I'm still scratching my head at that.

He was even involved in Q's takedown of Comey.

I don't know why he did this... It may be a message or something to the white hats. If he voted on it, it means one thing, if he votes against it means another sort of thing, but I have no proof on that.

Here's his statement on the matter:

Like any compromise, this bill isn’t perfect and nobody got everything they wanted or likes everything in the bill, but this bipartisan package is a vast improvement over the House-passed infrastructure bill and a far cry from President Biden’s and Congressional Democrats’ partisan schemes to hike taxes and spend trillions on liberal pipedreams masqueraded as ‘human infrastructure.’ Our bipartisan package bundles several bills that have already won bipartisan action in the Senate, all without raising taxes on Iowa families. It’s proof that the Senate is fully capable of delivering on bipartisan policy when given the chance. It’s a shame my Democrat colleagues are still intent on following this bipartisan exercise with a partisan multi-trillion dollar reckless tax and spending spree, which I will oppose,

To be clear, they passed the 1.2 Trillion dollar bill instead of the 3.5 Trillion bill Nancy really wants. There are TWO bills for Infrastructure going on.

Here's a breakdown of the two bills Democrats are trying to ship as one:

There’s also a much bigger, $3.5 Trillion spending package that Democrats are currently preparing to push through Congress without Republican support. This could be where the bipartisan infrastructure deal hits a snag, since some Democrats are saying they won’t vote for one without the other.

As the bill stands, the House must review it before it goes on to the Oval Office. Republicans can drag it out, but they risk Democrats shoving the 3.5 Trillion bill onto the floor along with it. If the Democrats do that, and try to pitch both as one, we could be screwed harder than if we just let the 1.2 Trillion one through now.

Again, the cast of characters tacked on to this bill is unsavory, and Grassley being among them is all sorts of heartbreaking to me. I don't know what it all means, but I trust Grassley enough to not write him off just yet.