Categories
Abortion Intelwars late term abortion Mitt Romney Partial-birth abortion Senate xavier becerra

Romney fires back at Biden nominee who advocates for ‘common ground’ on partial-birth abortions

Xavier Becerra, nominee for secretary of Health and Human Services, said Tuesday that “common ground” can be found on late-term, partial-birth abortions.

What are the details?

The stunning statement came as Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) grilled the former California attorney general over his position on abortion.

Romney asked Becerra why, during his tenure in the U.S. House, he
voted against legislation that banned partial-birth abortions — Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 — which outlawed partial-birth abortions of babies who have heartbeats.

“Most people agree that partial-birth abortion is awful. You voted against a ban on partial-birth abortion. Why?” Romney asked.

Becerra began his response by explaining he respects that “people have different deeply held beliefs” on abortion, before claiming “common ground” can be found on the issue about which Romney asked.

He continued:

I have worked, as I mentioned, for decades trying to protect the health of men and women, young and old. And as attorney general, my job has been to follow the law and make sure others are following the law.


So, I will tell you that when I come to these issues, I understand that we may not always agree on where to go, but I think we can find some common ground on these issues because everyone wants to make sure that if you have an opportunity, you’re going to live a healthy life. And I will tell you I hope to be able to work with you and others to reach that common ground on so many different issues.

How did Romney respond?

The Utah Republican flatly rejected Becerra’s offer of finding “common ground” on partial-birth abortion.

“I think we can reach common ground on many issues, but on partial-birth abortion, it sounds like we are not going to reach common ground there,” Romney shot back at Becerra.

Anything else?

President Joe Biden has been criticized for nominating Becerra.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), for example, has been highlighting Becerra’s lack of professional experience in health industries.

“[Becerra] is not a doctor. He has no scientific background. He has no background in virology, he has never worked at a pharmaceutical company — he’s got nothing to do with health care,” Cruz explained on Fox News.

“But what is he? He is a trial lawyer!” Cruz said. “And his only experience, as far as I can tell, with health care is he sued the Little Sisters of the Poor.”

Share
Categories
Clarence Thomas Constitution Ginni Thomas Intelwars Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Opponents attack wife of Clarence Thomas over his dissent bashing decision to not hear critical election case

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas issued a searing dissenting opinion after the Supreme Court refused to hear a pivotal case involving a controversial Pennsylvania electoral directive that allowed the counting of ballots received up to three days after Election Day.

Now, Thomas’ opponents are using his opinion to attack his wife.

What did Thomas say?

Thomas believes the court’s refusal to hear the case opens the door for more election controversies in the future.

The central concern, according to Thomas, is whether state executives have the power to usurp their state legislatures in determining election laws, despite the U.S. Constitution explicitly assigning that power to legislators.

“[Pennsylvania’s] decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future,” Thomas wrote. “These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”

Thomas later added:

One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear
rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future
elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath
a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite
further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us. I respectfully dissent.

Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito joined Thomas in dissent.

Why did opponents attack his wife?

Thomas’ wife, Ginni Thomas, has been outspoken about her political beliefs and support for Donald Trump.

Despite the fact that Thomas raised serious constitutional concerns with the Pennsylvania case, Democrats implied his wife’s politics drove his dissent — and even demanded that she be investigated to determine what role, if any, she played in the deadly violence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

Christine Pelosi, daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “I’m concerned that #SCOTUS Justice Thomas dissented—we will have to learn more about the role his wife Gini Thomas played in raising money for Trump’s deadly #Jan6 ‘Insurrection Day.'”

Duty to Warn, an “association of mental health professionals warning Trump is psychologically unfit,” attacked Thomas for not disavowing his wife’s politics.

“Today, SCOTUS refused to hear an appeal from the PA GOP about extending mail-in voting deadlines. Clarence Thomas wrote a dissent. His wife Ginni endorsed the 1/6 protest, demanded an overturn of the election, and sent ‘LOVE’ to demonstrators. He’s not dissented to any of that,” the organization tweeted.

“Justice Thomas by the very fact that Ginni Thomas participated in 1/6 attack needs to recuse himself,” another critic said.

“For the sake of the integrity of the highest court in the United States of America, Justice Thomas must resign. Ginni Thomas must be investigated for her role in the January 6 insurrection. He and his wife are clearly radicalized,” another person said.

There is no evidence that Ginni Thomas played any role in the deadly violence at the Capitol.

Anything else?

Ginni Thomas apologized to Thomas’ staff earlier this month in emails obtained by the Washington Post.

“I owe you all an apology. I have likely imposed on you my lifetime passions,” Ginni Thomas wrote. “My passions and beliefs are likely shared with the bulk of you, but certainly not all. And sometimes the smallest matters can divide loved ones for too long. Let’s pledge to not let politics divide THIS family, and learn to speak more gently and knowingly across the divide.”

Share
Categories
Campaign 2024 Donald Trump GOP Intelwars Mitt Romney republican party

Mitt Romney predicts Donald Trump will win 2024 Republican nomination if he runs again

Republican Sen. Mitt Romney does not support former President Donald Trump, nor did the Utah lawmaker vote for Trump in 2016 or 2020.

But Romney predicted Tuesday that Trump would secure the 2024 Republican Party presidential nomination should he run for the White House again.

What did Romney say?

During an interview with New York Times-DealBook, Romney admitted that Trump’s enduring influence over the GOP means the former president holds the best odds of winning another presidential nomination.

“I don’t know if he’ll run in 2024 or not, but if he does, I’m pretty sure he will win the nomination,” Romney said.

“I look at the polls, and the polls show that among the names being floated as potential contenders in 2024, if you put President Trump in there among Republicans, he wins in a landslide,” he added.

Romney, himself a former GOP presidential nominee, qualified his prediction by noting that “a lot can happen between now and 2024.”

Not only has Trump’s political strength not weakened, but neither has Romney’s opposition to Trump. Romney further explained that if Trump is the GOP nominee for the third consecutive presidential contest, he will maintain his fierce opposition toward Trump.

“I would not be voting for President Trump again. I haven’t voted for him in the past. And I would probably be getting behind somebody who I thought more represented the tiny wing of the Republican Party that I represent,” Romney explained.

Will Trump run again?

While the likelihood of Trump running again is high, the former president has not stated definitively whether he will pursue his former office in 2024.

“It’s too early to say, but I see a lot of great polls out there,” Trump said last week.

However, Axios reported that Trump is planning to claim “total control” over the Republican Party during his first post-presidential speech this weekend at the Conservative Political Action Conference. Sources said Trump will present himself as the “presumptive 2024 nominee” in a “show of force.”

Trump senior adviser Jason Miller told Axios, “Trump effectively is the Republican Party. The only chasm is between Beltway insiders and grassroots Republicans around the country. When you attack President Trump, you’re attacking the Republican grassroots.”

Still, there is significant disagreement about the future of the Republican Party.

Republicans like Romney, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), the no. 3 House Republican, and perhaps even Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) believe the GOP should put Trump in the rearview mirror, recognizing the Republican Party lost control of the House, White House, and Senate under Trump’s watch.

Other Republicans disagree.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), for example, believes Trump should be part of the GOP strategy to regain control in Washington.

Share
Categories
house Intelwars Iowa Mariannette miller-meeks Rita hart

House takes first step in contested election review that may result in Republican being unseated

The Democrat-controlled House took the first steps last week of adjudicating a contested House seat that may result in a Republican lawmaker being replaced by her Democratic challenger.

What is the background?

Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R) was declared the winner of Iowa’s second congressional district over Democratic challenger Rita Hart last November by just six votes — 196,964 to 196,958.

After Iowa certified Miller-Meeks’ win, Hart appealed to the House by filing a Notice of Contest. Hart’s campaign alleged that “the Miller-Meeks campaign has sought to keep legitimate votes from being counted — pushing to disqualify and limit the number of Iowans whose votes are counted,” the Iowa City Press-Citizen reported.

Hart claims there are 22 “legally-cast, uncounted votes” from her election — and, of course, she alleges that if those votes are counted, she would be the rightful winner of the contest.

Lawyers for Hart’s campaign allege the Democrat would have won the race by just nine votes had the 22 votes not been excluded.

What is happening now?

The House Administration Committee gathered last Friday to establish the process by which Hart’s claims will be adjudicated.

Politico reported, “The Friday meeting was brief. Members unanimously agreed to a resolution that establishes procedures the committee will abide by as it considers recent elections contested under the act.”

Miller-Meeks has asked the committee to dismiss Hart’s claims, but Friday’s action indicates the committee is taking the claims seriously. Formally rejecting Miller-Meeks’ request would begin an investigative process that could result in Miller-Meeks losing her seat if Hart’s claims are confirmed.

More from Politico:

To deal with past contested elections, the Administration Committee, chaired by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), has set up a task force to oversee an investigation or recount. That panel would make a recommendation based on its findings to the entire House, which could then vote on who should hold the seat.

What was the reaction?

Hart’s campaign praised the development, claiming the step meant the voice of voters would be heard.

“We are glad to see the House Committee on Administration taking action towards ensuring that every legally cast vote is counted in this race and that all Iowans’ voices are heard. Every legal voter in this country has a right to have their ballot counted and the remedy here is clear — count the ballots,” campaign manager Zach Meunier said.

However, House Administration Committee ranking member Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) warned the development may result in a “dangerous precedent.”

“I can’t think of a worst first step this committee could take in a new Congress than to waste taxpayer dollars by moving forward with overturning this election,” he said, Politico reported.

Part of that danger may be the fact that Hart’s campaign did not exhaust her legal remedies in Iowa.

In fact, Hart’s campaign revealed in early December that was their exact strategy: bypass Iowa courts in lieu of the Democrat-controlled House. The Hart campaign claimed “limitations in Iowa law” made necessary the direct appeal to the House.

The Hart campaign’s decision earned scorn from Miller-Meeks’ campaign, and even Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R).

“Rita Hart has chosen a political process controlled by Nancy Pelosi over a legal process controlled by Iowa judges. All Iowans should be outraged by this decision,” the Miller-Meeks campaign said, the Des Moines Register reported.

Reynolds similarly reacted, “By heading straight to a Democratic-controlled Congress, Hart is attempting to undermine the voice of Iowans.”

Share
Categories
gun control guns Intelwars Joe Biden Merrick Garland mike lee Second Amendment

Merrick Garland admits his DOJ would ‘advance’ Joe Biden’s gun control agenda: ‘Entitled to pursue’

Merrick Garland, the nominee for attorney general, admitted Monday that the Department of Justice would most likely enforce President Joe Biden’s gun control agenda.

What did Garland say?

Garland revealed his philosophy toward the Second Amendment during questioning from Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R).

Lee asked, “Do you support banning of certain types of firearms?”

“Well, as I’m sure you know, the president is a strong supporter of gun control and has been an advocate all his professional life on this question,” Garland responded.

“The role of the Justice Department is to advance the policy program of the administration as long as it is consistent with the law,” he continued. “Where there is room under the law for the president’s policies to be pursued, then I think the president is entitled to pursue them.”

Garland, however, conceded the Supreme Court has given “a little indication” about the extent of the Second Amendment, a reference to
D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, two landmark Supreme Court cases affirming the fundamental nature of Second Amendment rights.

Garland later said his view is “totally controlled” by those Supreme Court precedents.


Senate holds Merrick Garland’s confirmation hearing

youtu.be

What about Biden’s gun goals?

Biden has made gun control a central concern of his political agenda, both throughout his presidential campaign and since taking office last month.

Biden’s aggressive gun control agenda includes, among other promises:

  • Banning the manufacture and sale of “assault weapons and high-capacity magazines,” which Biden calls “weapons of war”
  • Restricting Americans to one firearm purchase per month
  • Ending online firearm and ammunition sale
  • Putting “America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns”
  • Requiring “gun owners to safely store their weapons”

While the constitutionality of assault weapons bans have yet to be determined by the Supreme Court — the high court rejected hearing 10 gun-related cases last year, which included cases involving assault weapons bans — the court has already ruled on at-home safety restrictions.

While many states require gun owners to keep firearms out of access for minors, there is no federal law mandating the safe storage of firearms.

However, the Supreme Court ruled in D.C. v. Heller that a portion of D.C.’s firearm regulations that required all firearms in a home be “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock” was unconstitutional.

Still, the Supreme Court has affirmed that some restrictions on the Second Amendment are not unreasonable, and therefore permissible. Where the proverbial line in the sand exists, though, has not been made clear, and will likely be established in due time.

Anything else?

The White House confirmed last week that Biden may use executive action to enact his gun control agenda.

Biden earlier used the third anniversary of the Parkland, Florida, tragedy to push for gun control.

“Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets,” Biden said on Feb. 14.

Share
Categories
covid COVID-19 Intelwars Michelle lujan grisham New Mexico

Report: NM Dem governor held in-person meetings despite COVID guidelines, spent thousands on alcohol, Wagyu beef

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) reportedly did not follow her own coronavirus-related gathering edicts and spent thousands of taxpayer dollars on alcohol and luxurious Wagyu beef last year.

What are the details?

While New Mexico residents faced some of the most strict COVID-related restrictions in the nation, Lujan Grisham was reportedly meeting with her staff in-person — despite advising against such gatherings for New Mexicans.

According to the Santa Fe New Mexican, Lujan Grisham was holding in-person meetings with her Cabinet and New Mexico legislators while telling New Mexico residents not to gather with people they do not live with. The meetings were held at the governor’s mansion in Santa Fe, despite the widespread use of video conferencing software, like Zoom.

Meanwhile, Lujan Grisham spent nearly $13,500 of taxpayer dollars on groceries, alcohol, and services like dry cleaning during the second half of 2020.

“Receipts show more than $6,500 on groceries, from Wagyu beef and tuna steaks to several purchases of alcohol, including bottles of tequila, vodka, gin, wine and beer,” the New Mexican reported.

News of Lujan Grisham’s spending comes after she reportedly gave several staff members salary raises ranging between $7,500 to $12,000.

What was the reaction?

New Mexico House Minority Leader Jim Townsend (R) called Lujan Grisham’s spending “disenchanting.”

“It’s not what tax dollars ought to be spent for,” he said. “In the time when people are hurting all over the state, using their tax dollars to buy Wagyu beef has got to be a little bit disenchanting to many people. I think it’s just more of indication of the problem that we have had and the governor has had connecting with people.”

“Those are the kinds of things that cause people to totally distrust the government,” Townsend added. “When they see these [messages] of, ‘You need to stay home and you can’t have your family for Christmas and you can’t do this and you can’t do that,’ but I’m going to sit here and eat Wagyu beef and buy hundreds of dollars of alcohol with your tax dollars. What in the world would you expect them to think?”

House Minority Whip Rod Montoya (R) had harsher words for Lujan Grisham. He said the Democratic governor’s actions indicate she believes that she is “more privileged than everybody else.”

