Tag Archives: White House

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 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

President Donald Trump is increasingly isolated

In his accusations of electoral fraud, President Donald Trump is increasingly isolated. His intelligence chief says that international rivals are seeking to weaken trust in democratic processes. Attorney General Bill Barr has disappointed Trump by saying that the Department of Justice has found no proof of systemic fraud. An election security officer shot a tweet about what Trump called a “highly misleading” election comment. “It’s clear to me, and I think most Americans,” Krebs told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Friday, “that the election is over. “We’ve got to get this past.”
Some of the administration officials Krebs served with the most closely on the election were bolder in their rebukes to the President. Commissioner Ben Hovland of the Election Assistance Commission called Trump’s comments “misleading” and “insulting” The country’s top counter-intelligence official said Wednesday that he was worried about post-election conspiracy theories.While Trump rants about votes, Why none of his election security officials support him?

Reference
While Trump rants about votes, none of his election security officials support him. https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/04/politics/trump-election-security-officials/index.html

Can you believe that Trump is merely 67 votes faraway from being an ex-President; therefore, it is freaking him from

Hillary Clinton’s nearly 66 million votes in the 2016 election weren’t enough to defeat Donald Trump. But just over 0.0001% of your could end Trump’s presidency. That’s the reality of what Trump faces if the man is formally impeached through House of Representatives later today, as is expected, prompting a removal trial inside the Senate.

Photo by Aaron Kittredge on Pexels.com

In such a trial, the Constitution simply requires two-thirds considering the Senate, in this case, 67 senators, to vote to convict and remove — then it’s goodbye Trump.

Trump’s fate lies in the hands of 20 GOP senators — the fictitious number necessary join the 45 Democratic senators and two independent senators, who typically side with Democrats, to vote to convict him and end his presidency, assuming they all vote to eliminate Trump.

Yes, this is a huge long shot that 20 Republican senators will vote to send Trump packing, especially given Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s statement a while back saying there’s “had no opportunity” that Trump will probably be removed. However, as an old trial lawyer, I can tell you with the jurors don’t always do for sure. And there’s still the opportunity that further incriminating evidence is revealed about Trump between now and the start of the trial.

Including the best of US, presidents would be unnerved at the prospect that their political demise is just 67 votes away. And even though Trump has been called a lot of things, “secure” is undoubtedly not one instance. Here is the same Trump who just days ago took to Twitter to despicably mock 16-year-old global climate warming activist Greta Thunberg, likely because she beat him out for the title of their time magazine’s “Person of the Year.”

Contributing to Trump’s stress level are comments such as the one made by former GOP Senator Jeff Flake, who recently declared that there would be “at least 35” Republican senators who would vote to eradicate Trump if ballots have been kept secret. That number could be considered a bit high. Still, Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy started several weeks ago, which he thinks there are at least five GOP senators already more likely to vote with Democrats.

Any doubt that Trump costs of this math through his head over and also over, aiming to work out if he mocked or angered enough Republican senators that would spell his political doom? Naturally, what gives Trump protection is that his GOP base backs him solidly, and all of the Republican senators who vote to eliminate Trump could expect to receive their wrath.

And even though the Trump campaign publicly claims that impeachment will help Trump win in 2020 by firing up his base, Trump’s own Twitter is a glimpse of a President entirely panic mode. On Thursday, Trump unleashed a barrage of 123 tweets in the course of the House Judiciary Committee debate toward the articles of impeachment, many commenting toward the hearings, including one instance where he accused two Democratic constituents of the property of lying.

That established a record regarding the most tweets by Trump in a single day, eclipsing his record of 105 tweets set just days before, on Sunday, where he also aimed along at the impeachment process numbers.

Just, for instance, one in all Trump’s tweets Sunday expressed his approval of a conservative activist who had written, “The Constitutional framers could well be appalled by the way impeachment continues to be wielded for being a political weapon against President Trump.”

From the following Friday, following the House Judiciary Committee voted to approve articles of impeachment, Trump again took to Twitter to formulate how upset he cannot be charged with illegal trespass: “It’s not fair that I’m being Impeached when I’ve not made any effort to improve your chances of finding a job wrong!”

