6
   

Monitoring Biden and other Contemporary Events

 
 
Region Philbis
 
  5  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2022 05:32 pm
@BillW,
Quote:
Stewart Rhodes, leader of Oath keepers found guilty of Seditious Conspiracy!
excellent...
Below viewing threshold (view)
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2022 06:28 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:

When the Supreme Court does strike down a law, it does not make the state responsible for changing that law. Rather, the Supreme Court directly invalidates the law using their own innate power.


SCOTUS does not make law. SCOTUS determines the Constitutionality of a challenged law. SCOTUS can name special masters to monitor a state into resolution of a challenge. And a SCOTUS ruling can compel Congress and Courts to act in concert to bring about changes to bring a situation into a Constitutional mandate: ie all those "Federal oversteps" you guys hate - school integration and affirmative action, for an example.


Didn't you have civics classes in high school?
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2022 06:41 pm
Mark Meadows Ordered to Testify in Georgia Probe
Mark Meadows Ordered to Testify in Georgia Probe

November 29, 2022 at 4:38 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 48 Comments

https://politicalwire.com/2022/11/29/mark-meadows-ordered-to-testify-in-georgia-probe/

"SNIP......

“South Carolina’s Supreme Court has ordered former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to testify to an Atlanta-area grand jury investigating Donald Trump’s effort to overturn the election in Georgia,” Politico reports.

......SNIP"
3
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2022 07:50 pm
Joe The Union Man Biden
Get to know Joe.
https://youtu.be/nSWVDB7wEBc

Deftly avoids railroad strike until after midterms…
Railroad workers deserve paid sick days.


blatham
 
  2  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2022 09:32 pm
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fixqpc0XgAUc5eM?format=jpg&name=medium
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2022 10:02 pm
@Lash,
Bernie Sanders interviewed by Chris Hayes on the railroad bill
Lash
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2022 10:33 pm
@blatham,
They should have at least 1 per month.
Bernie’s lowballing it because Biden wants to give them nothing.

I hope they strike until they get 15.

It would be EASY to afford it.
They just don’t want to.

Joe Biden is no friend of unions and no friend of working Americans.
blatham
 
  5  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2022 11:19 pm
@Lash,
Quote:
Joe Biden is no friend of unions and no friend of working Americans.

My father was a union organizer. I've been a member of several unions and have always been a strong supporter of unions and have consistently decried the decimation of unions at the hands of business interests and their political allies (by far the majority being within the Republican party). But, as always, your game is slandering Democrats.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/02/joe-biden-unions

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-27/podcast-biden-s-pro-labor-presidency-isn-t-good-enough-for-unions

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/inflation-is-obscuring-bidens-pro-labor-achievements

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/07/business/economy/biden-union-membership.html
glitterbag
 
  5  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 01:02 am
@blatham,
Labor Unions have improved the working conditions for many working people. They (just by existence) also improved the working conditions for people not working for unions.
Builder
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 01:29 am
@Lash,
Quote:
Joe Biden is no friend of unions and no friend of working Americans.


Like many in congress, creepy Joe hasn't done an honest day's work in his miserable excuse for a life.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 02:16 am
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:
SCOTUS does not make law. SCOTUS determines the Constitutionality of a challenged law.

Agreed.

And when they determine that a law is unconstitutional they strike it down.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
SCOTUS can name special masters to monitor a state into resolution of a challenge. And a SCOTUS ruling can compel Congress and Courts to act in concert to bring about changes to bring a situation into a Constitutional mandate: ie all those "Federal oversteps" you guys hate - school integration and affirmative action, for an example.

Such steps are only in rather extreme situations. Normally the response to an unconstitutional law is merely to strike it down. But I do think it would be pretty funny if leftist states stated having to get prior approval from the courts before they could enact new gun control laws.

I don't hate school integration.


bobsal u1553115 wrote:
Didn't you have civics classes in high school?

Yes. It was pretty redundant, as I had already learned it all on my own when I was in elementary school.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 04:02 am
Quote:
Today, after an eight-week trial and three days of deliberations, a jury of five women and seven men found Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, 57, the founder and leader of the right-wing Oath Keepers gang, and Kelly Meggs, 53, who led the Florida chapter of the Oath Keepers, guilty of seditious conspiracy and other charges related to the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. It found Rhodes guilty of obstruction of an official proceeding and tampering with documents and proceedings, and found Meggs guilty of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to prevent an officer from discharging duties, and tampering with documents or proceedings.

The jury also found three additional defendants from the organization—Kenneth Harrelson, 42; Jessica Watkins, 40; and Thomas Caldwell, 68—guilty of related felony charges.