“It really appears in the Governor’s Office as if she really believes herself to be more privileged than everybody else in New Mexico,” Montoya said, the New Mexican reported. “I didn’t realize the governor was so underpaid that she has to use discretionary money for things that she should be paying for herself.”

What did Lujan Grisham say?

The governor’s office excused her behavior and claimed there was a difference between Lujan Grisham telling New Mexicans not to gather with people they do not live with and Lujan Grisham gathering with people she does not live with.

“There’s a difference between inviting someone into your house for the Super Bowl or someone’s birthday and having three or four Cabinet secretaries there to talk about their budgets amid an unprecedented economic downturn and to work out what we’re going to propose or recommend to the Legislature given the changing economic forecast,” spokesman Tripp Stelnicki said.

Stelnicki told the New Mexican the food and alcohol purchases were for Lujan Grisham, her staff, security, and maintenance workers.

“The governor wanted to sort of try to make things and send them to people, like pozole at Christmas,” he said.

On Friday, Lujan Grisham responded to scrutiny surrounding her spending, admitting that she had “dropped the ball.”

“When people are struggling, should it be fair that residents [of the governor’s mansion] literally have a locked-up grocery store closet … that has libations and catering stuff and food?” she said. “I don’t want New Mexicans to feel like I don’t take seriously their hardship.”

Share
Categories
Donald Trump GOP Intelwars republican party Trump voters

New poll reveals nearly half of Trump supporters would abandon GOP if Trump created own party

The Republican Party could be doomed in future elections if former President Donald Trump creates his own political party.

What are the details?

Nearly half of Trump supporters — 46% — said they would abandon the GOP if Trump created his own political party, according to a new Suffolk University-USA Today poll released over the weekend.

In fact, only 27% of respondents said they would stay with the Republican Party, while the remaining percentage of respondents said they are undecided.

“We feel like Republicans don’t fight enough for us, and we all see Donald Trump fighting for us as hard as he can, every single day,” a Wisconsin business owner told USA Today. “But then you have establishment Republicans who just agree with establishment Democrats and everything, and they don’t ever push back.”

Meanwhile, half of the respondents said the Republican Party should be “more loyal to Trump,” and fewer than 20% said the GOP should jettison loyalty to the former president.

Another poll released earlier this month found that 64% of registered Republicans would abandon the GOP for a Trump-created third-party.

Will Trump start his own party?

Trump has reportedly explored the possibility of creating his own political party.

One day before President Joe Biden was inaugurated, the Wall Street Journal reported, “Trump discussed the matter with several aides and other people close to him last week. The president said he would want to call the new party the ‘Patriot Party,’ the people said.”

However, Trump allies later rebutted the idea.

“The president wanted me to know, as well as a handful of others, that the president is a Republican, he is not starting a third party and that anything he would do politically in the future would be as a Republican,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said in late January.

In fact, Trump reportedly plans to declare control of the Republican Party during his first post-presidential appearance, at the Conservative Political Action Conference next weekend, Axios reported.

From Axios:

In his first post-presidential appearance, Donald Trump plans to send the message next weekend that he is Republicans’ “presumptive 2024 nominee” with a vise grip on the party’s base, top Trump allies tell Axios.

A longtime adviser called Trump’s speech a “show of force,” and said the message will be: “I may not have Twitter or the Oval Office, but I’m still in charge.” Payback is his chief obsession.

“Trump effectively is the Republican Party,” Trump senior adviser Jason Miller told Axios. “The only chasm is between Beltway insiders and grassroots Republicans around the country. When you attack President Trump, you’re attacking the Republican grassroots.”

Share
Categories
Cancun Intelwars Joe Rogan Ted Cruz Texas power crisis Tim dillon

Joe Rogan defends Ted Cruz over Cancún controversy: ‘Can he make it warm out?’

Comedian Joe Rogan appeared to defend Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) in a new episode of the “Joe Rogan Experience” after the Republican lawmaker was bashed for briefly traveling to Cancún last week with his family.

What is the background?

Cruz found himself at the center of controversy after he was spotted flying to Cancún. Such a trip may be commonplace for affluent Houston residents, considering the short distance between Houston and the tropical paradise situated on the Yucatán Peninsula.

After all, senators were scheduled to be at home last week. So, with school being canceled because of snow, and Cruz being at home with his family, the Texas lawmaker said he made the trip after his daughters requested a short getaway.

But at the same time Cruz took his brief trip, Texans were enduring a massive crisis, triggered by unusual winter weather and record-low temperatures. Millions of Texans experienced power outages — some even for multiple days — which, combined with once-in-a-generation arctic air, resulted in multiple deaths.

Democrats pounced on the moment, accusing Cruz of hypocrisy and alleging that he was somehow neglecting Texans in their time of need.

However, Cruz was neither able to restore power nor warm temperatures above freezing.

What did Rogan say?

Rogan, who moved to the Lone Star State last year, made this exact point while discussing the absurd controversy during a new podcast episode with Tim Dillon.

“Here’s the thing: What can he do? What is the reason for him staying?” Rogan said.

Dillon responded, “I think it’s just the optics of how it looks.”

“Can he make it warm out?” Rogan retorted, then joking, “Maybe he should be there with blankets and put them over the pipes.”

“It’s funny. It’s the people that hate him the most are the ones like, ‘He should be there!’ And it’s like, ‘Doing what?!'” Dillon responded.


The Austin Ice Storm & Ted Cruz Traveling to Cancun During Crisis

www.youtube.com

Anything else?

Later in the podcast, Rogan noted that Cruz was a “vocal critic” of Austin Mayor Steve Adler, a Democrat, who flew to Cabo San Lucas, another Mexican tropical paradise, last December after telling Austin residents to “stay home” because of the coronavirus.

The Austin American-Statesmen made the same connection.

However, there is an obvious and significant difference between what Adler and Cruz did: Adler told his residents to “stay home” while already in Cabo.

Share
Categories
Chuck Schumer Climate Change Intelwars Texas Texas power crisis winter weather

Schumer mocks Texas over deadly energy crisis, blames ‘ignored climate change’: ‘Hope they learned a lesson’

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer disparaged and mocked Texas on Sunday as the Lone Star State battles the crisis triggered by record-breaking winter weather last week.

What happened in Texas?

When snow, ice, and blistering arctic air engulfed Texas and the deep south last week, millions of Texans were left in the dark and cold for days.

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas — which is responsible for supplying the majority of the state’s electricity for more than 25 million Texans — has come under fire for vulnerabilities in the Texas power grid. In fact, Texas was just “seconds and minutes” away from experiencing catastrophic failure with its energy grid that would have left the state in the dark for months, the Texas Tribute reported.

More from the New York Post:

Texas is the only state in the continental US to run its own stand-alone electricity grid and had not been forced to weatherize because it is not subject to federal oversight.

The exact number of people who died from the extreme cold is not yet known.

What did Schumer say?

The New York Democrat said he hopes Texas “learned a lesson,” attributing the significant energy issues to officials who have “ignored climate change.”

“The bottom line is, Texas thought it could go it alone and built a system that ignored climate change,” Schumer said while speaking in Manhattan, the New York Post reported.

“It was not what’s called resilient, and now Texas is paying the price,” he mocked. “I hope they learned a lesson.”

Schumer went on to bash Texas officials for allegedly not considering the effects of climate change when constructing their energy systems.

“When we build power, when we build anything now, we have to take into account that climate change is real, or people will have to be caught the way the people in Texas were,” Schumer said.

