Category Archives: White House

What do you think of Alabama Senator Tuberville’s comparison of descendants of slaves to criminals?

Saturday, during a rally for former President Donald Trump, Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Alabama, equated descendants of enslaved people to criminals, generating severe outrage for pushing a racist narrative. Before a predominantly white audience in Minden, Nevada, Tuberville denounced Democrats as “pro-crime.” “They desire crime because they wish to seize what you have.” They seek to control your possessions. “They seek compensation because they believe the perpetrators are entitled to it,” Tuberville added. “Bull****! That is not obliged to them.” In a press release, NAACP President Derrick Johnson described Tuberville’s remarks as “flat out racist, ignorant, and utterly sickening.”

A Call For Reparations: How America Might Narrow The Racial Wealth Gap

America is notorious for racial inequality. A Call for Reparations: How the United States Could Reduce the Racial Wealth Gap
Johnson continued, “His words promote a centuries-old lie about Black people that throughout history has resulted in the most dangerous policies and violent attacks on our community.” The office of Tuberville did not reply promptly to NPR’s request for comment. As a means of addressing the enduring impacts of slavery, support for reparations for black Americans whose ancestors were slaves has increased throughout time. More than 170 Democratic co-sponsors backed a measure to examine reparations for slavery last spring. A House committee voted to advance the proposal, but the entire House of Representatives has not yet examined it. As a means of addressing the enduring impacts of slavery, support for reparations for black Americans whose ancestors were slaves has increased throughout time.

Bibliography

Kim, Juliana. “Alabama Sen. Tuberville Equates Descendants of Enslaved People to Criminals : NPR.” NPR.org, October 10, 2022. https://www.npr.org/2022/10/10/1127872936/senator-tuberville-racist-reparations-stereotype?fbclid=IwAR3H5GpsKM5XxUnWyy1jHr7hJk5xF7vs7YRvdYYE5wHIJyCiDv9QbC2bPTg.

Why is Trump calling McConnell a “disloyal” at hearings on January 6?

After a House committee played a clip of McConnell’s comments on the Senate floor during Trump’s impeachment trial, former President Donald Trump retaliated against Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.).

By Jeremy Herb, CNN
Updated 5:00 AM ET, Sat July 23, 2022

The former president referred to McConnell as a “disloyal sleaze bag” and claimed that without Trump’s support, McConnell would not have won reelection. Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett joined a 6-3 conservative majority in overturning Roe v. Wade, thanks mainly to McConnell’s assistance in enabling Trump to appoint them as three conservative justices to the Supreme Court. So when he was the one driving the rioters who stormed the capital and did nothing, why is the former president trying to get angry with the Senate Majority Leader?

Did you know that there will likely be further demonstrations this weekend in response to the agony and anger caused by the Supreme Court’s decision about abortion?

According to authorities, tear gas was deployed to disperse protesters outside the Arizona State Capitol. Numerous protestors gathered in New York City’s Washington Square Park to oppose the judgment. Anti-abortion protestors were there, although they maintained a low profile. Following the demonstration, at least 20 individuals were “taken into jail with charges pending” throughout the city. In 2019, the biggest proportion of abortions performed on women requesting the procedure were performed on black women.

According to the statistics, they also had the highest abortion rate, with 23,8 abortions per 1,000 women. Black women who are pregnant or have just given birth are three to four times more likely to die than White women in the same circumstances. Friday, after the Supreme Court reverses Roe v. Wade, anti-abortion groups protest in Washington, D.C. Champagne is consumed by anti-abortion activists in front of the Supreme Court. Rachel Herring, an anti-abortion campaigner, said, “According to Judaism, life starts with the first breath, when the soul enters the body.”