The Department of Justice proved that after President Joe Biden won the November 3, 2020, election, Rhodes, Meggs, and others began plotting to use force to oppose the lawful transfer of presidential power. 

Beginning in late December 2020, they planned to travel to Washington, D.C., on or around January 6, 2021, to stop Congress from certifying the electoral college vote that would officially elect Biden. They recruited others, organized combat training sessions, and smuggled paramilitary gear to the area around the Capitol. They planned to take control of the Capitol grounds and buildings on January 6. 

According to the Department of Justice, on that day, “Meggs, Harrelson, and Watkins, along with other Oath Keepers and affiliates—many wearing paramilitary clothing and patches with the Oath Keepers name, logo, and insignia—marched in a ‘stack’ formation up the east steps of the Capitol, joined a mob, and made their way into the Capitol. Rhodes and Caldwell remained outside the Capitol, where they coordinated activities” and stayed in touch with quick reaction force teams outside the city, which were ready to bring in firearms to stop the transfer of power. 

That a jury has now found two people guilty of seditious conspiracy establishes that a conspiracy existed. Former federal prosecutor Randall D. Eliason, who teaches law at George Washington University, told reporters Spencer S. Hsu, Tom Jackman, and Rachel Weiner of the Washington Post: “Now the only remaining question is how much higher did those plans go, and who else might be held criminally responsible.” While federal prosecutors sought only to tie Rhodes to the other Oath Keepers, both sides agreed that Rhodes communicated with Trump allies Roger Stone, Ali Alexander, and Michael Flynn after the election. 

There are two more seditious conspiracy trials scheduled for December. One is for five other Oath Keepers; the other is against the leaders of the far-right gang the Proud Boys, led by Henry ‘Enrique’ Tarrio. 

Yesterday, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election are not covered by presidential immunity as his lawyers argued. The judge noted that he was acting not as a president in defense of the Constitution, but rather in a different role as a candidate when he tried to overturn the election. Sullivan said: “Persuasive authority in this district specifically recognizes that there is no immunity defense for Former President Trump for ‘unofficial acts’ which ‘entirely concern his efforts to remain in office for a second term.’”

The South Carolina Supreme Court today unanimously ordered Mark Meadows, who was Trump’s last White House chief of staff, to testify before the Fulton County, Georgia, grand jury investigating Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. Meadows was on the phone call Trump made to Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger on January 2 to demand he “find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have,” making his testimony key to the investigation. Meadows lives in South Carolina, where he tried to argue that he could not testify because of executive privilege. Lower South Carolina courts disagreed, and now the state’s supreme Court has said that Meadows’s arguments are “manifestly without merit.” 

In Washington, Trump advisor Stephen Miller testified today before the grand jury investigating the events of January 6, 2021. The Justice Department subpoenaed Miller in September. He also testified before the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol. 

Also in Washington today, the Senate passed the Respect for Marriage Act, which provides federal recognition of same-sex and interracial marriages for the purposes of federal benefits like Social Security, and requires states to recognize such marriages, although it does not require them to perform such marriages. The law is an attempt to get out in front of the Supreme Court, whose right-wing members have suggested they would invalidate marriage equality after ending protections for reproductive rights. Thirty-six Republicans voted against the bill, with 12 Republicans joining the Democrats to pass it. 

The Senate bill amends one passed in July by the House, which will now have to agree to the changed measure and is expected to do so. House speaker Nancy Pelosi announced a vote for next week.

Today Pelosi also announced that Congress will take up the legislation Biden asked for yesterday: a law to put in place the deal between the railroad corporations and the railway unions. Four of 12 unions have rejected the deal because of its lack of paid sick days. In a letter to her colleagues, Pelosi expressed reluctance to bypass standard ratification procedures but said, “we must act to prevent a catastrophic strike that would touch the lives of nearly every family: erasing hundreds of thousands of jobs, including union jobs; keeping food and medicine off the shelves; and stopping small businesses from getting their goods to market.”

She promised to bring the measure up for a vote tomorrow. 

But, in typical Pelosi fashion, she has found a way to demonstrate to union members and to lawmakers like Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who are angry at Biden’s determination to avoid a strike, that those standing in the way of paid leave for the unions are not the Democrats. After the vote on the agreement, she will hold a “separate, up-or-down vote to add seven days of paid sick leave for railroaders to the Tentative Agreement.” Such a measure is likely to pass the House and die under a Republican filibuster in the Senate. 

While the jury was handing down its verdict in the case of Stewart Rhodes, who said on tape that he would “hang f*ckin’ Pelosi from the lamppost,” Speaker Pelosi was lighting the Capitol Christmas tree with fourth-grader Catcuce Micco Tiger, who is a citizen of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI) and has ancestry from the Seminole Tribe of Florida and Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. 