“When I wrote the [Hurricane] Sandy bill, $60 billion for New York, we made sure everything was resilient,” he added. “When they built back the subways, built back this, built back that, they were going to be resistant to climate changes, and we have to do that.”

Share
Categories
CNN Intelwars minimum wage Ro khanna small businesses

Dem Rep. Khanna admits Democrats ‘don’t want’ small businesses that pay less than $15 minimum wage

California Democrat Rep. Ro Khanna essentially argued Sunday that Democrats believe no jobs are better than “underpaying” jobs — those that pay less than $15 per hour.

What happened?

During an appearance on CNN’s “Inside Politics,” host Abby Phillip asked Khanna whether Democrats should be pushing for an increased federal minimum wage as the pandemic continues to adversely impact the American economy. Phillip noted that millions of Americans remain out of work, particularly in retail and service industries that are more likely to pay employees the minimum wage.

Khanna claimed now is the right time by citing Amazon and Target — two massive companies that have set their minimum wages at $15 per hour — and even alleged that increasing the minimum wage creates jobs.

Phillip responded by again asking about small businesses, not large corporations that can generally afford to pay higher wages.

“I’m wondering, what is your plan for smaller businesses?” she asked. “How does this, in your view, affect mom and pop businesses who are just struggling to keep their doors open, keep workers on the payroll right now?”

Shockingly, Khanna said small businesses should not keep their doors open if they do not pay employees the wage that Democrats are demanding.

“Well, they shouldn’t be doing it by paying people low wages,” Khanna replied. “We don’t want low-wage businesses. I think most successful small businesses can pay a fair wage.”

“I love small businesses. I’m all for it. But I don’t want small businesses that are underpaying employees,” Khanna went on to say. “It’s fair for people to make what they’re producing and I think $15 is very reasonable in this country.”


Rep. Ro Khanna on CNN Inside Politics with Abby Phillip

www.youtube.com

Later, when asked if progressive Democrats should compromise on raising the minimum wage to pass the next stimulus, Khanna said moderates should be the ones who compromise.

How many jobs are at stake?

Despite Khanna’s claims, the Congressional Budget Office found in 2019 that raising the minimum wage would potentially cost millions of jobs.

In an average week in 2025, the $15 option would boost the wages of 17 million workers who would otherwise earn less than $15 per hour. Another 10 million workers otherwise earning slightly more than $15 per hour might see their wages rise as well. But 1.3 million other workers would become jobless, according to CBO’s median estimate. There is a two-thirds chance that the change in employment would be between about zero and a decrease of 3.7 million workers. The number of people with annual income below the poverty threshold in 2025 would fall by 1.3 million.

House Democrats released their $1.9 trillion stimulus bill on Friday. The legislation includes a federal minimum wage hike.

Share
Categories
guns Intelwars Jefferson gun store Louisiana Second Amendment Shooting

Louisiana gunman learns the hard way not to open fire at people inside gun store

Armed citizens are being credited with saving lives after they engaged a gunman who opened fire on customers inside a Louisiana gun store on Saturday.

The Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office said a gunman opened fire inside the Jefferson Gun Outlet — a combination gun store and indoor shooting range located in Metairie, Louisiana — before being engaged by armed bystanders outside the store.

The gunman shot four people, killing two and leaving two others injured. The gunman was killed by the armed citizens.

The Jefferson Gun Outlet in Metairie, Louisiana. (Michael DeMocker/Getty Images)

“Arriving deputies located several victims suffering from gunshot wounds,” the JPSO said in a statement, Fox News reported. “Three individuals were pronounced dead on the scene, and two more were transported to a local hospital for treatment. The two transported victims are in stable condition.”

“At this time, it appears a suspect shot two victims inside the location, then was engaged and shot outside the location by multiple other individuals,” the statement continued. “The suspect is one of the deceased on scene.”

The incident happened shortly before 3 p.m. on Saturday.

What did witnesses say?

Michael Mayer, an executive at the Jefferson Gun Outlet, told the New York Times the gunman opened fire after becoming enraged by a request to unload his firearm before entering the store.

“He became agitated by the request and pulled his gun out of his pants and started firing,” Mayer told the Times. “Our armed and trained employees, as well as some armed permitted customers, returned fire and eliminated the threat.”

Tyrone Russell told the newspaper that he was taking a concealed carry permit class at the gun store when the shots rang out.

“All of a sudden, all I hear is a whole lot of gunshots,” Russell said, adding that “everybody started panicking” and “it was like a real shootout.”

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said the agency’s New Orleans office is assisting with the investigation.

Share
Categories
Boeing 777 Colorado denver FAA Intelwars ntsb united airlines

Frightening video shows airplane engine on fire after pilot declares ‘MAYDAY’ just minutes into flight

A United Airlines flight bound for Honolulu was forced to make an emergency landing on Saturday after the Boeing 777-200 plane experienced a massive engine failure just minutes into flight.

Video of the exploded engine went viral on social media, as did pictures that showed pieces from that engine land in residential areas near Denver, Colorado.

What are the details?

Just minutes after departing Denver International Airport, the pilot of United Airlines flight 328 sent a distressed “MAYDAY” call over air traffic control communications to report “an engine failure,” and request an immediate return to the airport.

Video of the exploded right-wing engine, with missing pieces and on fire while still in the air, quickly went viral on social media.


RAW: United Flight 328 engine catches fire

www.youtube.com

Barbara Underwood, a Hawaii resident, told Hawaii News Now that she saw the moment the engine exploded.

“I looked out the window and I saw the engine,” she said. “I noticed it was just shaking a lot. And I thought, well, it’s the turbulence.”

“And then as I was looking at it, it just blew fire. And that ring thing around it just flew off and then it was just smoking. And I was just like, ‘Oh my gosh, I don’t know what’s going to happen next,'” she explained.

Shockingly, Underwood said many passengers were unaware of what had happened.

“I was on the window on the right side, and nobody saw it except the people that were on the window and nobody screamed. And like I looked over and people were still reading their books. They kind of didn’t know what was going on,” Underwood told Hawaii News Now.

Pictures showing debris from that exploded jet engine also circulated on social media. The debris fell over Broomfield, a suburb of Denver.

Kieran Cain told NBC News he was playing basketball with his kids in Broomfield when he witnessed the debris rain from the sky.

“We heard a gigantic boom and, as we did that, we saw a huge puff of smoke and then stuff started falling out of the sky,” he said. “That’s when I called 911.”

Did the plane land safely?

Fortunately, the plane was able to land without further complications. The plane was carrying 231 passengers and 10 crew members.

There were no injuries.

The National Transportation Safety Board will lead the investigation into the incident, the Federal Aviation Administration said in a statement.

Share
Categories
Anti-racism Cartoon network Colorblindness Intelwars Racism

Cartoon Network PSA tells children to ‘see color’ to become ‘anti-racist,’ preaches ‘colorblindness’ is bad

The Cartoon Network released a new public service announcement for its young audience last week that preaches against “colorblindness,” and encourages children to “see color” to become “anti-racist.”

What does the ad say?

The ad begins with three characters — one white girl, one black girl, and a purple alien named Amethyst — singing in support of “colorblindness.”

“Colorblindness is our game because everyone’s the same. Everybody join our circle, doesn’t matter if you’re white or black or purple,” the characters say.

That’s when Amethyst stops the song and dance.

“Hold up a minute here— who wrote this?” the purple alien says. “I think it kind of does matter that I’m purple. I mean, I’m purple because I’m literally an alien.”

The black character then adds, “Well, I’m not an alien, but it definitely matters to me that I’m black.”

