Tag Archives: Congress

Inquiring Minds Want To Know

Posted on by

On Friday, Rumble posted an article that included a tweet by Roger Stone that asked a very interesting question.

Here is the tweet:

The article notes:

Have you heard the latest? The Biden Boys are set to fiercely fight their congressional subpoenas. Remember what happened to the Trump officials who took a similar stand during the January 6th sideshow?

Who can forget when Peter Navarro refused to testify before the circus known as the January 6th Committee? That poor guy was convicted of contempt of Congress so quickly, it made his head spin.

On October 6, 2014, Politico reported:

A federal judge has declined a House committee’s bid to have Attorney General Eric Holder held in contempt of court — and perhaps even jailed — for failing to turn over documents related to the Justice Department’ s response to Operation Fast and Furious.

However, in a ruling Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson also denied Holder’s request for an indefinite stay of her prior order that the attorney general must turn over any “non-privileged” documents the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee subpoenaed as part of an investigation into the botched gunrunning investigation. The judge previously ruled that Holder must give the panel any documents that are not both predecisional and deliberative in nature.

On November 17th, CNN reported:

The White House says the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden lacks constitutional legitimacy and is calling on GOP-led congressional committees to rescind their subpoenas and interview requests, according to a new letter obtained by CNN.

The move sets up a showdown with House Republicans as the White House criticizes what it describes as “Congressional harassment of the President,” calling on the committees to withdraw subpoenas and a series of requests for interviews aimed at White House officials and Biden family members and associates.

Earlier this week, House Oversight Chairman James Comer said he sent a subpoena to former White House counsel Dana Remus to discuss Biden’s alleged mishandling of classified documents. The Kentucky Republican had previously requested that Remus to appear for a voluntary interview, but the White House did not comply. And last week, the House Oversight Committee issued subpoenas to the president’s son Hunter and brother James as well as a Biden business associate.

Ignoring subpoenas only matters when you are a Republican.

 

The Video Tapes Are Revealing The Truth

Posted on by

As the video tapes from January 6th are being released, it is becoming very obvious that the story we have been told about that day is simply not true. The role of the Capitol Police needs to be scrutinized carefully in view of what the video reveals.

On Wednesday, Just the News posted an article about some of what has been learned from the video tapes.

The article reports:

Congressional investigators have obtained hours of video footage from undercover officers who were dispatched by the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police Department to the U.S. Capitol to conduct electronic surveillance during the Jan. 6 riot, a critical new piece of evidence that could help lawmakers fashion long-delayed security reforms.

The footage reviewed by Just the News ranges from the mundane — such as chronicling moments when Capitol Police officers are impacted by tear gas fired into the crowd – to more provocative scenes that appear to show plainclothes MPD officers exhorting rioters to climb scaffolding near the Capitol or talking about being undercover with liberal fascist protesters in a crowd.

Please follow the link and read the entire article. At this point we need to know who the Capitol Police actually work for and who gave them their instructions for that day.

Israel Aid?

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Daily Wire posted two articles relating to American aid to Israel.

The first article reported:

Twelve House Democrats joined with Republicans on Thursday to pass a White House-opposed plan offset $14.3 billion in aid for Israel by slashing the same amount of funds meant for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

The GOP measure to provide emergency aid to Israel as it fights Hamas passed by a 226-196 vote, sending the legislation to the Democrat-led Senate where Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has already vowed not to bring it up for consideration.

Instead, Schumer announced earlier in the day, the Senate would “work on our own bipartisan emergency aid package that includes funding for aid to Israel, Ukraine, humanitarian aid including for Gaza, and competition with the Chinese Government.”

But the passage of the GOP House plan has already proven to be bipartisan with a dozen Democrats voting in favor of it: Reps. Angie Craig (D-MN), Don Davis (D-NC), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Jared Golden (D-ME), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Greg Landsman (D-OH), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Darren Soto (D-FL), Haley Stevens (D-MI), Juan Vargas (D-CA), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), and Frederica Wilson (D-FL).

The second article reported on Senator Schumer’s reaction to the bill:

The Democrat-controlled Senate will refuse to consider the House GOP plan to send aid to Israel in its fight against Hamas, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced on Thursday, setting up a standoff with the Republican-led lower chamber.

Opting for a different path, Schumer said the Senate will move forward by working on legislation that combines Israel assistance with other national security matters — a strategy rejected by House conservatives, but favored by the Biden administration.

“Let me be clear: The Senate will not take up the House GOP’s deeply flawed proposal,” Schumer said in a post to X. “Instead we will work on our own bipartisan emergency aid package that includes funding for aid to Israel, Ukraine, humanitarian aid including for Gaza, and competition with the Chinese Government.”

The Democrats are allergic to spending cuts. Because of that, it is questionable whether any American aid will reach Israel. However, I suspect the Democrats will find a way to send more money to Ukraine. Maybe it’s not really about the spending cuts.

The Police State In Action

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Breitbart posted the following headline:

Exclusive — ‘We Caught Them Red-Handed’: DOJ Spied on GOP Staffers Probing the Origins of the Russia Collusion Hoax

Is anyone surprised?

The article reports:

The Department of Justice (DOJ) obtained private communications and other personal records of multiple Republican House and Senate staffers who were investigating the department’s role in the origins of the Russia collusion hoax, according to former senior Trump administration official Kash Patel.