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, supporters for abortion rights pound on the doors of the Arizona State Senate. On Friday, June 24, anti-abortion demonstrators celebrate in front of the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC. An anti-abortion activist wears socks that proclaim “abortion is cruel” while arguing with an abortion rights activist. On Friday, Jill McElroy and her nine-year-old daughter Meriam joined in an abortion rights rally in front of the Supreme Court. She stated, “A lesson we have always taught our children is that they are the masters of their own bodies, and the Court’s ruling today goes against that, and as a family, we believe that’s wrong.”

Champagne is consumed by anti-abortion activists in front of the Supreme Court. I was there at the moment the decision was made. I am delighted. Earlier, I was walking on air, says pro-life activist Noah Slayter. Friday, the phrase “Our bodies, our choices” is spray-painted on a temporary wall in Washington, D.C.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, pro-choice protestors pound on the doors of the Arizona State Senate on Friday. Outside the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, an anti-abortion protester wears socks that proclaim “abortion is cruel.” In Arizona and Arkansas, abortion providers have began discontinuing their services. Dr. DeShawn Taylor remarked that she anticipates a period of darkness, albeit hopefully not for too long.

Approximately twenty abortion appointments originally planned for Friday through next week were canceled by Taylor’s facility. The head of Planned Parenthood said, “The majority of patients were desperate or scared” before to Friday’s Supreme Court ruling on abortion availability in certain states. A new legislation in California shields anybody conducting, helping, or receiving an abortion from any prospective civil action originating from outside the state. A clinic owner in Mississippi said that a woman should not have to leave the state to get medical treatment.

Why did Trump campaign records reveal that advisors were aware that the false electoral strategy was without foundation?

The convocation of the electoral college on December 14, 2020, was expected to herald the conclusion of that year’s tumultuous and protracted presidential election.

A rally outside the Georgia Capitol in Atlanta three weeks after the 2020 election. (Kevin D. Liles for The Washington Post)

In seven swing states won by Joe Biden, though, Trump supporters turned out ready to proclaim victory. Internal campaign emails and memoranda indicate it was part of a larger plot to provide Vice President Mike Pence with a cause to declare the election’s conclusion uncertain. Members of the committee have said that they would provide evidence that President Trump was engaged in an attempt to submit fraudulent electoral ballots for Vice President Joe Biden that failed. The committee got a court order telling Trump’s lawyer, John Eastman, to give the committee the papers.


The Justice Department and a prosecutor in the Atlanta region are also probing the voter fraud. Emails reveal that only days after the election, some Trump aides were planning on how to make a legal justification for promoting their own electors. They pondered whether state legislatures, which in a number of critical states were controlled by the GOP, could designate electors for Trump even if the certified results indicated that Biden had won. A legal consultant for Trump contended that the strict deadline for winning the election was January 6, not December 14. He drew attention to the fact that certain state legislation may be difficult to comply with.


The bogus Michigan electors were unable to convene in the state’s Senate chamber and instead decamped to the state party headquarters. Your tasks are vital. A campaign official wrote to Georgia’s fictitious electors that their efforts would be hindered unless absolute secrecy and discretion were maintained. Robert Spindell Jr., who signed an elector certificate for Donald Trump in Wisconsin, said the general consensus among the lawyers was that if Trump won any of these cases, something had to be done. The electors didn’t have any legal standing, and vice president-elect Mike Pence didn’t recognize them. This made him a target for the crowd that burned down the Capitol.

For more information about this read: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/20/trump-documents-fake-elector-plan/?fbclid=IwAR2-lGCprzKOhWX0tgYKw5fV1YBAeI0RpQKSjLNDU7g2dqdX9P9Dw8ZvzsM

The committee said on January 6 that it is working with the Department of Justice’s request for interview transcripts.

In response to a request from the Justice Department, the committee is in the process of releasing transcripts of the witness interviews it conducted. Currently, the panel is taking part in a cooperative effort with the Department of Justice.

