Congressman Grimm is not pleased. (Photo: Facebook)

As President Barack Obama's opponents pile on in the aftermath of multiple recent controversies--notably his reaction to the Benghazi attacks, revelations that the Internal Revenue Service focused on conservative-aligned nonprofits and the Justice Department's unprecedented snooping on press communications--one local congressman wants it to be known that he is also not pleased.

To wit, Republican Rep. Michael Grimm, who represents Staten Island and southern Brooklyn, released a lengthy statement this afternoon blasting Mr. Obama for "bringing Chicago-style politics to the White House." This style of underhanded rule, Mr. Grimm said, has resulted in a presidency that is “the most secretive, deceptive, and divisive we’ve seen in modern times."

For its part, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has said the administration had no knowledge of the Justice Department's secret efforts to obtain Associated Press reporters' and editors' telephone records, which the news agency slammed as a "massive and unprecedented intrusion."

Regarding the IRS subjecting conservative groups to additional scrutiny, Mr. Obama himself said Monday that he "will not tolerate it." But on questions as to whether his administration politicized its response to the September 11th, 2012 attacks on America's embassy in Benghazi, Libya, Mr. Obama insisted, “There's no 'there' there."

None of that was enough to persuade, Mr. Grimm, of course, whose entire statement ripping into the president can be viewed below:

“President Obama’s legacy is going to be one tarnished by scandal after scandal. This president had an opportunity to unite our country and move it forward better and stronger. Instead, he brought Chicago-style politics to the White House and divided us as a nation.

“Today this president continues to blame Republicans for politicizing Benghazi, when it is his very own administration that covered up the facts. He was slow to react to the IRS targeting conservative Tea Party groups, and today he denies knowledge of the Justice Department seizing the phone records of AP reporters.

“The president claims to be in the dark on one event after another. What are they doing over there? Who’s accountable if it’s not the commander in chief?

“Instead of a legacy of ‘hope and change,’ President Obama will be known for bringing Chicago-style politics to the White House. The most ‘transparent administration in history’ is actually the most secretive, deceptive, and divisive we’ve seen in modern times. This administration has misled the American people one too many times, and it’s time it is held accountable.”

Jay Carney at a White House press briefing last March. (Photo: Getty)

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney responded to a plea from a group of sixth graders who had their tour of the presidential residence canceled due to the so-called "sequester" cuts in a press briefing this afternoon. Mr. Carney described the situation as "extremely unfortunate," but unavoidable due to the $85 billion in automatic budget cuts that took effect March 1 after lawmwakers were unable to reach a deficit reduction deal.

"The President and the First Lady have throughout the time that they’ve been here made extraordinary efforts to make this the people’s house, and it is extremely unfortunate that we have a situation like the sequester that compels the kinds of tradeoffs and decisions that this represents," Mr. Carney said. "The fact is the Secret Service, like other agencies of government, is affected by the sequester. And the Secret Service presented options that ranged from canceling tours to potential furloughs and cuts in overtime. And in order to allow the Secret Service to best fulfill its core mission, the White House made the decision that we would, unfortunately, have to temporarily suspend these tours."

The White House announced the decision to cancel tours due to the sequester cuts on Tuesday. According to the Secret Service, the tours cost the agency tasked with protecting the President and his family $74,000 a week. Because of the cancellations, a group of sixth grade students from St. Paul's Lutheran School in Iowa will miss out on their planned March 16 field trip to the White House. The sixth graders released a filmed plea to the White House to "please let us visit!" on the school's Facebook page yesterday.

In the briefing, Mr. Carney described the decision to cancel tours as a choice between letting guests visit the White House or cutting pay for Secret Service agents.

"The issue here is a choice between potential furloughs--and that's not just an issue that goes to the Secret Service mission, but also the individuals affected," said Mr. Carney. "We're talking about pay cuts and overtime cuts or a choice to suspend tours. And I'm not suggesting it's a happy choice, but it is one that we had to make."

Mr. Carney also urged Congress to make a deficit reduction deal and suggested that might allow the children's trip to be rescheduled.