A recently-revealed subpoena shows that the DOJ sought the records for not only Patel when he was an investigator for then-Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), but also those of Jason Foster, who was at the time chief investigative counsel to then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (I-IA) and was also looking into the DOJ’s role in the hoax.

According to multiple subpoenas revealed so far, the DOJ had subpoenaed Google, Apple, and other companies to obtain private records in what Patel believes was an unlawful attempt to dig up dirt on them in retaliation for investigating the Democrat-pushed hoax that Donald Trump’s campaign had colluded with Russia in the 2016 presidential election.

It is time to fire every supervisor and leader in the Department of Justice and replace them with people who are willing to respect the U.S. Constitution that they took an oath to uphold and protect.

The article concludes:

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is looking into the DOJ’s use of subpoenas “and other legal authorities” to obtain the private communications records of lawmakers, staff, and journalists, according to the DOJ Office of Inspector General website:

The DOJ OIG is reviewing the DOJ’s use of subpoenas and other legal authorities to obtain communication records of Members of Congress and affiliated persons, and the news media in connection with recent investigations of alleged unauthorized disclosures of information to the media by government officials.

The review will examine the Department’s compliance with applicable DOJ policies and procedures, and whether any such uses, or the investigations, were based upon improper considerations.

“Whether you hated us back then [because of] the Nunes memo — well, every report since then has said the same thing we did,” Patel said. “We were the first out of the gate. The IG, John Durham, said there was no lawful basis to ever investigate Trump or his campaign and that FBI people lied to a federal court and the slew of other violations that they came up with.”

“They got caught. We asked them to help expose it and instead they doubled down and used the system of justice and FBI investigatory powers to try to take us out and silence us,” he said.

“I’m going to put Chris Wray, Rod Rosenstein … and other people in the hot seat under oath, and I’m going to depose them, and demand they answer these questions, and we’re going to watch them lie to the world,” Patel said, adding that Rosenstein currently works at Wray’s old law firm.

“None of this is a coincidence. These people cover up for each other and Chris Wray is still covering up for them as a director of the FBI and I’m going to expose it all,” he said.

It’s time to either abolish the DOJ and the FBI or simply fire the executives and appoint new ones.

We Need Fiscal Responsibility In Washington

Posted on by

On Friday, The Washington Examiner posted an article about this year’s budget deficit. One of the conclusions that can be drawn from the numbers is that so far electing Republicans to the House of Representatives has not had any impact (actually that’s because the lame-duck Democrat Congress passed bills that limited the 2023 Congress’ ability to curtail spending). However, now we have a speaker who seems to be less likely to continue previous shenanigans. The next few weeks are going to be very interesting in terms of the budget process.

The article reports:

The United States is increasingly losing the war against red ink.

Per new Treasury Department figures, the U.S. government is courting a worsening fiscal crisis. Officially, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the federal government ran a $1.7 trillion deficit for fiscal 2023, which ended Sept. 30. That’s up from a $1.4 trillion federal budget deficit posted in 2022.

But as highlighted by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Yellen’s math ignores another $300 billion in debt incurred by President Joe Biden’s student debt cancellations, bringing the actual total of the deficit under the president to a full $2 trillion. Fix that adjustment for fiscal 2022, and that year’s deficit amounted to a little less than $1 trillion.

This means that in just one year, sans recession and sans war, the federal government under Biden managed to double the deficit by more than $1 trillion. And in large part, it’s all thanks to his embrace of inflation, or at least inflationary spending.

Broadly speaking, the explosion of our national debt, which is now the size of the nation’s annual GDP, is primarily driven by our growth of government spending. While the rest of the nation pays handsomely for inflation with their paychecks, reduced in real terms of purchasing power, our wealthiest generation profits from the pockets of taxpayers. Thanks in large part to the cost-of-living adjustments for our entitlement programs, the three greatest categories of federal budget outlays — Social Security ($1.4 trillion), Medicare ($848 billion), and Medicaid ($616 billion) — grew by 11%, 12%, and 4%, respectively, from just last year.

The article concludes:

The stratospheric surge in bond yields should serve as a warning to Washington that even if the Fed won’t force the government to slow down the spending, the nation’s creditors will not continue to bankroll Uncle Sam without him paying a hefty premium for the privilege. While underlying demographic trends and the inherent, gerontocratic structure of entitlements predestined the nation to a certain fiscal fiasco long before the pandemic, the bipartisan embrace of wartime borrowing, and then Biden’s decision to double down on inflationary policy, have put the country on the path where not even the Fed can fight the deficit disaster on its own.

If Washington won’t listen to the Fed, perhaps it will begin to listen to creditors as the coffers continue to run dry.

We can’t afford to fund wars all over the world. The defense contractors love it, but the country will be destroyed by the debt incurred.

Confirmation Of An Earlier Article

Posted on by

Yesterday I posted an article that included an interview of Representative Matt Gaetz. The interview included claims that former Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy had undermined the selection of a new speaker in the quest for regaining the speakership. Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article with similar claims by Representative Nancy Mace. If nothing else, the two articles illustrate that the Washington swamp is deep and wide and if the American people want to take back their government, it will not be easy.

The Gateway Pundit reports:

It took several votes by House Republicans before a Speaker was chosen and agreed to by the caucus.