Tiger won the role of youth tree lighter with an essay sharing the Cherokee origin story for evergreen trees. “After creating all plants and animals,” Pelosi explained, “our Creator asked them to fast, pray, and stay awake for seven nights. But at the end, only a few were awake. The trees that stayed awake were rewarded with the ability to keep their leaves yearlong and with special healing powers. It is a story of faith and gratitude—of hope enduring through the dark night.”

“And,” Pelosi added, “it is hope that we celebrate each holiday season—that through the cold and dark winter, spring will someday come.”  

Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn, who defended the Capitol against the Oath Keepers on January 6, heard the jury’s verdict, then watched the tree lighting.

hcr
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 04:09 am
Never Trump Means Never

Opposing Trumpism is about more than rejecting one man.

Tom Nichols wrote:
In one of the most appalling appropriations of a political banner in years—or at least since Trump decided in 2012, after years of changing party registrations, finally to settle on calling himself a Republican—some of the conservatives hoping to salvage the GOP’s fortune after the 2022 midterms are trying to seize and redefine the term Never Trump to mean a rejection of “only Trump, and no other Republicans who are like him.” This is important not as some internecine fight among the right but because it is a preview of how many Republicans (and especially those coalescing around Florida Governor Ron DeSantis) intend to rehabilitate the GOP brand in 2024.

The strategy will be to make Trump the sin-eater for the entire party, designating him as the GOP’s sole problem, and then rejecting him—and only him. The goal will be to scrub away the stain of having accommodated Trump while pretending that the Republican Party is no longer an extension of his warped and antidemocratic views. This will require an extraordinary suspension of disbelief and an expenditure of gigawatts of political energy on the pretense that the past seven years or so didn’t happen—or didn’t happen the way we remember them, or happened but don’t matter because Trump, having escaped Elba to contest the primaries, will finally be sent to St. Helena after his inevitable defeat.

This will be the new Republican line, and it is nonsense.

As one of the original Never Trumpers—an appellation adopted by disaffected Republicans and conservatives who swore never to support Trump—I think I have a pretty firm handle on what the term means. I do not speak for every Never Trumper, but I am confident that virtually all of us would affirm that we were not just making a choice about a candidate but opposing the movement that coagulated around Trump. We did this not only by expressing disapproval—which is easy—but by actively voting for his Democratic challengers, which for some of us was harder to do but was part of actually “stopping” Trump. In this, we became a movement ourselves. We were not merely choosing one flavor of ice cream over another; we were examining our own beliefs, and then advocating for others to join us in defending those ideas in the public square.


We knew that Trump represented an existential threat to everything that we and millions of other Americans, regardless of party, cherished. He was an avowed enemy of the rule of law, cared nothing about fidelity to the Constitution, and could never be a responsible steward of the awesome powers of the presidency. (It is no accident that the first Never Trumpers were heavily concentrated among those of us with connections to national security.) We were certain that Trump would bring racism, misogyny, and religious bigotry to the White House. And we were right.

But Trump exceeded our worst fears. We expected him to bring a claque of opportunists and various other mooks and goons with him to Washington, but we overestimated the ability of the GOP’s immune system to fight off a complete surrender to Trump’s parasitical capture of the party. We appreciated the threat of Trump, but we were surprised by the spread of Trumpism—the political movement that arose as a malignant mass incarnation of Trump’s personality, based on racism, nativism, isolationism, the celebration of ignorance, and a will to power that was innately hostile to American institutions. Trumpism is now the only real animating force in Republican politics; indeed, DeSantis, the great GOP hope, is so much a Trump sycophant that he has even learned to stand and gesture like Trump.

The idea that Never Trump means more than the rejection of one vulgar and ignorant man—that it also means Never Trumpism—infuriates a lot of people on the right. (The folks over at National Review, some of whom have apparently jumped on the DeSantis bandwagon, have seemed particularly agitated in the past few days.) The immediate circumstance that precipitated all this online whining about the Never Trumpers and generated the sweaty attempts to seize their mantle was, of course, Trump’s dinner this weekend with an anti-Semite and a white supremacist. Top Republicans who should be desperate to scour the stink of Trumpism off the GOP but who fear Trump and his base once again went weak in the knees. Most stayed quiet; others employed careful circumlocutions. Mike Pence said Trump should “apologize” for the dinner, as if it were a faux pas. Senator John Thune blamed Trump’s staff—always a handy dodge in Washington.