"We are obviously disappointed about that kind of decision, but it would have been far better, in our view, if Congress had taken action to delay the sequester in the very same way they took action two months ago -- two and a half months ago, to delay the sequester to avoid just this kind of outcome," Mr. Carney said.

The sixth graders from St. Paul's Lutheran School in their Facebook plea to the White House. (Photo: Facebook)

A group of sixth graders from St. Paul's Lutheran School in Waverly, Iowa has turned to the internet to save their school trip to the White House. The children were scheduled to tour the White House on March 16, but their visit was cancelled yesterday along with all other tours of the presidential residence due to "staffing reductions" caused by the so-called "sequester" budget cuts that took effect last Friday after lawmakers failed to make a deficit reduction deal. In an effort to muster support and salvage their trip, the school posted a brief video on Facebook featuring a plea from the children.

"The White House is our house, please let us visit!" the sixth graders say in the clip.

According to Christi Line, the principal of St. Paul's Lutheran, the trip is a "big event" for the children, who are in their final year at the private, Christian school.

"This is our first White House trip and we'd hoped to make it an annual event," Ms. Line told Politicker in a phone call this evening. "This is a new capstone project that we have initiated this year for our sixth grade."

Ms. Line said a parent of one of the students was working to plan the tour. Requests for White House tours are generally processed through the requester's congressional representative. According to Ms. Line, the children were first told their request had been accepted and then cancelled this morning leading to widespread "disappointment" in the class.

"It was kind of a good news, bad news thing. we just found out that our tour had been approved and, of course, we were finding out at the same time that they were not doing White House tours now," said Ms. Line. "Students had been hoping that we would be accepted for a tour. Our trip was coming up in just a couple of weeks and we knew based on when we applied for that that we would find out sort of at the last minute with just a little time left. So, we had been waiting every day to hear."

Ms. Line said the Facebook plea was proposed by the parent who tried to plan the tour. She stressed it was simply an effort to salvage the tour for the children and "not a political statement." As of this writing, the White House Press Office has not responded to a request to respond to the children's video.

"We were absolutely adamant that this not be a political issue for us. This is not about politics for our students, this is just about wanting to have the opportunity to visit the White House. One of the reasons we chose Washington D.C. as opposed to Chicago or St. Louis or some place else for our capstone trip was that it's the kind of trip that not every family has the ability to take on their own," Ms. Line said.

Ms. Line described the D.C. trip as a chance for the students to "find out more about how the government works," to "extend their learning in the classroom about American history" and to learn more about "how they can live out their lives to make the world a better place." Though the sixth graders won't be able to visit the White House, Ms. Line said the school was not canceling the field trip and that the students would visit other landmarks, including the U.S. Capitol, where House Speaker John Boehner has vowed public tours will continue in spite of the "sequester" cuts.

"We will still go to D.C.," said Ms. Line. "We are not canceling our trip because the White House tour will not be accessible to us."

Update (3/7/13 6:57 P.M.): White House Press Secretary Jay Carney responded to the sixth graders' video in a briefing with reporters today and described the situation as "extremely unfortunate," but unavoidable.

(Photo: Getty)

Earlier this afternoon, Vice President Joe Biden attended a gun violence conference a few miles from the location of last year's infamous Newtown school shooting massacre. And Mr. Biden, who has led the White House's push for stricter policies on guns in the shooting's wake, passionately argued that gun control is no longer the untouchable "third rail" in our political system. Indeed, Mr. Biden took his contention in the opposite direction and said politicians are now compelled to engage the issue.

"Our understanding assumption is--in American politics today--[is] that this is kind of a third rail of politics," Mr. Biden declared. "That if you take this on, somehow there will be a severe political price to pay for doing it because that's what happened in the past. That's what happened in the past. People say--and you read, and people write about--the political risk and why they're unacceptable to take on. I say it's unacceptable to not take these on. It's simply unacceptable."

Mr. Biden took his case further and told his former congressional colleagues that, in addition to the "political price," there is a "moral price" for those failing to act on gun violence.