Now we know why. According to Matt Gaetz and Nancy Mace, McCarthy was working behind the scenes to derail any potential candidate for Speaker including Jim Jordan, arguably the most popular Republican in Congress.

The following quote is from Representative Mace:

…This thing didn’t need to last through three weeks. So the first thing that McCarthy and his allies did was prolong it and delay it and recess us and adjourn us every time they possibly could to drag this thing out and make it as painful as possible. For the eight of us who held the line and kicked McCarthy out of the speakership, that’s number one. Number two, there was a concerted and orchestrated effort at the hand of McCarthy that every time someone ascended, they got knifed in the back, including America’s favorite Republican congressman in Jim Jordan. I mean, our conference couldn’t even elect the best and favorite congressman in this country, Jim Jordan, because of what McCarthy and his allies were doing behind the scenes and orchestrating his failure.

This is another example of a Washington insider putting his own ambition ahead of the needs of America.

An Odd Couple Introduces Common Sense

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Just the News reported that Florida Republican Representative Matt Gaetz and New York Democratic Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have introduced a bill banning lawmakers, their spouses, or dependents from trading stocks. If that bill is ever passed, it will seriously diminish the incomes of the people who serve in Congress.

The article reports:

House Problem Solvers Caucus co-chair Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Penn., and Democratic Illinois Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi joined the pair in introducing the Bipartisan Restoring Faith in Government Act on Tuesday.

The bill further grants lawmakers a 90-day window during which they must divest themselves of their existing stocks. Moreover, should the spouse of a lawmaker receive “any financial instrument” as compensation for their main employment, they will have 90 days to sell it from the date they are contractually permitted to do so.

Covered individuals may still invest in “widely held investment funds” or government bonds.

The article concludes:

“As long as concerns about insider trading hang over the legislative process, Congress will never regain the trust of the American people. Our responsibility in Congress is to serve the people, not hedge bets on the stock market,” Gaetz warned.

AOC, meanwhile, echoed his remarks, saying “[t]he ability to individually trade stock erodes the public’s trust in government.”

“Members of Congress must be focused on their constituents, not their stock portfolios,” Krishnamoorthi added.

That is bipartisan legislation that most Americans can support. Unfortunately, I rather doubt it will become law.

Preparing?

Posted on by

Let’s not count our chickens before they hatch, but November is looking good for Republicans in Congress. Despite various statements from Democrats that they are not worried, actions speak louder than words.

On Sunday, Hot Air reported the following:

A wave election is on the horizon and the only question is just how strong of a wave it will be. Will it be a traditional kind of victory for Republicans as the minority party typically picks up seats in midterm elections? Or will it be a red tsunami brought about because of deep disapproval of the Biden administration? Either outcome will result in Republicans taking back control of the House and very well may flip the Senate, too. The White House is girding its loins in preparation of the consequences GOP victories will bring.

A top concern for the White House is the new investigations that will be opened up. Republican leadership has already announced that when Republicans are back in charge, Biden and his administration will be under fresh oversight scrutiny not seen to date. And, look for lots of questions being asked about the shady dealings of Biden, Inc. Democrats try to sweep ethical and legal questions about the dealings of Biden’s problem man-child, Hunter, by saying he’s a private citizen, not an elected official. That’s true but that excuse is slowly falling by the wayside as it becomes clear that Joe Biden is in the middle of his son’s sketchy financial deals, especially with foreign governments. That is important now, given Joe is president and dealing with foreign leaders.

So, what’s a nervous White House to do? This White House is bringing back an experienced presidential advisor and message masseuse. Anita Dunn is returning to help Sleepy Joe manage the upcoming electoral disaster that awaits Democrats. Dunn is the ultimate Washington insider. She is currently a senior adviser at the consulting firm SKDK – the ‘D’ is for Dunn. She agreed to work with Biden as he entered the White House as an advisor and then returned to SKDK. She’s an alum of the Obama-Biden administration.

I really hate the idea that every time Congress changes hands we get a new round of investigations. That is so reminiscent of a banana republic. However, there are some needed investigations that have not taken place under the Democrat Congress that need to take place. Among other things, why is it that Congressmen are still trading stocks and have a better profit average than Standard & Poor? (article here) What about the information on Hunter Biden’s laptop? What about evidence of cheating in the 2020 election? There’s a lot to look into.

The article concludes:

Dunn is returning on a full-time basis. There will also be a change in the White House Counsel’s office.

Changes are also expected inside the White House Counsel’s Office. Ian Sams, who currently works at the Department of Health and Human Services, is going to join in a communications position. He previously served as a spokesperson for Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2020 presidential campaign, where he developed a reputation for being outspoken and at times for having a combative style, traits that could be useful while facing aggressive inquiries from Republicans.

“If Republicans take one or more Houses of Congress, this is going to be a full-time job that has the potential to suck a lot of the oxygen out of the room,” the person said. “There is a recognition from both the White House counsel’s office and also the communication’s office that oversight is going to be a major focus of Republican efforts which is going to in turn create a lot of media attention around these issues.”

So, the Biden administration is putting a couple of Democrat pitbulls in key positions for communication and the Counsel’s office. Sounds like the White House is pretty nervous about what may be exposed in oversight investigations. A great exodus is already underway from personnel in Kamala’s office. Look for more of that coming out of the White House, too, when Republicans come back into power in Congress.