From left, Reps. Bennie Thompson, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger at a hearing Thursday of the House committee investigating Jan. 6.J. Scott Applewhite / AP

They have no intention of addressing the intricacies of that topic in a public setting. This week, senior DOJ officials sent a letter to the committee, increasing the amount of pressure that is being placed on the panel to comply. The letter was included as part of a document that was submitted in response to a request that was made to postpone the trial of many defendants. A piece of witness evidence that was provided to the committee earlier this week included a brief reference of the name of one of the defendants in the case.

More information may be found at the following website: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jan-6-committee-says-cooperating-doj-request-interview-transcripts-rcna34174?fbclid=IwAR2rAbeic4C6GHqHOoqrluWReo4 1cUyMIneqH9VkbKsF

Do you believe that Republican senators kept their promise toward an African American woman after their line of questioning?

At the start of her Supreme Court confirmation hearings last week, Republican senators made a solemn promise to Ketanji Brown Jackson: They promised that they would not treat her as harshly as Democrats had treated Brett M. Kavanaugh during his 2018 confirmation hearings—a set of circumstances that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) described as “one of the lowest moments in the history of this [Senate Judiciary] committee.”
The reviews have been received. Americans favor Jackson’s confirmation substantially more than they support other recent candidates. Still, they also believe that Republicans handled Jackson’s confirmation roughly as severely as Democrats managed Kavanaugh, if not worse than Democrats dealt with Kavanaugh.
According to a survey conducted by Quinnipiac University last week, there is reasonably significant support for Jackson’s confirmation: 51 percent of respondents backed it, while just 30 percent opposed it. It is more popular than during the verification of Trump’s past two candidates, including Kavanaugh, whose nomination was rejected by the public. According to a CNN survey, Americans are vehemently opposed to it by as much as double digits.
However, it is also essential to consider how we arrived at that position.
Even as Americans opposed Kavanaugh’s confirmation, they were primarily dissatisfied with how Democrats handled his confirmation hearings—particularly their treatment of decades-old sexual misconduct claims, according to several. According to the CNN study, 56 percent of respondents gave unfavorable feedback, while just 36 percent gave them good reviews.
However, the Republican response to Jackson’s hearings — and, it seems, her track record on child pornography cases, which was the central line of attack — has received a mixed reception. According to polling, only 27 percent of Americans approve of their strategy, compared to 52 percent who are opposed to it, according to polling. According to the CNN survey, Democrats and Kavanaugh are separated by a 25-point margin, compared to a 20-point margin for Republicans and Kavanaugh. This time around, there are also more undecideds, which may be because Jackson’s hearings were not as well-publicized as they could have been.
Independents disapproved of the other party’s actions in both instances: on Kavanaugh, they disapproved of Democrats 58-30, and on Jackson, they disliked Republicans 54-25 in both cases, according to exit polls.
It is worth noting that, apart from the public’s support for the candidate, there was a significant difference between the two confirmations. Neither side walked away from the Kavanaugh hearings with glowing recommendations. Republicans’ handling of the situation was perceived in an unfavorable light on par with Democrats’ handling of it. When it comes to Jackson, Democrats, on the other hand, earned more favorable ratings (42 percent) than they received terrible reviews (34 percent). As a result, it is not just a case of people loathing all politicians.
The crucial issue that arises from this is: why did people express dissatisfaction with how the Republican Party handled Jackson’s hearings? After all, their negative vote margin is about 2-to-1, owing to many party members’ disapproval of their actions. Republicans are divided on the issue, with 52 percent supporting it and 26 percent opposing it.
That suggests that even Republican members of Congress felt their party went a little too far in criticizing Jackson’s record as a district judge in child pornography cases (when, in fact, her record was relatively ordinary) during the 2016 election.
The connection to the Democrats’ treatment of Kavanaugh is again illuminating. In that case, too, 26 percent of the opposing party expressed dissatisfaction with the way their side handled the situation. In contrast, approval was far higher – 67 percent. As a result, intraparty assessments of the Republican Party’s treatment of Jackson are, on the whole, more unfavorable than those of the Democratic Party’s handling of Kavanaugh.
Furthermore, Republicans supported Jackson more strongly than Democrats did Kavanaugh.
While Democrats overwhelmingly opposed Kavanaugh’s confirmation by 91-7, about 1 in 5 Republicans (21 percent) believe Jackson should be approved, with a comparatively small majority of 60 percent against. If people like Jackson over Kavanaugh, it is likely that their threshold for believing she was mistreated will be lower than it is for Kavanaugh.
However, many Republicans may wish their side had opposed Jackson even more aggressively than they did.
There are many unknowns in this set of data.
Overall, though, the American people do not believe that Republicans have elevated the level of conversation in the wake of Jackson’s hearings. As long as Republicans say they are the party of Abraham Lincoln, they would keep the principles of Lincoln’s time in office. But they would fall short of what Lincoln did,
From listening to the hearings and hearing all of the questions that were not connected to the judge’s credentials, it is clear that the Republican Party has regressed significantly. Because they treated an African-American woman who was well-qualified for the job, they show that they do not know the law.