“It makes a difference that I’m white,” the white character responds to the black character. “I know the two of us get treated very differently.”

The white character goes on to claim that people add a “fantasy” color in discussions of race to ignore actual problems associated with racism.

“I think people like the black, white, or purple thing, because adding a fantasy race in there helps distract from the actual racism black people have to deal with,” the character says.

The black character responds, “My experience with anti-black racism is really specific. Other people of color experience other forms of racism, too. But you won’t see any of that if you ‘don’t see color.'”

The alien says at the end, “So this entire public service announcement could be a ploy to avoid talking about racism altogether. Hey, could we get a rewrite where we appreciate each other without erasing what makes each of us different?”


See Color | The Crystal Gems Say Be Anti-Racist | Cartoon Network

www.youtube.com

The description of the PSA reads, “It’s important to SEE people in all their beautiful COLORS. When you see color and the unique experiences that come from it, you can recognize the role racism plays in our culture AND appreciate everyone and their diversity.”

Anything else?

According to Variety, the PSA is the third installment in a four-part series meant to teach “ways to disrupt common narratives about racism.”

From Variety:

It is part of a four-part series developed by “Steven Universe” creator Rebecca Sugar and “OK K.O.! Let’s Be Heroes” creator Ian Jones-Quartey to provide kids and families with productive ways to disrupt common narratives about racism. “See Color” was developed with psychologist Dr. Deborah J. Johnson, who specializes in racial and cultural development.

Cartoon Network has prioritized advancing the progressive social agenda in recent months.

As TheBlaze reported, the network faced backlash last December after posting a tweet focusing on “normalizing gender pronouns” and “respecting them.”

Share
Categories
backlash Coca Cola Intelwars Racism Robin diangelo Try to be less white

‘Try to be less white’: Coca-Cola hit with backlash over ‘confronting racism’ training course

Coca-Cola found itself at the center of controversy on Friday after a viral social media post revealed that some Coca-Cola employees completed a racial sensitivity training course that teaches participants how to “be less white.”

What are the details?

Images of the course were shared by psychologist Karlyn Borysenko, an activist who is fighting against critical race theory, who obtained the images from an “internal whistleblower” at Coca-Cola.

One of the slides in the course titled, “Confronting Racism,” states, “Understanding What it Means to Be White, Challenging What it Means to Be Racist.”

Another slide states, “To be less white is to:” “be less oppressive,” “be less arrogant,” “be less certain,” “be less defensive,” “be less ignorant,” “be more humble,” “listen,” “believe,” “break with apathy,” and to “break with white solidarity.”

“In the US and other Western nations, white people are socialized to feel that they are inherently superior because they are white. Research shows that by age 3 to 4, children understand that it is better to be white,” another slide claims.

One of the other slides just says, “Try to be less white.”

The online training is a webinar created by Robin DiAngelo, author of “White Fragility,” and
is hosted on LinkedIn.

The description of the course says the training “gives you the vocabulary and practices you need to start confronting racism and unconscious bias at the individual level and throughout your organization. There’s no magic recipe for building an inclusive workplace. It’s a process that needs to involve people of color, and that needs to go on for as long as your company’s in business. But with these tools at your disposal, you’ll be well on your way.”

What was the response?

Coca-Cola was met with backlash online.

  • “Wut…. this seems like blatant racial discrimination to this employment lawyer,” attorney Harmeet K. Dhillon said.
  • “If a corporate company sent around a training kit instructing black people how to ‘be less black’, the world would implode and lawsuits would follow.
    I genuinely hope these employees sue
    @CocaCola for blatant racism and discrimination,” Candace Owens responded.
  • “This is outright racism under the guise of education. Substitute any other race for white and watch the reaction. You can’t reach equality by denigrating another group,” one person said.
  • “That whistleblower needs to file a civil rights violation complaint for race based discrimination. This won’t go away until this is viewed as a legal issue, which it is,” another person said.
  • “How is any of this legal? If we replaced white with any other race there would literally be hell to pay. This is the most @$ backwards Jim Crow thinking on steroids that I’ve ever seen,” another person said.

What did Coca-Cola say?

In a carefully crafted statement, Cola-Cola neither confirmed nor denied that employees were required to take the training.

The video circulating on social media is from a publicly available LinkedIn Learning series and is not a focus of our company’s curriculum. Our Better Together global learning curriculum is part of a learning plan to help build an inclusive workplace. It is comprised of a number of short vignettes, each a few minutes long. The training includes access to LinkedIn Learning on a variety of topics, including on diversity, equity, and inclusion. We will continue to refine this curriculum.

Share
Categories
Amnesty Filemón vela Henry cuellar Illegal Immigration immigration immigration reform Intelwars Joe Biden Vincente gonzalez

Texas Democrats issue stern warning to their own party over embrace of far-left immigration policy

Three Texas Democrats warned their own political party this week that the continued embrace of progressive immigration policies will result in electoral distaster for the Democratic Party.

What is the background?

Coming into office, President Joe Biden had promised to reverse most of his predecessor’s immigration policies. Biden has already taken executive action to implement some immigration reform.

But on Thursday, Democrats in the House and Senate introduced legislation championed by Biden that would provide amnesty to approximately 11 million immigrants who are illegally living in the U.S.

As TheBlaze reported:

The bill would also increase the number of legal immigrants, provide foreign aid to South and Central American countries, make it easier for refugees to claim asylum, change all instances of the word “alien” in federal law to “noncitizen,” increase spending on border infrastructure to process migrants, assign Social Security numbers and provide health insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act to illegal aliens granted “lawful prospective immigrant” status, and much more.

What are the Texas Democrats saying?

Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar, Vincente Gonzalez, and Filemón Vela — all of whom represent congressional districts on the Texas-Mexico border — are warning the Biden administration’s aggressive immigration agenda is a “receipt for distaster” for Democrats.

In fact, Gonzalez told Politico that Democrats will lose their majorities in Congress if they continue to move forward with progressive immigration policies.

“The way we’re doing it right now is catastrophic and is a recipe for disaster in the middle of a pandemic,” Gonzalez said.

“Our party should be concerned. If we go off the rails, it’s going to be bad for us,” he added. “Biden is going to be dealing with a minority in Congress if he continues down some of these paths.”

Unfortunately, Biden’s immigration policies, which are drawing more migrants north, have already had undesirable impacts, according to Cuellar.

“I said, ‘Hey, we don’t want the wall, but when it comes to the other issues, we gotta be careful that we don’t give the impression that we have open borders because otherwise the numbers are going to start going up. And surely enough, we’re starting to see numbers go up,” Cuellar told Politico.

Still, all three Democratic politicians told Politico they share Biden’s vision of a “fair and humane” immigration system.

According to Politico, Democrats’ vulnerabilities have already been exposed, when then-President Donald Trump saw “an unexpected surge in support” in Democratic strongholds along the Texas-Mexico border in the 2020 election.

Republicans hope to further galvanize voters that Democrats have traditionally taken for granted to win future elections.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus covid COVID-19 Intelwars minimum wage stimulus

Alarming items stuffed inside House Dem’s $1.9T stimulus bill: Health surveillance, animal COVID studies

House Democrats unveiled Friday the $1.9 trillion economic stimulus package they hope to pass by late next week. Included in the bill are $1,400 stimulus checks and numerous other pandemic-related relief measures, like additional funding for state and local governments and more federal unemployment benefits.

The bill — which was “stitched together” by the Democratic-controlled House Budget Committee, according to Reuters — was also filled with dozens of items completely unrelated to direct pandemic relief.