Only a very few were specific and unequivocal. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell finally weighed in today with a shot at Trump’s ambitions, saying that “there is no room in the Republican Party for anti-Semitism or white supremacy,” and that “anyone meeting with people advocating that point of view, in my judgment, are highly unlikely to ever be elected president of the United States.” But Senator Bill Cassidy was more direct: “President Trump hosting racist antisemites for dinner encourages other racist antisemites,” he tweeted. “These attitudes are immoral and should not be entertained. This is not the Republican Party.” Cassidy’s words are admirably clear, but while he argues that such attitudes are not the Republican Party, they are, in fact, espoused by people widely tolerated by the base of the Republican Party—starting right at the top with Donald Trump.

The Republicans know they have a problem. Many of them seem to believe their only recourse now is to say that they were all Never Trumpers in the hope that voters will somehow draw an unwarranted distinction between Trump and the party he has captured from top to bottom. But those of us who said “Never Trump” years ago—and meant it—know the difference.

atlantic
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 04:20 am
@Lash,
Quote:
It would be EASY to afford it.

And costly to implement it.

Quote:
Joe Biden is no friend of unions and no friend of working Americans.

That's an opinion contradicted by facts:

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/viewpoint-bidens-nlrb-dol-seek-to-upend-trump-era-labor-laws

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/weekly-shift/2022/05/09/nlrb-stretches-its-wings-under-bidens-appointees-00030967

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/the-biden-era-of-labor-law-change-the-8486888/

I know it's not the same thing as workers taking control of the means of production or corporate gangsters being sentenced to hard labor but it's a big change from the Trump era and that is as much as can be expected with such a closely divided federal government and electorate.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 06:57 am
https://i.imgur.com/qepG5Mb.jpg

https://image.politicalcartoons.com/269365/600/gop-trump.png
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  3  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 08:16 am
@hightor,
Quote:
But Trump exceeded our worst fears. We expected him to bring a claque of opportunists and various other mooks and goons with him to Washington, but we overestimated the ability of the GOP’s immune system to fight off a complete surrender to Trump’s parasitical capture of the party. We appreciated the threat of Trump, but we were surprised by the spread of Trumpism—the political movement that arose as a malignant mass incarnation of Trump’s personality, based on racism, nativism, isolationism, the celebration of ignorance, and a will to power that was innately hostile to American institutions. Trumpism is now the only real animating force in Republican politics; indeed, DeSantis, the great GOP hope, is so much a Trump sycophant that he has even learned to stand and gesture like Trump.


The question is, will it work for them? While it was great Democrats didn't get creamed in the midterms, Trumpism wasn't rejected, the GOP managed to gain the house and keep the Senate closely divided.

Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 08:39 am
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:


Quote:
But Trump exceeded our worst fears. We expected him to bring a claque of opportunists and various other mooks and goons with him to Washington, but we overestimated the ability of the GOP’s immune system to fight off a complete surrender to Trump’s parasitical capture of the party. We appreciated the threat of Trump, but we were surprised by the spread of Trumpism—the political movement that arose as a malignant mass incarnation of Trump’s personality, based on racism, nativism, isolationism, the celebration of ignorance, and a will to power that was innately hostile to American institutions. Trumpism is now the only real animating force in Republican politics; indeed, DeSantis, the great GOP hope, is so much a Trump sycophant that he has even learned to stand and gesture like Trump.


The question is, will it work for them? While it was great Democrats didn't get creamed in the midterms, Trumpism wasn't rejected, the GOP managed to gain the house and keep the Senate closely divided.




Rev...this mid-term was the best for either party in the presidency in decades. Yeah, the GOP gained the House...but they are stuck with 222...only four above the needed majority number. And they have an assful of renegades yapping at their own heels. Keeping the Senate is monumental for the Dems (and Independents caucusing with them).

We may be through with Trump...but we are far from through with Trumpism...which is only a pretense for the kind of people who form the base of the GOP. The haters, of which there are many, will gravitate to today's GOP no matter who heads it. There is no one who can head that faction except someone in the mold of Trump.
Lash
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 08:44 am
@hightor,
https://www.instagram.com/p/Clj5FKDpcsL/?igshid=NGFlNTM4N2U=

https://www.instagram.com/reel/ClkmMrIDu3l/?igshid=NGFlNTM4N2U=

Biden is telling Congress to force railroad workers into a contract that they rejected.

He’s a union buster who talks like he’s not.
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Wed 30 Nov, 2022 08:51 am
@Lash,
If there's no change of the Railway Labor Act (RLA), Congress has the ability to impose an agreement on the rail workers to avert a strike.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 02/08/2023 at 07:36:27