Reference

Americans strongly disapprove of GOP pushback on Ketanji Brown Jackson. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/01/americans-disapprove-gop-jackson/?fbclid=IwAR0R1DXxA3QB5kHfs9ROkOimrD8gbkXdJl0OT9h1_xMaWwkaW6alQJW8Pwg

Did you know that Antony Blinken often cites his family’s Holocaust history? The Russia-Ukraine war has him stuck between the personal and the political.

When Secretary of State Antony Blinken cited his family’s Holocaust-era history in explaining a matter of U.S. foreign policy on Monday, it was far from the first time he has done so.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken speaks at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., March 21, 2022. (Kevin LaMarque/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

“One of my responsibilities as Secretary is determining, on behalf of the United States, whether atrocities have been committed,” Blinken, who is Jewish, said Monday at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, where he announced that the Biden administration had determined that the Burmese military had committed genocide against the Rohingya. “It’s an immense responsibility that I take very seriously, particularly given my family’s history.”

That family history involves his stepfather, Samuel Pisar, the Holocaust survivor who became a renowned legal scholar and philosopher. Blinken has often described the late Pisar’s recounting of his rescue by American soldiers, saying it shaped his own idea of what the United States symbolizes worldwide.

“That’s the story that I grew up with, about what our country is and what it represents, and what it means when the United States is engaged and leading,” Blinken said.

Now America’s top diplomat contends with a conflict that puts these values to the test: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which has involved mass killings of civilians.

He is also dealing with appeals from Ukraine’s Jewish president, Volodymyr Zelensky — who similarly cites the Holocaust as shaping his outlook — to do more to stop Russia’s attacks.

Zelensky has additionally made direct comparisons between the Russian onslaught and the Holocaust, while Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated his goal is to “de-Nazify” Ukraine.

Talking to American Jewish leaders, Zelensky called Putin’s actions “pure Nazism;” talking to Israelis, he likened Russian tactics to the “final solution”; and in his address to the U.S. Congress, he called the Russian invasion “the worst war since World War II.”

The Biden administration has imposed crippling sanctions on Russia. In addition, it is funneling billions of dollars in defense and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and deploying U.S. troops to NATO allies adjacent to Ukraine. But President Joe Biden will not accede to Zelensky’s top demands — including creating a no-fly zone over Ukraine to protect it — saying they could provoke a world war.’

On Wednesday, however, Blinken formally declared that the United States’ position is that Russian forces have committed war crimes.

“Many of the sites Russia’s forces have hit have been clearly identifiable as in-use by civilians,” he said. “This includes the Mariupol maternity hospital, as the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights expressly noted in a March 11 report. It also includes a strike that hit a Mariupol theater, clearly marked with ‘дeти’ — Russian for ‘children’ — in huge letters visible from the sky.”

