After Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. blamed a lone lawmaker for what he described as the nation’s public health crisis, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) struck back.

“You’ve presided here, I think, for 32 years,” Secretary Kennedy told Senator Murray, the Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, on Tuesday. “You presided over the destruction of the health of the American people. Our people are now the sickest people in the world,” he alleged in his sweeping indictment.

Senator Murray had asked Kennedy, “whose decision was it to withhold Child Care and Development Block Grant funding?” but he attacked the Washington Democrat in a heated back-and-forth.

“You came here to argue with me,” Murray said at the end of the exchange. “I came here to ask you questions about your budget request. Your budget request is asking us to cut dramatically, but I am also making the point that Senator Baldwin made that what you are doing right now is enacting your budget that Congress has not passed by cutting critical funding across the board. And I think this committee will find that to be very detrimental on the future.”

READ MORE: ‘Full MAGA Lobotomy’: Rubio Rebuked by Senate Dem — ‘I Regret Voting for You’

Murray also told Kennedy, “you said last week, quote, ‘We were not cutting thousands of scientists. We are not cutting clinical trials, but I want you to know, in the last four months, you fired or pushed out nearly 5,000 NIH staff and terminated more than 1,600 NIH grants. That includes more than 240 clinical trials across the country. So whose decision was it to fire scientists and terminate these NIH grants and the clinical trial?”

Kennedy responded, “Senator, I don’t trust your information, with all due respect,” before the exchange again grew heated.

On social media, Senator Murray blasted the HHS Secretary.

“RFK Jr. is a shameless liar and, candidly, an insane conspiracy theorist,” Murray wrote. “He’s fired the people who monitor bird flu. He’s fired food safety inspectors. He’s firing NIH clinical staff—and he’s cutting cancer research. This grifter is making America LESS healthy & LESS safe.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

HHS Secretary Kennedy (@SecKennedy): “You presided over the destruction of the health of the American people. Our people are now the sickest people in the world because you have not done your job.

Sen. @PattyMurray: “Mr. Secretary, seriously?!? Mr. Secretary, seriously?!?” pic.twitter.com/IDJWLCwQdp

— CSPAN (@cspan) May 20, 2025

READ MORE: Vulgar Trump Boast Claims Credit for Olympics—and Blames ‘Rigged’ Race for Comeback

Image via Reuters

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not receive a warm welcome from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where he served for fourteen years. Instead, he faced withering criticism from Democrats for embracing President Donald Trump’s policies—many of which he once opposed. One senator told Rubio he regretted voting to confirm him, while another accused him of betraying his own conscience, saying she believed he knew in his heart that his actions had been wrong.

“I have to tell you directly and personally that I regret voting for you for Secretary of State,” U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) told the Secretary of State (video below).

Rubio snapped back: “Your regret for voting for me confirms I’m doing a good job.”

READ MORE: ‘Ignorant’ Noem’s ‘Incoherent’ Habeas Corpus Claim Blasted

Later, on social media, Senator Van Hollen wrote: “The Marco Rubio who testified today is not the one I served with in the Senate. He has had a full MAGA lobotomy.”

After much back-and-forth during his Senate testimony, Rubio told Van Hollen, “I’m actually very proud of the work we’ve done with USAID. For example, I don’t regret cutting $10 million for male circumcisions in Mozambique. I don’t know how that makes us stronger and more prosperous as a nation.”

Circumcisions dramatically reduce the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.

Rubio read from a list of other programs he now opposes, including, he said, “$14 million for social cohesion in Mali, whatever the hell that means.”

“Here’s another point, okay?” a defiant Rubio continued. “There is a division in our government between the federal branch and the judicial branch. No judge, in [the] judicial branch, [can] tell me or the President how to conduct foreign policy. No judge can tell me how I have to outreach to a foreign partner or what I need to say to them.”

He went on to say, “What I do is revoke visas, and it’s very simple. A visa is, it’s not a right, it is a privilege. People apply for student visas to come into the United States and study. And if you tell me that you’re coming to the United States to lead campus crusades, to take over libraries, and burn down, try to burn down buildings, and [commit] acts of violence —”

READ MORE: Vulgar Trump Boast Claims Credit for Olympics—and Blames ‘Rigged’ Race for Comeback

After more heated discussion, Rubio said, “The bottom line is if you are coming here to stir up trouble on our campuses, we will deny you a visa.”