Be prepared for an abundance of media spin if the Republicans take Congress.

 

 

This Infuriates Me

Posted on by

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse posted an article revealing that between 100 to 200 congressional reps and/or staff and families who contracted COVID-19 were treated with the Front Line Ivermectin protocol.

The article includes the following screenshot:

The article reports:

This successful treatment is happening at the same time many congressional representatives are playing politics in favor of the vaccine; downplaying the effective anti-viral treatment and therapeutic approach with Ivermectin; and taking action to block regular American citizens from seeking similar treatment with Ivermectin.

Congress can seek treatment with a medication they simultaneously deny to others?  This is well beyond a “scandal”, and needs to be investigated quickly.

Additionally, as Merck has announced a new and similar anti-viral drug called Molnupiravir, two trial studies in India have requested to exit the trials.  Apparently the issue surrounds the new drug providing no benefit once a patient is moderately ill and hospitalized (READ MORE, Reuters Link).

The article includes the following video of Dr. John Campbell highlighting a comparison between Ivermectin and Molnupiravir :

It infuriates me that ordinary Americans were denied a life-saving treatment that was used successfully by the political elite. It may be time to un-elect everyone in our government and elect ordinary citizens to replace them.

As William F. Buckley once said:

I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.

I think the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory might have higher ethical standards than those we have currently entrusted with our government.

 

Have You Seen This Anywhere On The News?

Posted on by

Yesterday The Hill reported that the legal limit on how much debt the U.S. government can owe was reimposed Sunday.

The article reports:

A two-year deal to suspend the debt ceiling lapsed at midnight following inaction from Congress and President Biden to give the U.S. more borrowing authority. The Treasury Department will now begin taking what it refers to as “extraordinary measures” to prevent the U.S. from defaulting on its debt.

Those steps are likely to avert a default until October or even November before Biden will need to sign a bill to raise or suspend the limit again.

Think about this in terms of your personal finances. You have reached the top of your borrowing authority and have to cut back on expenses for the moment. However, you plan on expanding the amount of money you can borrow in the fall (or suspending any limit on your borrowing for some length of time). Meanwhile you are considering trillion dollar spending bills. In what universe does this make any sense?

The article continues:

The expiration of the debt limit has triggered numerous partisan standoffs over the past decade, most recently in 2019. Each time, Congress has raised or suspended the debt limit. But the weeks before a potential default have often been the most tense, both for financial markets and administration officials.

“I respectfully urge Congress to protect the full faith and credit of the United States by acting as soon as possible,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen wrote in a letter to congressional leaders last week, warning that they risked “irreparable harm to the U.S. economy and the livelihoods of all Americans” by delaying action.

There is no clear path to a bipartisan agreement as Republicans hold out for spending cuts that Democrats refuse to consider.

While Democrats have slim majorities in both the House and Senate, they will still need the support of 10 GOP senators to avoid a filibuster on legislation to raise or suspend the debt ceiling.

Republican leaders have told Democrats that there can be no bipartisan debt ceiling agreement without a slate of debt reduction measures targeting the roughly $28 trillion national debt. Several GOP lawmakers have floated a deal similar to the 2011 Budget Control Act, which ended a debt ceiling standoff shortly before the U.S. suffered its first ever credit downgrade.

We simply cannot continue our current rate of government spending. At some point the dollar will collapse. It is interesting that none of the news shows I watched this morning mentioned the debt ceiling.

Fighting The First Amendment

Posted on by

Yesterday The Epoch Times posted an article about Congressional Democrats putting pressure on cable networks to stop carrying conservative news sources.

The article reports:

The attempt by several House Democrats to pressure television carriers to deplatform certain news organizations could trigger a lawsuit, law professor Alan Dershowitz said Saturday.

“When the First Amendment says Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, it’s been interpreted to mean, take no action, it doesn’t have to be law. The First Amendment applies to presidents to governors to mayors to anybody who can abridge the freedom of speech. And I think these letters abridge the freedom of speech,” Dershowitz said during an appearance on Newsmax TV.

Reps. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) and Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.) sent a dozen letters to 12 different carriers this week urging them to deplatform or otherwise take action against Fox News, Newsmax, and One America News for allegedly spreading misleading information about the Jan. 6 Capitol breach and the COVID-19 pandemic.

They pointedly asked the carriers if they were planning on carrying the networks “both now and beyond any contract renewal date.”

…They sent letters to AT&T, Verizon, Roku, Amazon, Apple, Comcast, Charter Communications, Dish Network, Cox Communications, Altice USA, Google’s parent company Alphabet, and Hulu.

The letters were sent in advance of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing titled “Fanning the Flames: Disinformation and Extremism in the Media.”

Eshoo told the hearing that the First Amendment “prohibits Congress from enacting laws abridging the freedom of speech, and I’m an ardent supporter of it.

“It does not, however, stop us from examining the public health and democratic implications of misinformation,” she added.

The article concludes:

Lawmakers heard from Emily Bell, director of the Tow Center for Digital Media at Columbia University, who claimed that Newsmax and One America News “showed themselves willing to continue to repeat false narratives about the legitimacy of the election result.”