Even President Bill Clinton was concerned at the chance being taken from office evidenced by his apology to the country shortly after being impeached through House in 1998, stating, “Exactly what I want The united states and its citizen to know, exactly what I want the Congress to learn, is that I appear to be profoundly sorry for all I have done wrong in words and deeds.”

Clinton offered those words despite having an approval rating that could reach over 60% when it occurs, which notably peaked at 73 percent just days after the House voted to question him.

Such a contrast to Trump, who per FiveThirtyEight.com, currently provides the lowest approval rating of almost any president these many days into his first term at 42%. Trump now even trails Presidents Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush concurrently point inside their respective first terms, and both of them lost re-election.

Trump should be worried. Anything can happen in an effort. All it is going to take is precisely 20 Republican senators to join the Democrats in saying they had an ample amount of his antics, and Trump can have earned himself a destination in historical event — and then in every school textbook — just like the first president in the history of the republic removed from the Senate. Understanding that thought is causing Trump to panic.

Author Resource Box:

Trump is just 67 votes away from being an ex-President and …. https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/12/15/opinions/trump-votes-impeachment-obeidallah/index.html

Do you believe there is independent support for an impeachment inquiry rises following public hearings: poll?

Impartial help for the impeachment inquiry rose after the public proceedings, based on a ballot announced Friday. The Politico/Morning Talk to poll confirmed 44 percent of independent voters polled backed the charge inquiry, a 4-point bounce from last week’s poll. Impartial contrast towards the inquiry also dropped (eight) 8 points to 39 per cents. This enhance proof comes after polls the past few days confirmed the decline of independent help to regard the examination. Polls showed that in fact Democrat party and Republicans stand their ground to back and fight the inquiry.

This week’s ballot showed 81 percent of Democrats the surveyed groups helping the House examination into President Trump, and 81 per cents of Republican the surveyed groups against it. The even split among party-aligned voters showed the intervention independents may have in the full opinion. Overall, registered voters within the poll endorsed the impeachment question rate as a week ago, at 48 percent.

The opposition to the investigation slipped by 2 shows forty-three per cents. The poll pooled 1,988 registered voters between Nov. 22-24. Within the days implementing the last public proceedings in the House, the amount of mistake is 2 percent points. The House launched a charge inquiry into the leader. This inquiry was after a whistleblower complained. Trump requested the Ukrainian leader to inquire former Vice President Joe Biden days after withholding military benefit beginning with the nation. Existing and former officers testified before the House Intelligence Committee on the White House’s partnership along with Ukraine.

Author Resource Box: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/472044-independent-support-for-impeachment-inquiry-rises-following-public-hearings

Live updates: House Democrats subpoena Giuliani associates; Trump to hold first campaign rally since the launch of the impeachment inquiry

House investigators issued subpoenas Thursday up to 2 associates of President Trump’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani following their arrest on campaign finance charges, seeking “key documents” which have not been produced along with impeachment inquiry.

Image result for Trump impeachment

The 2 guys are supposed to charge with scheming to funnel foreign money to U.S. politicians within a bid to affect U.S.-Ukraine relations. Both types have helped Giuliani investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his awesome son, although the indictment does not mention Giuliani or suggest that he cannot be charged with illegal trespass portion of alleged crimes. The developments played out as Trump ready to move to Minneapolis as a result of his first campaign rally since House Democrats launched the impeachment inquiry. Ahead of the trip, Trump lashed out at Fox News following its release of a new poll showing 51 percent of voters want to see him impeached and taken out of office. That is an uptick considering that the House launched an inquiry focused on Trump’s call wherein he pressed the president of Ukraine to look into the Bidens at a time when U.S. military aid to Ukraine was withheld.

Reference:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry-live-updates/2019/10/10/e46ddd94-eace-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html

Can you believe the House panel subpoenaed Gates and Michael Flynn?

The House Intelligence Committee on Thursday sent a subpoenas to two pastTrump officials who pleaded guilty and cooperated concerning special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

The intelligence panel reported it had subpoenaed past Trump campaign deputy Rick Gates and past national security adviser Michael Flynn. The two pleaded guilty in the special counsel’s investigation before cooperating when using the investigation, and their affidavit is documented in Mueller’s report.