(READ: The full 591-page bill)

Federal minimum wage increase

The bill would enact a key promise made by President Joe Biden and Democrats, increasing the federal minimum wage to $15 by 2025.

Animal COVID studies

The bill allocates $300 million of taxpayer dollars for the Agriculture Department to “conduct monitoring and surveillance of susceptible animals for incidence of SARS–CoV–2” as guided by the World Organization for Animal Health.

‘Socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers’

Addressing farm loans, the bill states that the Agriculture Department “shall provide a payment in an amount equal to 120% of the outstanding indebtedness of each socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher as of January 1, 2021, to pay off the loan directly or to the socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher.”

The purpose of the debt payments is to “alleviat[e] discriminatory barriers preventing socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers from fully participating in the American farm economy.”

The bill also provides another $1 billion to the same group for “outreach, mediation, financial training, capacity building training, cooperative development training and support, and other technical assistance to socially disadvantaged groups.”

Student loan outreach

The bill allocates $91 million for the “Department of Education to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus, domestically or internationally, including direct outreach to students and borrowers about financial aid, economic impact payments, means tested benefits, and tax benefits for which they may be eligible.”

Fine arts and museums

The bill allocates $135 million to the National Endowment for the Arts and another $135 million to the National Endowment of the Humanities.

Meanwhile, the bill also allocates $200 million to the Institute of Museum and Library Services.

Native American languages

The bill also gives $10 million for the “preservation and maintenance of Native American languages.”

Vaccine information

The bill provides $1 billion “to strengthen vaccine confidence in the United States,” “provide further information and education with respect to vaccines,” and “improve rates of vaccination throughout the United States.”

Family planning

Family planning, which could include abortion, gets $50 million.

Global health

The bill provides $750 million for “the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to combat SARS–CoV– 2, COVID–19, and other emerging infectious disease threats globally, including efforts related to global health security, global disease detection and response, global health protection, global immunization, and global coordination on public health.”

Health surveillance

The bill provides another $500 million “to support public health data surveillance and analytics infrastructure modernization initiatives at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

Airlines

The airline industry, which was controversially bailed out in the first stimulus last spring, gets another $15 billion in this bill.

(H/T: Oilfield Rando)

Share
Categories
Biden laptop scandal Defamation Hunter biden Intelwars John paul mac isaac Twitter

Computer repairman at center of ‘Biden laptop’ scandal takes new legal action against Twitter

The former Delaware computer repair shop owner who found himself at the center of controversy involving Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, last year has taken new legal action against Twitter.

What are the details?

John Paul Mac Isaac filed a new lawsuit in federal court on Thursday against Twitter, claiming the social media platform defamed him by declaring that a New York Post story reporting the existence of the laptop included “hacked” material.

According to Mac Isaac, the classification damaged his reputation, forcing him, in part, to shut down his Delaware business.

“Plaintiff is not a hacker and the information obtained from the computer does not constitute hacked materials because Plaintiff lawfully gained access to the computer, first with the permission of its owner, Biden, and then, after Biden failed to retrieve the recovered data despite Plaintiff’s reuses, in accordance with the Mac Shop’s abandoned property police,” the lawsuit reads. “Plaintiff, as a direct result of Defendant Twitter’s actions and statements, is now widely considered a hacker.”

Mac Isaac released a video last year stating that being labeled a “hacker” is a “death sentence in my industry.”

“For the record, I am not, nor have I ever been, a hacker,” Mac Isaac declared.

When the Post’s story broke last October — alleging the laptop proved Joe Biden knew about Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings — Twitter swiftly moved to stop the story from circulating on its platform by claiming the story contained hacked material, thereby violating Twitter’s rules.

However, Mac Isaac has maintained that he did not hack anything. Instead, the Post obtained a copy of the laptop hard drive from Rudy Giuliani, who was given a copy by Mac Isaac. The computer repairman made copies of the hard drive when Biden never returned for the hardware.

Hunter Biden has never denied the laptop belonged to him, the Washington Examiner noted.

Anything else?

This is the second lawsuit that Mac Isaac has filed against Twitter.

The first lawsuit was thrown out by a judge last December over a lack of jurisdiction. That suit, also for defamation, demanded $500 million in damages.

The new lawsuit attempts to resolve the jurisdictional concerns by stating Twitter operates in Florida and that Twitter damaged Mac Isaac while he was conducting business in the Sunshine State.

The new lawsuit claims Twitter’s defamation caused damages of at least $75,000.

“Twitter’s actions and statements had the specific intent to communicate to its users, including its Florida resident users, that Plaintiff is a hacker and/or hacked the published materials,” the lawsuit states.

Mac Isaac also demands that Twitter “make a public retraction of all false statements and to issue a public apology.”

Share
Categories
america first Climate Change Foreign Policy group of seven Intelwars Joe Biden

Biden declares ‘America First’ is over, reveals plans to ‘dramatically reshape’ US foreign policy

President Joe Biden has declared the end of “America First,” the foreign policy championed by former President Donald Trump that sought to prioritize the needs of Americans over international allies.

What did Biden do?

In separate speeches with international partners on Friday, Biden unveiled “his plans to dramatically reshape the U.S. foreign policy agenda,” according to the New York Post.

In his first speech to the Group of Seven — comprised of the U.S., Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom — Biden “declare[d] that America is back and the trans-Atlantic alliance is back,” an administration official told the Post. The G-7 meeting was closed to media.

The administration official added that Biden emphasized “the core proposition that the trans-Atlantic alliance is a cornerstone for American engagement in the world in the 21st century, just as it was in the 20th.”

Meanwhile, Biden pushed the same message during a speech to the Munich Security Conference, announcing that America is “not looking backward,” an implicit reference to Trump and the policies of the Trump administration, according to the New York Times.

More from the Times:

And then he went on to offer a 15-minute ode to the power of alliances. He talked about an America that was itself overcoming challenges to the democratic experiment.

In sharp contrast to Mr. Trump, who declined on several occasions to acknowledge the United States’ responsibilities under Article V of NATO to come to the aid of allies, he said “We will keep the faith” with the obligation. “An attack on one is an attack on all.”

What is the background?

Biden has spent the opening weeks of his presidency dismantling much of his predecessor’s policies.

Not only has Biden jettisoned Trump’s “America First” foreign policy approach, but Biden has rejoined the Paris Agreement on climate change, reversed Trump’s withdrawal from the World Health Organization, and has signaled willingness to negotiate returning to the failed Iran nuclear deal.

“The United States would accept an invitation from the European Union High Representative to attend a meeting of the P5+1 and Iran to discuss a diplomatic way forward on Iran’s nuclear program,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said this week.

Biden was especially criticized this week over his willingness to rejoin the Iran nuclear deal.

In fact, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned that negotiating with Iran will result in the Islamic nation obtaining nuclear weapons.

“Adopting the European Union model of accommodation will guarantee Iran a path to a nuclear arsenal,” Pompeo told the Washington Free Beacon.

Share
Categories
Biden administration China Coronvirus COVID-19 DNI Intelwars Wuhan Wuhan theory

Report: Biden admin still won’t rule out theory that COVID-19 came from Wuhan lab accident

The Biden administration is still open to the idea that the coronavirus escaped from the infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology, according to a new report.

What is the Biden administration saying?

The office of the Director of National Intelligence told NBC News that the agency, now led by Biden appointee Avril Haines, stands by a statement released by the office last April.

That statement said:

As we do in all crises, the Community’s experts respond by surging resources and producing critical intelligence on issues vital to U.S. national security. The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan.