They also listened to Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor, who called the deplatforming push similar to the “Red Scare” seen during the Cold War, when anyone suspected of being communist sympathizers were targeted.

Ranking Member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) criticized the letters as an attack on the First Amendment.

“Anyone who values free speech and a free press should be alarmed by these actions today,” she said. “It’s an attack on the First Amendment when public officials use their power to coerce private companies to censor and silence viewpoints they don’t agree with.”

This is frightening. The First Amendment protects free speech. There is no scenario that gives Congress the right to control what the American people are able to hear.

Actions Have Consequences

Posted on by

Unfortunately it appears that the Democrat’s definition of unity is to silence any dissenting views on their policies. The idea of compromise and debate seems to have vanished somewhere in the recent election. This is not the way our country was set up, and many Americans are unhappy with the direction the Democrats are already taking us.

Just the News posted an article yesterday about the approval ratings of some of our Congressional leaders.

The article includes the following screenshot:

The article concludes:

Less than a majority of Republican voters (45%) expressed approval for McConnell, showing a growing divide within the Republican party. Meanwhile, a majority of Democrats (67%) still approve of Pelosi, who was recently elected Speaker of the House by a slender margin.

This survey polled 1,200 registered voters and was conducted by Scott Rasmussen from Jan 7-9, 2021.

The poll’s cross-demographic tabulations can be found here and here.To see the poll’s methodology and sample demographics, click here.

The Republican Party does not easily unify. It is made up of people who do not naturally fall into lock step. There are many Republicans (myself included) who would like to see the Republican Party actually lead instead of sitting back and playing the victim. Mitch McConnell has done a good job of confirming judges, but he has not always been on the President’s team. That is unfortunate because the President is the highest elected official in the Republican Party–he should be considered its leader. It is unfortunate that the Party has not been willing to unite behind him to get things done. Had the members of the Party been willing to take a strong stand, they might have been able to work out an infrastructure bill and get it passed despite the Democrats’ objections. Had the party stuck together instead of playing their ‘never Trump’ games, they might have been able to overcome Democrat resistance to policies that would have moved our country forward. I believe the approval ratings above reflect the frustration of the American people that the two parties have not been able to work together for the good of the country. Based on their actions so far, I don’t see that changing under a new Congress and administration.

 

Silliness In Congress

Posted on by

After a while, you have to wonder why Democrats in Congress are so anxious to get President Trump out of the White House. He has eight days left to serve as President, can’t they just leave him alone? I guess not.

The Epoch Times reported yesterday that Representative Alex Mooney, a Republican from West Virginia, blocked Democrats from introducing a resolution via unanimous consent to call on Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove President Donald Trump.

The article reports:

The Democrat-backed resolution calls on Pence and the Cabinet to “declare what is obvious to a horrified Nation: That the President is unable to successfully discharge the duties and powers of his office.”

…Mooney said Pelosi “should not attempt to adopt a resolution of this magnitude without any debate on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives,” noting that “it is wrong to have sent members of Congress home and then try to adopt without any debate a precedent-setting resolution that could imperil our Republic. The U.S. House must never adopt a resolution that demands the removal of a duly elected president, without any hearings, debate, or recorded votes.”

Whatever happened to the Democrat’s calls for unity? I don’t think misusing the 25th Amendment to unlawfully remove a Republican President creates unity.

Sad Things Are Happening In Congress

Posted on by

This is the transcript of a prayer offered in Congress yesterday. Please note that ‘this transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.’

The transcript is taken from the C-SPAN website:

I have some problems with this. The monotheistic god and the god known by many names and faiths? Awoman? What in the world?

Just for the record, the history of America is infused with Christianity. It is not a country of religions of a god known by many names. It is a country founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

In an article posted in November 2019, Christian Action reminds us:

In 1892 Supreme Court Justice David Brewer ruled, “The United States is a Christian nation.” He may have been the first high-level government official to refer to America as a Christian nation, but he was not the last.

In a letter to Pope Pius XII, President Harry S. Truman wrote, “Your Holiness, this is a Christian Nation.” And his letter made a direct reference to Justice Brewer’s ruling in the Holy Trinity vs. United States court decision.

“More than a half century ago that declaration was written into the decrees of the highest court of this land,” President Truman told the Pontiff. “It is not without significance that the valiant pioneers who left Europe to establish settlements here, at the very beginning of their colonial enterprises, declared their faith in the Christian religion and made ample provision for its practice and for its support.”

In 1931 the Supreme Court once again ruled, “We are a Christian people.” The court also made direct reference Justice Brewer’s 1892 decision for the basis of this claim.

The 1931 case involved a Canadian-born Baptist minister, Douglas Clyde Macintosh, who applied to become a naturalized U.S. citizen. Mr. Macintosh, though he previously served as a military chaplain for the Canadian Army during WWI, objected to swearing an oath of allegiance to the United States if it involved supporting a war that he found morally objectionable.

Writing for the majority in a 5-4 decision, Justice George Sutherland found that “We are a Christian people” and, as such, following the laws of the land is “not inconsistent with the will of God.” In essence, the court acknowledged, significantly, that there was a “God” and that laws passed by “a Christian people” would never violate God’s “will.”

The prayer was simply unacceptable. It did not reflect the values of the majority of Americans. Hopefully someone in Congress will have the courage to speak out against something that is not appropriate in a Christian nation.