House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff’s decision to subpoena overall the Mueller witnesses illustrate a new facet in the Democrats’ investigations into President Donald Trump, as it is the very first subpoenas issued to targets related to the Mueller probe.


Schiff threatens to subpoena FBI director. The House Judiciary and Intelligence committees are operating on dual tracks inside their examinations relating to the Mueller investigation: House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler has issued subpoenas to former White House officials who figured prominently inside the special counsel’s obstruction investigation, while Schiff is now subpoenaed officials cited within the special counsel’s investigation into Russian election interference.

“To be a part of our oversight work, the property Intelligence Committee is constant to evaluate the deep counterintelligence concerns raised in Special Counsel Mueller’s report, so that requires speaking directly with the fact witnesses,” Schiff, a Democrat from California, said in a statement. “Both Michael Flynn and Rick Gates were critical eyewitnesses for Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation, but until now have refused to cooperate fully with Congress.”


The subpoenas to Flynn and Gates request they can give documents later this month and appear just before the panel on July 10. The House Intelligence Committee had interviewed former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen when you prepared the motorcycle for winter its sweeping probe that Schiff launched not too long ago, that is examining Russian election interference along with Trump’s finances and possible foreign influence.

House approves a resolution to enforce McGahn, Barr subpoenas during the court proceeding. Schiff had put off other interviews, including with Trump business associate Felix Sater, as the committee dedicated to having the Mueller report. However, Thursday’s subpoenas undoubtedly are a sign of the fact that the committee is returning to its interviews as Democrats proceed to highlight and publicize what has been uncovered within the Mueller investigation.

Within the Judiciary Committee’s investigation, the White House has directed those subpoenaed do not provide documents regarding their time inside the Trump administration. The White House directed former White House counsel Don McGahn not to testify under subpoena, while former White House communications director Hope Hicks is appearing later this month behind closed doors but may not answer there will be instances when inquiries are asked that the court will not allow due to claims of executive privilege.

It is unclear how Flynn and Gates will respond to Schiff’s subpoenas. Both of them are still under cooperating agreements when using the Justice Department and also have still to be sentenced after their guilty pleas. Flynn retained a new lawyer now that promoted conspiracy theories about Mueller’s team.

The letter to Flynn includes a note about his cooperation when using the Justice Department, which prompted the special counsel to recommend very little jail time, arguing which the cooperation should consist of Congress.

“Even though the committee knows that your cooperation agreement having the Doj only demands that you testify for the department, the committee is disappointed which you do not view your cooperation more broadly as an obligation to assist us, not merely the Department of Justice,” Schiff wrote.

Reference
House Intelligence Committee urges no pardon for Edward …. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-intelligence-committe-urges-no-pardon-for-edward-snowden/2016/09/15/f647a6f4-7b86-11e6-beac-57a4a412e93a_story.html
Former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks …. https://www.westernjournal.com/former-white-house-communications-director-hope-hicks-lands-new-gig-fox/

President James Abram Garfield, the 20th President of the United States, 7th cousin 5x removed

President James Abram Garfield is my 7th cousin 5x removed. The ancestor who connects us as relatives is, Francis Newcombe, my 11th great grandfather.

Historical narrative. James Abram Garfield (November 19, 1831 – September 19, 1881) had been the 20th president of the United States. Garfield served from March 4, 1881, until their death by assassination, six and a half months. Garfield had been the initial sitting member of Congress to be elected towards the presidency and remains the just sitting House user to gain the White House.

Garfield joined politics as a Republican in 1857. He served as an associate of the Ohio State Senate from 1859 to 1861. Garfield opposed Confederate secession, served as a significant basic when looking at the Union Army through the American Civil War, and fought within the battles of Middle Creek, Shiloh, and Chickamauga. Garfield had been first elected to Congress in 1862 to represent Ohio’s 19th District. Throughout Garfield’s extensive congressional service following the Civil War, he securely supported the gold standard and gained a reputation as a talented orator. Garfield initially consented with Radical Republican views regarding Reconstruction, but later preferred a moderate approach for civil legal rights enforcement for freedmen.