In fact, a “western intelligence official” told NBC News the U.S. government “has substantial intelligence” proving the Chinese government attempted to cover up the virus and “obscure” the origins of the pandemic.

The classified material, which NBC News said was corroborated by a U.S. official, is significant enough that officials have been unable to rule out an accident having happened at the Wuhan lab, resulting in an accidental release of the COVID virus.

What is the background?

As TheBlaze reported, investigators with the World Health Organization claimed last week that it is “extremely unlikely” COVID-19 came from the Wuhan bio laboratory.

Those investigators reached their conclusion after investigating for less than one month.

“The findings suggest that the laboratory incidents hypothesis is extremely unlikely to explain the introduction of the virus to the human population,” Peter Ben Embarek, an expert with the WHO food safety and animal diseases division, said, the Associated Press reported.

Shockingly, the WHO reversed course just days later when WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said “all hypotheses remain open.”

“The expert team is still working on its final report and we look forward to receiving both the report and a full briefing,” he said. “Some questions have been raised as to whether some hypotheses have been discarded. I want to clarify that all hypotheses remain open and require further study.”

Anything?

Still, despite President Joe Biden restoring U.S. funding of the WHO when he entered office, the Biden administration voiced distrust with the international body last week, citing the investigation into the origins of COVID-19.

In fact, Biden’s national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, expressed “deep concerns” with the credibility of the WHO.

“We have deep concerns about the way in which the early findings of the COVID-19 investigation were communicated and questions about the process used to reach them,” Sullivan said.

“It is imperative that this report be independent, with expert findings free from intervention or alteration by the Chinese government,” he added.

Share
Categories
Bennie thompson Capitol riots Donald Trump Intelwars Ku klux klan act

House Democrat files lawsuit against Trump over Capitol riot, cites violation of ‘Ku Klux Klan Act’

A top Democratic congressman filed a lawsuit in federal court against former President Donald Trump on Tuesday over Trump’s alleged role in the deadly violence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

What are the details?

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, filed the lawsuit to hold Trump personally accountable for his alleged role in the Capitol riot.

The lawsuit — which named Rudy Giuliani, Proud Boys, and Oath Keepers as co-defendants — claims Trump and his co-defendants “plotted, coordinated, and executed a common plan to prevent Congress from discharging its official duties in certifying the results of the presidential election.”

Specifically, the lawsuit claims Trump and his co-defendants violated the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which, the lawsuit explains, “was intended to protect against conspiracies, through violence and intimidation, that sought to prevent Members of Congress from discharging their official duties. The statute was enacted in response to violence and intimidation in which the Ku Klux Klan and other organizations were engaged during that time period.”

To help make its case, the lawsuit says that claims made by Trump and Giuliani about the integrity of the election laid the foundation for the violence of Jan. 6, which was brought to a head by Trump’s rally.

“The carefully orchestrated series of events that unfolded at the Save America rally and the storming of the Capitol was no accident or coincidence,” the suit says. “It was the intended and foreseeable culmination of a carefully coordinated campaign to interfere with the legal process required to confirm the tally of votes cast in the Electoral College.”

The suit was filed against Trump in his personal capacity, and Thompson is listed as the plaintiff in his personal, not official, capacity.

The lawsuit seeks “declaratory judgment” that Trump and his co-defendants violated the Ku Klux Klan Act, as well as unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

What is the background?

The lawsuit was filed just three days after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) excoriated Trump, placing blame for the Capitol riot squarely on Trump’s shoulders.

Although McConnell voted to acquit Trump in his impeachment trial on grounds that the Senate does not have jurisdiction to apply the Constitution’s impeachment mechanisms against a now-private citizen, McConnell made clear that Trump’s Senate acquittal did not absolve him from potential criminal and civil consequences.

“President Trump is still liable for everything he did while he’s in office, as an ordinary citizen, unless the statute of limitations has run,” McConnell said.

“He didn’t get away with anything — yet, yet,” he added. “We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation, and former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one.”

The lawsuit cites McConnell’s comments seemingly in support of the lawsuit.

Share
Categories
Andrew Cuomo Coronavirus COVER UP covid COVID-19 Elise stefanik Intelwars New York Nursing home crisis

Congresswoman demands immediate federal investigation into Andrew Cuomo: ‘The dam is breaking’

New York Rep. Elise Stefanik (R) is calling for a federal investigation into Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) over his handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

Despite already writing a leadership book that positively recasts his COVID-19 response, Cuomo is becoming the target of bipartisan backlash as new details surface over his pandemic response, particularly the nursing home scandal.

What is the background?

Last week, two explosive stories were published revealing new details about Cuomo’s COVID response.

First, the Associated Press reported that more than 9,000 patients recovering from COVID-19 were sent to nursing homes in New York state under an executive order Cuomo issued that essentially prohibited nursing homes from turning away COVID-positive New Yorkers.

Shockingly, the number “is more than 40% higher than what the state health department previously released,” the AP reported.

Then, a top Cuomo aide admitted that Cuomo’s administration covered up data on New York nursing homes after then-President Donald Trump began applying pressure on Cuomo as a staggering number of New York nursing home residents died of COVID.

All the while, Cuomo blamed Trump and Republicans.

What did Stefanik say?

The Republican lawmaker said Monday on Fox News that “the dam is breaking” against Cuomo and urged an immediate Department of Justice investigation into Cuomo’s pandemic response.

[Cuomo] is the worst governor in America in terms of how he has handled the COVID crisis. And last week was an absolute bombshell, you have both Democrats and Republicans calling for an independent investigation. I want to see subpoenas both at the state level, the State Senate and state assembly should issue subpoenas immediately. And I want the Department of Justice to launch an independent investigation.

We know from the partial transcript that was released by the secretary to the governor there was that there was obstruction of justice. And this is not about politics. This is about people’s lives. And what was so shameful about the transcript that was released was the secretary to the governor didn’t apologize for the number of deaths, didn’t apologize for the policy, but apologize for the political fallout that faced Democrats.

Not only did Stefanik say that Cuomo should be held accountable at the federal level, but she alleged “pay-to-play issues” had occurred.

“These tens of thousands of families deserve transparency and accountability, and frankly, at this point, with an obstruction of justice that needs to be prosecuted at the federal level,” she said. “I also think there are serious pay-to-play issues that are going on here as well, because of some of the immunity shields that were forced into the legislation by the governor’s team.”

“Now the dam is breaking … you’re seeing overwhelming bipartisan outcry,” Stefanik went on to say. “Everyone knows Gov. Cuomo is a bully, that they bully people within their own party. But this is more important. We’re talking about lives that were lost here.”


Elise Stefanik joins Martha MacCallum to discuss Cuomo’s massive criminal coverup. 2.15.21

www.youtube.com

Anything else?

After last week’s revelations, Democrats and Republicans are both calling for Cuomo to be stripped of his emergency powers related to the pandemic, and some are even demanding his resignation.

Cuomo, however, is still refusing to take responsibility for the crisis that happened under his watch.

In fact, Cuomo on Monday shifted blame for the nursing home crisis from Trump and Republicans to nursing home staff, accusing anyone who disagrees with him of spreading “conspiracy theories.”

Share
Categories
Censure Donald Trump Intelwars North Carolina North Carolina Republican Party Richard Burr Trump Impeachment

North Carolina GOP unanimously votes to censure Richard Burr for voting ‘guilty’ in Trump Senate trial

The North Carolina Republican Party voted on Monday to censure Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) for voting “guilty” against former President Donald Trump in his second Senate impeachment trial.