"I say to my colleagues who will watch this and listen to this, I say to you, 'If you're concerned about your political survival you should be concerned about the survival of our children,'" he said. "And guess what? I believe the price to be paid politically will be to those who refuse to act, who refuse to step forward. Because America's changed on this issue. You should know that the American people are with us, you should know! You all should know, there's a moral price to be paid for inaction."

President Barack Obama delivering his State of the Union address this evening. (Photo: Getty)

President Obama included his discussion of environmental issues and climate change after outlining initiatives to grow manufacturing jobs and before discussing plans to improve national infrastructure and help home owners. He closed this portion of his speech by describing all of these proposals as potentially spurring job growth.

"These initiatives in manufacturing, energy, infrastructure, and housing will help entrepreneurs and small business owners expand and create new jobs," President Obama said in the prepared version of his remarks.

Sandwiched in between his policies on manufacturing jobs, road and bridge construction and housing, President Obama expressed a need for the government to "do more to combat climate change." To bolster this argument, he cited several weather events, including Hurricane Sandy."

"Yes, it’s true that no single event makes a trend. But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15. Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and floods--all are now more frequent and intense," said the president. "We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science--and act before it’s too late."

President Obama went on to call for a "bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change" that would "make meaningful progress on this issue while driving strong economic growth." Specifically, he called for expanding solar and wind energy initiatives, fastracking oil and gas permits to take advantage of a "natural gas boom" that he said has "led to cleaner power and greater energy independence" and funding research and technology to help natural gas burn "even cleaner." He also proposed using oil and gas revenues from public lands to "fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good." He hinted this was also a good economic move by noting it was supported by "a non-partisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals."

The President also stuck with the strategy of casting his policies on more controversial issues in terms of potential economic benefit when he brought up immigration.

"Our economy is stronger when we harness the talents and ingenuity of striving, hopeful immigrants," President Obama said. "And right now, leaders from the business, labor, law enforcement, and faith communities all agree that the time has come to pass comprehensive immigration reform."

On this front, President Obama said he would push for "strong border security" and for "establishing a responsible pathway to earned citizenship" including background checks, taxes and penalties, English language requirements and prioritization for those who have been attempting to come to the U.S. through legal channels. He closed his call for immigration reform by citing another potential economic benefit--an influx of "highly-skilled" workers.
 
"Real reform means fixing the legal immigration system to cut waiting periods, reduce bureaucracy, and attract the highly-skilled entrepreneurs and engineers that will help create jobs and grow our economy," said President Obama.
 
President Obama closed his speech by bringing up another potentially controversial issue, gun control. Though he didn't turn to economic arguments to support his plans for increased regulation of firearms, he framed the issue as a question of securing the safety of the nation's children, and as a result, far more important to the future of the nation than any plan to improve America's financial situation.

"Of course, what I’ve said tonight matters little if we don’t come together to protect our most precious resource--our children," the president began. "It has been two months since Newtown. I know this is not the first time this country has debated how to reduce gun violence. But this time is different. Overwhelming majorities of Americans ... have come together around commonsense reform."

President Obama said these "commonsense" gun control reforms include background checks and banning high-capacity magazines.

"Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress. If you want to vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote," President Obama said. "Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations, and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun."
 
Though President Obama took on climate change, immigration reform and gun control in his speech, there were two notable hot-button issues he didn't address; gay marriage and abortion. The president only briefly alluded to gay and lesbian issues once in his speech when he described efforts to take care of the country's armed forces and cited the plan announced yesterday to provide benefits to same-sex spouses of servicemembers as an example of his administration's commitment to the troops.

"We must to protect those who serve their country abroad, and we will maintain the best military in the world," said the president. "We will invest in new capabilities, even as we reduce waste and wartime spending. We will ensure equal treatment for all service members, and equal benefits for their families--gay and straight."

Reproductive rights and the abortion debate were not mentioned at all in the president's speech. However, issue featured prominently in Senator Marco Rubio's Republican response to the State of the Union, which began on a loud, pro-life note.

"The State of the Union address is always a reminder of how unique America is," Mr. Rubio said. "But America is exceptional, because we believe that every life, at every stage, is precious."