 

Sunlight Is Needed

Posted on by

Yesterday Just the News reported the following:

Trump campaign senior advisor Jason Miller during an interview on Newsmax TV expressed the hope that evidence pertaining to election-related issues will be shared directly with the American people next week.

If a minimum of one member of each congressional chamber objects to the electoral vote returns of a state during a joint session of Congress presided over by the vice president on Jan. 6, each chamber will separately debate for up to two hours and then vote on the objection, according to the Congressional Research Service: “An objection to a state’s electoral vote must be approved by both houses in order for any contested votes to be excluded.”

The evidence needs to be shared with the public. However, I am not convinced that all media outlets will share the information. We have seen Facebook, Twitter and YouTube consistently block or ‘fact check’ any content that portrays Joe Biden or any member of his family in a bad light. Those of us who have learned to navigate alternative news sources have a pretty good idea of what went on with the 2020 presidential election, but I am not convinced that the American public as a whole has any idea of the level of corruption. The videos that many of us have seen both of witness testimony and surveillance videos have not been seen by a majority of Americans. Therefore many Americans may not understand what the fuss is about.

The article concludes:

Miller mentioned during the interview multiple examples of election-related concerns. “These are the specific types of evidence that we want to be able to present to the American public on the national stage and not allow local politicians to sweep it under the rug,” he said.

President Trump has not conceded to Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election contest.

An election that includes rampant cheating will not move America forward. Unfortunately I fear that however this comes out, the country will be more divided than ever.

 

 

Festivus Report’ of government excess

Posted on by

Yesterday The Washington Examiner reported that Senator Rand Paul released his annual Festivus Report, airing his grievances of government excess and spending.

The article lists some of the details of the report:

“Spending was about 50% higher than last year, and payments of interest on the public debt remained extremely high at $387 billion. If you laid out that many $1 bills end to end, it’d be enough to wrap around the earth 1,506 times,” Paul wrote. “Our debt puts at risk the long-term solvency of major programs such as Social Security. And why? To pay for test tubes for COVID tests that turn out to be soda bottles?”

Paul’s report documented more than $54.7 billion worth of “totally wasted money.” He points to specific projects and studies that received federal funding and identifies the total value of grants used to conduct the research.

That amount of money, Paul said, was enough to fund the entire Treasury Department for three years, the Department of Housing and Urban Development for six months, or buy every citizen a 40-inch television.

The “waste” spending varies from failed international missions, such as $8.6 billion spent in Afghanistan to boost counternarcotics efforts or $23.9 billion spent “trying unsuccessfully to replace the Bradley [Fighting Vehicle],” to oddities including $1.3 million researchers accessed to determine whether people would knowingly eat ground-up bugs or $2 million spent testing whether hot tubs lower stress.

The report identified $896,000 spent by the National Institutes of Health “to give cigarettes to adolescent kids to test their reactions to various levels of nicotine in the cigarettes.”

The article concludes:

“Congress has every tool it needs to fight and end government waste,” Paul’s report stated. “It’s just a matter of finding the willpower to use them. Rest assured, I will keep fighting for fiscal sanity and providing my colleagues in Congress with the opportunity to find their fiscal backbone!”

Americans already pay more money in taxes than the medieval serfs did to their manor lords. Unless the spending is brought under control, our children and grandchildren will be slaves to the government. Congress controls the spending. Until voters elect congressional representatives who are willing to cut spending, things will not change.

Not Sure This Will Hold

Posted on by

Yesterday The Epoch Times posted an article about the Supreme Court decision regarding counting non-citizens in the 2020 census. The decision is somewhat confusing, but here are the highlights.

The article reports:

The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government may remove illegal aliens from the 2020 Census count, which eliminates that population from the process of allocating congressional seats and Electoral College votes that officially determine the presidency.

The 6-3 decision in Trump v. New York issued Dec. 18 is a victory for the Trump administration.

So far, that is good news.

The article continues:

States and local governments, including so-called sanctuary jurisdictions, which refuse to cooperate with federal immigration officials, sued to prevent the administration’s plan from moving forward. They argued that President Donald Trump, a Republican, was attempting to interfere with the count and prevent Democratic-leaning areas with large illegal-alien populations from gaining congressional seats.

But the high court found that their challenge was premature because they could not demonstrate any so-called concrete injury they might suffer. The ruling apparently leaves open the possibility of further challenges in the future and acknowledges the Trump administration may have difficulty implementing its policy.

“At present, this case is riddled with contingencies and speculation that impede judicial review,” the court stated in the unsigned opinion.

“The President, to be sure, has made clear his desire to exclude aliens without lawful status from the apportionment base. But the President qualified his directive by providing that” information should be gathered “to the extent practicable” and that aliens should be excluded “to the extent feasible,” quoting federal regulations.

“Any prediction how the Executive Branch might eventually implement this general statement of policy is “no more than conjecture” at this time,” the court stated citing Los Angeles v. Lyons (1983).

“To begin with, the policy may not prove feasible to implement in any manner whatsoever, let alone in a manner substantially likely to harm any of the plaintiffs here. Pre-apportionment litigation always ‘presents a moving target’ because” the administration “may make (and the President may direct) changes to the census up until the President transmits his statement to the House.”