“We’re gonna continue to revoke the visas of people who are here as guests and are disrupting our higher education facilities.”

“We’re going to do more,” he vowed. “There are more coming. We’re going to continue to revoke the visas of people who are here as guests, and are disrupting our higher education facilities.”

Senator Van Hollen interjected, saying, “Writing an op-ed to the Tufts’ school newspaper is disrupting foreign policy? That’s pathetic!”

Critics slammed the Secretary of State.

“Rubio’s spineless arrogance was on full display in this hearing,” declared author Rachel Louise Snyder, a contributing writer to the New York Times opinion section.

“It’s telling that Rubio chose to bluster and grandstand rather than offer an actual argument for why it was legal to revoke Rumeysa Ozturk’s visa because of an op-ed she wrote,” remarked The Atlantic’s James Surowiecki. “It’s because he doesn’t have an actual argument.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

Sen. @ChrisVanHollen: “I have to tell you directly and personally that I regret voting for you for Secretary of State.”@SecRubio: “Your regret for voting for me confirms I’m doing a good job.”

Van Hollen: “That’s a flippant statement.” pic.twitter.com/2UHH7tkkrT

— CSPAN (@cspan) May 20, 2025

READ MORE: Leavitt’s Deficit Denial and the First Ever Trillion-Dollar Defense Budget Built on It

Image via Reuters

U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem is facing sharp backlash after falsely defining the core constitutional principle of habeas corpus during sworn testimony before Congress—and defiantly, yet inaccurately, insisting that presidents have unilateral authority to suspend it.

Asked what habeas corpus is, Noem, a former governor and U.S. Congresswoman, delivered this incorrect response: “Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the President has to be able to remove people from this country.”

“That’s incorrect,” U.S. Senator Maggie Hasan (D-NH) interjected, before serving up the correct response and a bit of a legal lesson—and a warning.

READ MORE: Vulgar Trump Boast Claims Credit for Olympics—and Blames ‘Rigged’ Race for Comeback

“Habeas corpus is the legal principle that requires that the government provide a public reason for detaining and imprisoning people. If not for that protection, the government could simply arrest people, including American citizens, and hold them indefinitely for no reason. Habeas corpus is the foundational right that separates free societies like America from police states like North Korea.”

“As a senator from the ‘Live Free Or Die’ state, this matters a lot to me and my constituents, and to all Americans,” Hassan explained. “So Secretary Noem, do you support the core protection that habeas corpus provides, that the government must provide a public reason in order to detain and imprison someone?”

“Yeah, I support habeas corpus,” Noem replied, before again promoting a false narrative.

“I also recognize that the President of the United States has the authority under the Constitution to decide if it should be suspended or not,” she insisted.

“It has never been done without approval of Congress,” Senator Hassan responded. “Even Abraham Lincoln got retroactive approval from Congress.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller recently suggested the administration was looking into suspending habeas corpus.

READ MORE: Leavitt’s Deficit Denial and the First Ever Trillion-Dollar Defense Budget Built on It

Critics blasted Secretary Noem.

“The Secretary of DHS does not know (1) what the writ of habeas corpus is or (2) which branch of gov’t has the constitutional power to suspend the great writ. Given her expected role in detaining millions of people, that’s not great,” warned civil rights attorney Patrick Jaicomo.

“This is extraordinary,” exclaimed immigration attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick. “The Secretary of Homeland Security doesn’t know what the right of habeas corpus is (the ancient right to go to court to challenge government detention) and offers an incoherent definition which suggests she thinks it’s a presidential power to deport people?”

“Kristi Noem says that habeas corpus is the president’s right to remove people from this country. Really great that someone this ignorant of people’s constitutional rights is in charge of removing people from this country,” lamented The Atlantic’s James Surowiecki, author of “The Wisdom of Crowds.”

“Noem just turned a centuries-old safeguard against tyranny into a talking point for authoritarianism,” wrote investment banker Evaristus Odinikaeze. “Founding Fathers just face-palmed in unison.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

HASSAN: What is habeas corpus?

NOEM: Habeas corpus is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country

HASSAN: That’s incorrect pic.twitter.com/ozRVVfdSoP

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 20, 2025

READ MORE: No Trump, No FEMA? Tornado Ravaged City’s Mayor Pleads for Federal Assistance