Does Blinken feel the pressures of family history as he contemplates Ukraine? The State Department did not respond to multiple requests for an interview. But his speech at the Holocaust museum on Monday showed that it was on his mind.

“One of the unsettling truths of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is that there’s never a time I visit here when its lessons do not feel deeply resonant,” he said. “But I have to tell you, I can recall a few times when that history felt so urgent or the responsibility it imparts on us so pressing. As we meet, the Russian Government continues to wage its unprovoked, brutal war on Ukraine. Each day brings more brutal attacks, more innocent men, women, and children killed.”

The war’s risk to Holocaust survivors in Ukraine was especially poignant in Blinken’s telling.

“Ukraine is home to nearly 10,000 Holocaust survivors, including an 88-year-old woman, Natalia Berezhnaya of Odesa,” he said. “Here’s what she said in a recent interview, and I quote: ‘It’s hard to wrap my mind around the fact that in 1941, I had to hide in the basement of this building, and that I’m going to have to do that again now.'”

Blinken stopped short of accusing Putin of genocide as he did the Burmese military. Instead, he cast Russia’s predations as part of a welter of human rights disasters now proliferating.

“Even as we are working to increase international pressure on the Kremlin to end this unjustified war, we know there are many other places where horrific atrocities are being committed,” Blinken said. “Over recent weeks, as I’ve spoken with diplomats worldwide about Ukraine, I’ve also heard a constant refrain. Many of them say, ‘Yes, we stand with the people of Ukraine. But we must also stand with the people suffering atrocities in other places.'”

On Wednesday, the move to accuse Russia of war crimes is notable; noted Jewish foreign policy experts had been frustrated with Blinken’s language.

Josh Rogin, an influential foreign policy opinion columnist for The Washington Post, wrote that the hesitancy in Ukraine is reflective of a West that has allowed atrocities to be committed in China, Syria, and Burma. “The Ukraine example shows that ignoring atrocities anywhere is morally and strategically bankrupt,” he said this week before Blinken announced his war crimes designation.

Aaron David Miller, a longtime Middle East peace negotiator and a scion of one of Cleveland’s most prominent Jewish families, sounded a despairing note on Twitter.

“Never Again is Ever Ever Again,” he said. “The International Community has failed to even try to prevent any of the planet’s genocides/mass killings over past 100 years; Armenians; Holocaust; Cambodia; Rwanda; Congo; Sudan; Darfur; Myanmar; Uighurs; Syria….. Ever ask yourself why.”

Asked to expand on the tweet on CNN, Miller, now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment, a foreign policy think tank, admitted that he understood Blinken’s predicament.

“A president of the United States weighing the consequences of humanitarian intervention in the case of Ukraine has more than just moral factors to take into account and the consequences of an intervention or not an intervention at least for American interests, that could affect millions of humans in the United States and in Ukraine, so it’s it’s a moral hazard,” Miller said. “It’s a complicated problem. And frankly, I think Ukraine will be another example of confirmation of the rule.”

Abe Foxman, the retired national director of the Anti-Defamation League and a Holocaust survivor, argued that Blinken’s approach made sense: One’s views on the Holocaust may shape policy but should not necessarily determine what the procedure is.

He was pleased to see Blinken knows, understands, is informed and instructed by his family history, by his Jewish experience, Foxman said in an interview. It does make a difference, but it cannot be determinative of action. This is a war. It’s not a holocaust or genocide. And it’s very, very important that if you know your history, you see the difference.

Reference

Antony Blinken often cites his family’s Holocaust history. The Russia-Ukraine war has him stuck between the personal and the political. https://www.jta.org/2022/03/24/politics/antony-blinken-often-cites-his-familys-holocaust-history-the-russia-ukraine-war-has-him-stuck-between-the-personal-and-the-political?fbclid=IwAR0vj-Q7Oys1vWBpQYcJm7Y0kjH_8dp7HgXidygq51dBq-SV2-rFeN_-4mw

Did you know that Ginni Thomas, Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, exchanged texts with Mark Meadows about efforts to overturn the 2020 election?