The Supreme Court opinion allows the Trump administration to try to implement its counting policy for now even though processing of 2020 Census data is expected to wrap up in coming weeks. Existing law requires the president to file a mandatory reapportionment report with Congress next month, which could lead to reduced federal funding in states with large illegal-alien populations.

As expected, the ACLU is already planning to sue.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. This case is a convoluted mess. What is at stake is whether states like California, with large numbers of illegal aliens, will receive representation in Congress and the Electoral College because of their illegal residents.

So What Exactly Is Congress Doing?

Posted on by

Yesterday One America News posted an article about what Congress needs to accomplish in the next two weeks. There are a lot of things to be done. The question is whether or not they can work together successfully enough to get them done. Just for the record, calls for unity seem a little odd to me in a world where Congress can’t even find unity on things the American people need.

The article reports:

The biggest item on the legislative to-do list is an agreement on government funding. Congress faces a December 11 deadline to pass a government-funding bill and to avoid a shutdown.

Reports said negotiations over Thanksgiving ended with a deal on spending levels for the 12 2021 fiscal appropriation bills.

The chairs of the Senate and House Appropriations Committees said they would sit down to hammer out the final details. Committee staff and the White House would finalize each of the spending bills.

In early November, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the bills will fully fund several ‘crucial priorities,’ which includes securing the border to supporting public health.

…Negotiations also continue toward another coronavirus relief bill while both Democrats and Republicans remain at a stalemate over a dollar amount.

McConnell has pointed to several senators still backing a $500 billion proposal blocked by Democrats. However, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) continue to hold firm on a $2.2 trillion bill as a starting point for talks.

Congress is expected to work overtime in a push to come to an agreement on a proposal.

There is also some attempted silliness that may make compromise difficult:

Lawmakers also said they want to resolve a fight over a plan to rename military bases as part of a military policy bill.

President Trump has already threatened to veto a bill if it includes language that would force the Pentagon to rename “problematic” bases.

These issues are compounded by the fact that control of the Senate for Congress’s next session remains up in the air as Georgia’s runoff races won’t be concluded until after the new year.

The Pentagon does not need to waste its time renaming “problematic” bases. There are enough real threats to America around the world that need their attention.

Getting The Job Done–Even When You Have To Do It Alone

Posted on by

One America News reported yesterday that President Trump has signed four executive orders designed to alleviate some of the economic disruption caused by the coronavirus.

The article reports:

On Saturday, he signed a payroll tax initiative, which will defer payroll tax to those making less than $100,000 a year until the end of 2020.

…The president has renewed supplemental unemployment benefits at $400 a week. This new amount came in just below the previous $600 extra, which Americans were receiving before the enhance benefits expired earlier this month.

…He also provided assistance to renters by imposing a partial moratorium on evictions and suspended mandatory student loan payments through the end of the year.

…The president has expressed he had to step in because Democrats in Congress have not stepped up to the plate.

“Democrats have refused these offers,” said President Trump. “What they really want is bailout money for states that are run by Democrat governors and mayors, which have been run very badly for many, many years.”

This is a stroke of genius. The bill that the House of Representatives put forth included a lot of things that have nothing to do with the coronavirus, and they refused to negotiate on anything less. We don’t need national mail-in voting–we stand in line at the grocery store, at Home Depot, and at WalMart almost every day. We don’t need to bail out badly-run states–they need to clean up their own budgets first (and Washington also needs to do some serious spending reduction).

The Democrats are unhappy. They might take this to court, but if they do, they will be fighting a President who signed an executive order to help Americans while Congress could not come to agreement on doing anything. Even if they won in court, they would lose in the court of public opinion, and the election is less than three months away.

This was a brilliant move on the part of the President.

Good News On The Jobs Market

Posted on by

Just the News posted an article today reporting that the U.S. added 4.8 million jobs during the month of June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Thursday. The unemployment rate fell to 11.1%. Economists had estimated that 3 million jobs would be added.

The article reports:

The increase in jobs comes as businesses begin rehiring following the height of the coronavirus pandemic in April and May.

The unemployment rate also dropped more than expected. The Dow Jones predicted that it would fall to 12.4% in June. It was 13.3% in May.

We are definitely moving in the right direction.

The article concludes:

Also released this morning were the weekly jobless claims, which showed that 1.43 million Americans filed for first time unemployment benefits last week. This number was slightly higher than the expected 1.38 million.

The new numbers will help inform Congress later this month as they debate the possibility of expanding benefits for unemployed Americans.

The expanded benefits system has been providing the unemployed with an additional $600 a week, and covering workers who are not typically included in the state benefit systems.

Sections of the country have begun pausing their economic reopening efforts as the coronavirus spikes sharply in the south west.

It is likely that Congress will ultimately agree to extend those benefits, but decrease the $600 addition.

The $600 addition has been cited by many business owners as the reason some of their employees are not in a hurry to return to work. Whatever Congress subsidizes we will see more of. When unemployment is no longer subsidized, we will see less of it.

One Of Many Reasons Mail-In Voting Won’t Work

Posted on by

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted a video of a postal working throwing away the campaign mailers of a conservative candidate. What’s to stop any group of mail-in ballots from meeting the same fate?

The article reports:

A US Postal worker was caught on video throwing a stack of GOP congressional candidate campaign mailers in a dumpster.