At the 1880 Republican National Convention, Senator-elect Garfield went to as campaign manager for Secretary of the Treasury John Sherman and gave the presidential nomination speech for him. When neither Sherman nor their rivals – Ulysses S. Grant and James G. Blaine – could quickly get enough votes to secure the nomination, delegates opted for Garfield as a compromise from the 36th ballot. Into the 1880 presidential election, Garfield conducted a low-key front porch campaign and narrowly defeated Democrat Winfield Scott Hancock.

Garfield’s achievements as president incorporated a resurgence of presidential authority against senatorial courtesy in executive appointments, removing crime within the Post Office, and appointing a U.S. Supreme Court justice. He improved the powers of the presidency as he defied the influential New York senator Roscoe Conkling by hiring William H. Robertson to the lucrative post of Collector of the Port of New York, beginning a fracas that ended with Robertson’s verification and Conkling’s resignation through the Senate. Garfield advocated agricultural technology, an informed electorate, and civil liberties for African Americans. Garfield also proposed substantial civil service reforms; those reforms had been eventually passed away by Congress in 1883 and finalized into legislation by their successor, Chester A. Arthur, once the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act.

On July 2, 1881, Garfield was shot during the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad facility in Washington D.C. by Charles J. Guiteau, a disappointed workplace seeker. The wound was not instantly fatal for Garfield, but he succumbed on September 19, 1881. Guiteau ended up being executed for the murder of Garfield in June 1882. Some historians elect to forgo listing Garfield in rankings of U.S. presidents because of the short timeframe of his presidency.

My genealogical chart that shows the ancestor who connects us as relatives:

President James Abram Garfield (1831 – 1881)
7th cousin 5x removed

Abram Garfield (1799 – 1833)
Father of President James Abram Garfield

Asenath Hill (1778 – 1851)
Mother of Abram Garfield

Ebenezer Hill (1744 – 1834)
Father of Asenath Hill

Ebenezer Hill (1716 – 1815)
Father of Ebenezer Hill

Rachel Adams (1680 – 1758)
Mother of Ebenezer Hill

Peter Adams (1652 – 1723)
Father of Rachel Adams

Rachel Newcomb (1632 – 1690)
Mother of Peter Adams

Francis Newcombe (1605 – 1692)
Father of Rachel Newcomb

Francis Newcombe II (1630 – 1716)
Son of Francis Newcombe

Reference
James A. Garfield – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Garfield

Misimpression of House Speaker Pelosi speaks volumes

It took Facebook more than on a daily basis to downgrade a doctored video making House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seem like she was slurring her words — therefore the video itself remains on the webpage, with copycats proliferating.

A group called Politics WatchDog posted the manipulated video of Pelosi — which was slowed up to give the misimpression she was speaking in an impaired fashion at a think-tank event — at 1:29 p.m.

Nonetheless it wasn’t until after 9 p.m. on May 23, some 32 hours later, that Facebook began suppressing the video after a fact-check from 1 Facebook partner, LeadStories, was published. Facebook partner Politifact didn’t post its very own fact-check through to the following morning on May 24.
One basis for the delay: The fact-checkers needed to do their own reporting — finding audio and digital forensics experts who could verify that the video had been manipulated.

The flap on the Pelosi video reveals the limits of Facebook’s third-party fact-checking system into the battle against misinformation heading into the 2020 election cycle — and also as the company faces increasing scrutiny in Washington, including calls for this to be split up from Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren and others.

The social networking giant has taken a hands-off way of policing the veracity of content on the webpage, instead partnering with independent organizations that have get to be the company’s first and main type of defense against misinformation.

But fact-checking a post or video takes precious time, during which rumors and misinformation can continue to spread at internet speeds.
Facebook works only with fact-checkers which are an element of the International Fact-Checking Network, a global coalition of vetted fact-checkers founded by the Poynter Institute, a number one journalism think tank situated in Florida. Other people in the network through the Washington Post’s fact-checking arm, as well as the Associated Press and Factcheck.org, IFCN director Baybars Orsek said in an interview.