Following the 2020 presidential election, Virginia Thomas, a conservative activist married to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, urged White House chief of staff Mark Meadows in frantic text conversations during the crucial weeks following the vote to continue unrelenting efforts to reverse the result, according to copies of the texts obtained by CBS News top election and campaign reporter Robert Costa and Bob Woodward of The Washington Post.

This is what happens when individuals have a hidden agenda. Mrs. Thomas has not only gotten her husband into a pickle; she has gotten herself into one as well. Why would she jeopardize her status by doing such acts?

Reference

Ginni Thomas, Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, exchanged texts with Mark Meadows about efforts to overturn the 2020 election. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/virginia-ginni-thomas-clarence-wife-mark-meadows-texts-2020-election/?fbclid=IwAR0WUTrGzb_8JHYuRc3lv3J4j1d9YbL7fNyMkfos-qagSeAZOaVEt5pkf3g

Did you know that Jackson pushes back at GOP critics, defends judicial record?

Brown, Ketanji Jackson vehemently defended her record as a judge Tuesday, rebutting Republican charges that she was soft on crime and stating that if confirmed as the first black woman on the Supreme Court, she would rule as an “independent jurist.”

Republicans aggressively questioned Jackson during a marathon hearing that lasted into the night about the sentences she handed down to sex offenders during her nine years as a federal judge, her advocacy on behalf of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, her views on critical race theory, and even her religious beliefs. In February, President Joe Biden appointed Jackson to the Supreme Court, completing a campaign commitment to nominate a black woman to the court for the first time in American history. Cruz pressed Jackson on her sentencing for child pornographers, bringing up a giant poster board and marking passages he believed were heinous. 

The White House has rejected the criticism as “toxic and weakly presented misinformation.” And sentencing expert Douglas Berman, an Ohio State law professor, noted on his blog that although Jackson’s record indicates she is suspicious of the range of prison sentences proposed in child pornography cases, “so were prosecutors in the majority of her cases and district judges nationally.” Jackson said that the notion does not arise in her job as a judge and “would not be anything I would depend on” if approved. Jackson’s answers bypassed a key point: the court weighs whether to overrule those cases that affirm a nationwide right to abortion.

Reference

Jackson pushes back at GOP critics, defends judicial record. https://apnews.com/article/ketanji-brown-jackson-hearing-day-2-live-updates-219ce62acd87ca205163781f5b6623a0?fbclid=IwAR3L5e1TdHHui49NkKb_LwHfhgscFcptsRgqGb9DmXc9Jqr7FA-BPYh1DkQ

Condemnation or Russian President

US President Joe Biden has condemned Russian President Vladimir Putin for his country’s invasion of Ukraine. He then referred to Putin as a “murderous despot” and “pure thug.” Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s president, says he is “prepared for conversations” with Putin. The concern today is what Biden’s views — and those of others — signal for the future of the Ukraine conflict. What does President Putin anticipate when he behaves adolescent-like? The Ukrainian people have historically been fearless. Some Ukrainians have relatives in Russia, but they cannot obtain accurate information due to state-controlled media. The Ukrainian people and the Russian people in Russia should be free to think for themselves. Why should one individual dictate what they should consider? One day, the Russian people will rise up against such activities and liberate themselves from their ignorance.

Photo by u0414u043cu0438u0442u0440u0438u0439 u0422u0440u0435u043fu043eu043bu044cu0441u043au0438u0439 on Pexels.com

Reference

Calling Putin a war criminal is a bigger deal than you think. https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/21/politics/putin-war-criminal-ukraine-russia-what-matters/index.html?fbclid=IwAR0gr6FalS9OzEebI80a2u9_3kO4v81lnPPzuz1jK60NU-9mAhmUpwPNmSg