(Photo: Getty)

Beyoncé Knowles may or may not have sung the "Star Spangled Banner" at President Barack Obama's inauguration, but the country's executive branch seems disinclined to find out.

Ever since reports first accused Ms. Knowles of lip-syncing the patriotic anthem, inaugural news coverage has sharply focused on the issue, including front-page treatment from New York City's two tabloid dailies. Yet asked about the ongoing controversy during today's media briefing, Mr. Obama's press secretary, Jay Carney, had no significant comment on the matter.

"I actually have no idea what's true and what's not," Mr. Carney reportedly said, further claiming to have had zero conversations with the president about whether Ms. Knowles did, in fact, lip-sync the song.

Mr. Carney also suggested question itself was not worth responding to, sarcastically applauding the press for paying so much attention to the "important issues."

"I don't think it's a particularly important issue to address from the podium here," he said. “I'm glad you guys are focused on the important issues of the day."

(Photo: Getty)

Since last Friday's massacre at a Newtown, Connecticut elementary school, President Barack Obama has used vague phrases like "meaningful action" to express his administration's response to the slaying, while avoiding delving too far into specific plans. At a media briefing earlier today, however, White House press secretary Jay Carney listed some of the gun control measures Mr. Obama would actually support.

"He is actively supportive of, for example, Senator Feinstein’s stated intent to revive a piece of legislation that would reinstate the assault weapons ban," Mr. Carney said. “He supports and would support legislation that addresses the problem of the so-called 'gun show loophole,' and there are other elements of gun legislation that he could support. People have talked about [restricting] high capacity ammunition clips, for example. That is certainly something he would be interested in looking at. My point is that it goes beyond that."

Of course, left unsaid is how much political capital Mr. Obama is willing to spend to back this legislation. Advocates, including New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, have been pushing Mr. Obama to actively push these measures through Congress rather than simply await a bill to arrive on his desk. But Mr. Carney did say the wavering of some pro-gun legislators, like West Virginia's Democratic Senator Joe Manchin, gave Mr. Obama confidence.

"He is heartened, I should mention, by what we have all heard from some members of Congress who have been longtime opponents of gun control measures, commonsense gun control measures like the assault weapons ban," Mr. Carney added. "In fact, not long before I came out here he was on the phone with Senator Manchin discussing just this issue."

(Photo: Getty)

Earlier this morning, Speaker John Boehner and the U.S. House Republican leadership held a press conference to announce a new proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy and avoid the so-called "fiscal cliff," or the steep set of spending cuts and tax increases that will arrive by the end of the year if a deficit deal is not reached. Specifically, Mr. Boehner's plan would extend the current tax rates on everyone making less than $1 million a year, a sharp jump from President Barack Obama's own counteroffer yesterday, which conceded a $400,000 ceiling. Mr. Obama had previously stood firm on allowing the tax cuts to expire for everyone making more than $250,000, a number that GOP lawmakers apparently found unacceptable.

"Our hope continues to be to reach an agreement with the president on a balanced approach that averts the fiscal cliff. What we've offered meets the definition of balance, but the President is not there yet," Mr. Boehner began. "What the White House offered yesterday was essentially $1.3 million in new revenues, for only $850 billion in net spending reductions. That's not balanced in my opinion. So, at the same time that we're going to talk to the President, we're going to also move 'plan B.'"

While not sounding especially happy about backing off of his vow to block any tax increases, Mr. Boehner said the need to protect a majority of Americans forced his hand.

"I think we all know that every income tax filing in America is going to pay higher rates come January 1st unless Congress acts," he said. "So I believe it's important that we protect as many American taxpayers  as we can. Our 'plan B' would protect American taxpayers who make $1 million or less and have all of their current rates extended. I continue to have hope that we can reach a broader agreement with the White House that would reduce spending as well as have revenues on the table. I think it'd be better for our country. But, at this point, having a 'backup plan' to make sure that as few American taxpayers are affected by this increase as possible, moving down that path is the right course action for us."