Burr was one of seven Republican senators who voted to convict Trump. Despite their efforts, Trump was still acquitted because the final vote, 57-43, fell short of the 67-vote threshold needed for a conviction.

What are the details?

The NCGOP central committee voted unanimously to censure Burr, the Tar Heel State’s senior senator.

In a statement, the state Republicans explained they punished Burr because they believed holding an impeachment trial of Trump was unconstitutional.

Tonight, the North Carolina Republican Party Central Committee voted unanimously to censure Senator Richard Burr for his vote to convict former President Trump in the impeachment trial which he declared to be unconstitutional.

The NCGOP agrees with the strong majority of Republicans in both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate that the Democrat-led attempt to impeach a former President lies outside the United States Constitution.

In fact, the constitutionality of holding an impeachment trial against Trump, now a former president, was a question that loomed over last week’s trial.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) explained after voting to acquit Trump that, although he blames Trump for the deadly violence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, the former president was “not eligible for conviction.”

Despite Trump having been formally impeached while he was still in office, now that he is a private citizen, McConnell said the Senate did not have jurisdiction to conduct an impeachment trial against him. McConnell cited Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, which appears to limit the Constitution’s impeachment mechanisms to “the president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States.”

Why did Burr vote to convict?

Following his vote, Burr explained that he agreed about the unconstitutionality of holding the trial. But he claimed that because a majority of senators agreed to hold the trial, the precedent for conducting it was set.

According to Burr, the facts surrounding Trump’s guilt of “incitement of insurrection” were clear.

“The evidence is compelling that President Trump is guilty of inciting an insurrection against a coequal branch of government and that the charge rises to the level of high Crimes and Misdemeanors. Therefore, I have voted to convict,” Burr explained. “I do not make this decision lightly, but I believe it is necessary.”

How did Burr react to being censured?

In a brief statement, Burr accused the North Carolina Republican Party of expressing loyalty to Trump over the principles of the Republican Party.

“My party’s leadership has chosen loyalty to one man over the core principles of the Republican Party and the founders of our great nation,” Burr said, according to Politico.

Anything else?

Burr is not the only Republican senator who has been reprimanded for voting to convict Trump.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) was also unanimously censured by the Louisiana Republican Party, while Sens. Pat Toomey (R-Penn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) also face being censured.

Meanwhile, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) will likely be censured, too, but the Nebraska GOP had already drafted a resolution to censure him prior to his vote to convict. The Nebraska Republican Party is angry that Sasse has been critical of Trump.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who also voted to convict Trump, will likely not be reprimanded for her vote.

Interestingly, the Utah Republican Party released a statement Monday expressing support for Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), the only Republican senator who voted “guilty” in both of Trump’s Senate impeachment trials.

“Our senators have both been criticized for their vote. The differences between our own Utah Republicans showcase a diversity of thought, in contrast to the danger of a party fixated on ‘unanimity of thought,'” the Utah GOP said. “As 2021 begins, we look neither to the past, nor to be punitive.”

Burr is not seeking re-election to a fourth term. He will retire from the Senate after 2022.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus covid Covid variant COVID-19 Intelwars Uk variant

Report: COVID variant from UK ‘likely’ more lethal, could become dominant strain in America by March

British scientists believe that a coronavirus variant spreading throughout the United Kingdom is more lethal than the original COVID-19 strain.

Even more troubling, scientists believe the deadlier variant may become the dominant virus strain in the United States by March.

What are the details?

Government scientists in the U.K. revealed last week the viral variant, known as B.1.1.7, is “likely” responsible for an increased risk of hospitalization and death, the New York Times reported.

The variant has been reported in at least 82 different countries.

More from the Times:

The reasons for an elevated death rate are not entirely clear. Some evidence suggests that people infected with the variant may have higher viral loads, a feature that could not only make the virus more contagious but also potentially undermine the effectiveness of certain treatments. …

But scientists are also trying to understand how much of the increased risk of death may stem from the propensity of the variant to spread very easily through settings like nursing homes, where people are already vulnerable.

Overall, scientists have estimated the variant is spreading 35% to 45% quicker than the original strain in the U.S. and is possibly 30% to as high as 70% more lethal, Axios noted.

However, Muge Cevik, an infectious disease expert at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, warned there remain “several limitations” with the results of the latest study by U.K. government experts.

Cevik told the Times “there are other explanations of this increased severity,” citing the variant being able to “transmit disproportionately in settings with frailer people,” like nursing homes.

Indeed, the study “struggled to account for the presence of underlying illnesses in people infected with the new variant, and for whether the cases originated in nursing homes,” according to the Times.

US dominance by March?

Kristian Andersen, a virologist at the Scripps Research Institute who co-authored a U.S.-based study on the variant, predicted it would become the dominant strain in the U.S. by March if it spreads here at the same rate that it has in the U.K.

“We should probably prepare for this being the predominant lineage in most places in the United States by March,” she said.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued new warnings about the variant last month.

“I want to stress that we are deeply concerned that this strain is more transmissible and can accelerate outbreaks in the U.S. in the coming weeks,” Dr. Jay Butler, deputy director for infectious diseases at the CDC, said. “We’re sounding the alarm and urging people to realize the pandemic is not over and in no way is it time to throw in the towel.”

Fortunately, Pfizer and Moderna have said their COVID-19 vaccines are effective against variants.

Share
Categories
Intelwars Jen psaki Mainstream media sexism Tj ducklo

Top WH official resigns after threatening female reporter: ‘I know this was terrible’

A top White House communications staffer tendered his resignation over the weekend after uproar over the Biden administration’s handling of his alleged threats to a female reporter.

What is the background?

Deputy White House press secretary TJ Ducklo was suspended without pay for one week after he threatened to “destroy” the life of a female reporter who inquired about his relationship with another member of the media. Ducklo was also accused of making “derogatory and misogynistic comments.”

However, the reprimand seemingly fell well short of a promise that President Joe Biden made on Inauguration Day.

“I’m not joking when I say this: If you ever work with me and I hear you treat another colleague with disrespect, talk down to someone, I will fire you on the spot. No ifs, ands or buts,” Biden told his staff on Jan. 20.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki was confronted last Friday over why Ducklo’s punishment seemingly contradicted what Biden had promised. In response, Psaki dodged the questions and claimed Ducklo’s reprimand was “serious.”

What happened now?

Ducklo announced late Saturday that he had resigned from his job in the West Wing, saying he is “devastated” and “embarrassed” over his behavior.

No words can express my regret, my embarrassment, and my disgust for my behavior. I used language that no woman should ever have to hear from anyone, especially in a situation where she was just trying to do her job. It was language that was abhorrent, disrespectful, and unacceptable.

I am devastated to have embarrassed and disappointed my White House colleagues and President Biden, and after a discussion with White House communications leadership tonight, I resigned my position and will not be returning from administrative leave.

I know this was terrible. I know I can’t take it back. But I also know I can learn from it and do better. This incident is not representative of who I am as a person, and I will be determined to earn back the trust of everyone I have let down because of my intolerable actions.

Psaki then confirmed that Ducklo had tendered his resignation.

“We accepted the resignation of TJ Ducklo after a discussion with him this evening. This conversation occurred with the support of the White House Chief of Staff,” she said in a statement.

Anything else?

Interestingly, the Biden administration only addressed Ducklo’s behavior when it became public.

“There were conversations that occurred with the reporter, as well as editors at Politico, immediately after the conversation occurred,” Psaki admitted last week. “That was how we engaged in a private manner, and that was what we felt was appropriate at the time.”

Share