President Obama (Photo: Getty)

This afternoon, the White House Press Office released a report sent from President Barack Obama to the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate notifying them "about deployments of U.S. Armed Forces equipped for combat." In his report, the president said he "will direct additional measures against al-Qa'ida, the Taliban and associated forces," but said, "it is not possible to know at this time the precise scope or the duration of the deployments of U.S. Armed forces to counter this terrorist threat to the United States." 

This report indicates the White House may not be ready to make any solid commitments about withdrawing the troops that are still fighting Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan. On the campaign trail, President Obama had suggested American forces would depart Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

"We are bringing our troops home from Afghanistan. And I've set a timetable.  We will have them all out of there by 2014," President Obama told a crowd in September.

After President Obama's remarks about the withdrawal timetable caught on in the press, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney pushed back against the idea the president had committed to remove all of the troops fighting Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

"He never said that all the troops would be out," Mr. Carney said. "What we’ve said, as we did in Iraq -- and I think this is a good way to look at it —is in Iraq, there were steps of—sort of milestones where troops began to come home, more and more authorities transferred over to Iraqi security forces. The U.S. forces that remained as that process took place moved out of the cities and on to bases. And then the full transfer took place and combat mission ended, after which remaining U.S. forces eventually came home and the last U.S. soldier left, with the exception obviously of those who are at the embassy."

Mr. Carney went on to say the president remained committed to having Afghan forces take over primary security duties in the country by the end of 2014.

"I understand you're trying to engage in a clever game of gotcha," said Mr. Carney. "Everyone understands what the president's policy is, which is, a full transition to Afghan security lead by 2014. We have been abundantly clear about the stages of the implementation of that policy and as in Iraq, that means that while not all US troops will have withdrawn necessarily by then, the Afghan security forces will be in full security transition, will be in full security lead and U.S. forces will continue to be drawn down."

The report the president sent to Congress today is part of his requirement to keep Congress apprised of troop deployments under the War Powers Resolution. It also included a "classified annex" with further information about War On Terror-related troop deployments. Politicker reached out to the White House Press Office to ask whether the statement that he "does not know the precise scope or the duration" of these deployments means there may be deviation from the goal of "a full transition to Afghan security lead by 2014." We also asked whether the report, which came out as news of the school shooting in Connecticut dominated headlines, was originally scheduled to be released today. We received a response from the White House's Assistant Press Secretary for National Security and Defense, Tanya Bradsher, who described the report as part of the president's ongoing commitment to keep Congress "appropriately informed" about troop deployments in conjunction with the War Powers Resolution.

"Consistent with the War Powers Resolution, the President provides a periodic report to the Congress on the status of hostilities or certain situations where U.S. Armed Forces have been introduced without a declaration of war, as well as on the scope and duration of such hostilities or situations.  These reports are delivered no less often than once every 6 months," Ms. Bradsher said. "We are strongly committed to keeping the Congress appropriately informed in this critical area of foreign policy."

Ms. Bradsher did not address whether this report was scheduled for release prior to today's shooting or whether the White House was expecting any change to the prior goal of transitioning primary security responsibilities to Afghan forces by the end of 2014.

Jerrold Nadler. (Photo: Getty)

In the wake of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, that, as of this writing, left at least 27 people dead including the alleged gunman and 18 children, Congressman Jerry Nadler issued an impassioned statement calling for stricter gun control legislation.

"I am absolutely horrified by news of the cold-blooded shooting of dozens of children in Newtown, Connecticut. Yet another unstable person has gotten access to firearms and committed an unspeakable crime against innocent children," Mr. Nadler said. "We cannot simply accept this as a routine product of modern American life. If now is not the time to have a serious discussion about gun control and the epidemic of gun violence plaguing our society, I don’t know when is. How many more Columbines and Newtowns must we live through? I am challenging President Obama, the Congress, and the American public to act on our outrage and, finally, do something about this."

Following the mass shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, last July gun control advocates, including Mayor Michael Bloomberg, blasted the White House for not starting a discussion about gun control in the aftermath of that attack. At a press conference this morning, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was asked whether today's shooting would cause gun control to be a higher priority for President Barack Obama.

"There is, I'm sure will be, rather, a day for discussion of the usual Washington policy debates," Mr. Carney said. "But I don't think today is that day."