Sheriff Troy Nehls is running for Texas Congressional District 22.

Mr. Nehls is a pro-Trump conservative, a church-going family man, tough on crime and tough on border security.

No wonder why the left is trying to derail his campaign.

“A US Postal worker was just caught on video throwing a stack of my campaign mailers in a dumpster. Some patriots nearby heard a noise when she tossed them in & went to investigate. They found a stack of them and called me. No wonder people are skeptical of mail in voting.” Sheriff Nehls said.

The video is posted along with the article.

Is It Really About Fixing The Problem?

Posted on by

Townhall posted an article today about the efforts of Congress to pass a bill that would  address the issue of police reform. The article is behind the pay wall, so the link goes to a transcript of the original article.

The article reports:

Over the past two weeks, Republican Senator Tim Scott, a black man from South Carolina, extended the olive branch of bipartisanship to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on police reform.

On June 17, Scott introduced the JUSTICE Act as a way to tackle what he believes are needed reforms in cities across the country. He quickly gained 50 co-sponsors and opened the door to the “conversation” Democrats regularly claim America needs to have about race, communities and policing. But it turns out, the talking points about “having a conversation” weren’t stated in good faith. After Scott accepted 20 amendments on his legislation from Senate Democrats, they still voted it down, not even allowing debate on the bill.

But what’s even more egregious than playing politics with this issue is how Pelosi and Schumer framed their arguments without Scott in them.

Instead of discussing the content on the bill, the Democrats decided to attack Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

The article notes:

The day before Democrats blocked opening debate on the bill, Pelosi accused Republicans working on Senator Scott’s police reform of murder. She did this while advocating for the partisan House version of police reform legislation.

“So far they [Republicans] were trying to get away with murder, actually, the murder of George Floyd,” she claimed during an interview with CBS Radio.

When confronted about her words during an interview with MSNBC, Pelosi shamelessly pivoted away from the mention of Senator Scott and back to Mitch McConnell.

“Will you apologize?” MSNBC anchor Peter Williams asked during an interview.

“Absolutely, positively not,” Pelosi said.

“Is Tim Scott working in good faith?” he followed up.

“I’m sorry?” Pelosi asked as if she had no idea who Senator Tim Scott was.

“I’m talking about Mitch McConnell,” she said.

The article concludes:

Washington D.C.’s most partisan Democrats are attempting to write Senator Tim Scott out of the conversation. They’re doing it on purpose for political reasons and to continue their false narrative that Republicans are “racists.” It is despicable.

We have reached the point where it’s more important for many in Congress to gain political advantage than to solve a serious problem. It’s time to change the composition of Congress. If your Congressman voted against debate on this issue, it’s time to elect a new Congressman.

The Senate Actually Passed A Bill

Posted on by

One America News is reporting today that the Senate has passed a bill sanctioning Chinese officials over the country’s actions against Hong Kong. The bipartisan Hong Kong Autonomy Act passed with unanimous consent Thursday.

This is good news. China needs to pay a price for what it has done to Hong Kong. Otherwise Taiwan is next. Taiwan is probably next anyway, but at least we can try to slow things down a little.

The article reports:

The bill would place sanctions on businesses, individuals and police that interfere with Hong Kong’s freedoms. This came after China announced a national security law that is expected pass on June 30, which is threatening Hong Kong’s autonomy.

A resolution introduced by Sen. Josh Hawley (r-Mo.) was also approved, formally condemning China’s’ actions.

“The Senate needs to act now, Mr. President, to send a clear signal now that we will stand up to this aggression,” he stated. “…to rally free peoples now in defense of the rights and liberties of Hong Kong.”

Hitting China in the pocketbook is probably the only was to deal with them successfully.

Cowardice In The Senate

Posted on by

Our Senators and Congressmen are elected representatives. They are voted in by the people they are supposed to represent. A certain amount of transparency is expected from them so that the voters can decide whether or not to reelect them. Unfortunately, some of our cowardly Senators have learned how to get around that transparency and avoid taking responsibility for the votes they cast in the Senate.

Just the News posted an article yesterday that reported the following:

The Senate Armed Services Committee approved a $740 billion 2021 defense authorization bill on Wednesday that establishes a commission that would make recommendations on renaming military bases named after Confederate leaders and implement the plan within three years from the date the bill becomes law.

According to the office of the committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed, the committee passed an amendment by voice vote during a closed-door session that would create “a commission to study and provide recommendations” concerning the removal of “names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia that honor or commemorate the Confederate States of America.”

The amendment was passed by a voice vote so that no one would know who voted for it and who voted against it. No one is actually taking responsibility for the vote.

The article continues, illustrating the further lack of transparency:

The amendment was approved during a “secret level” markup session that concluded on Wednesday evening. The full text of the amendment, which was introduced by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), has not been made available yet. Warren’s office was not available for comment. The office of Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.) also did not respond before publication.

Inhofe reportedly said on Thursday that he would seek to change the language of the amendment so that renaming the military bases would not be a congressional requirement.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) tweeted on Thursday that he opposed the amendment and “spoke against it” during the closed-door, full committee markup of the defense bill.

“Congress should not be mandating renaming of our bases and military installations,” he wrote.

The House Armed Services Committee has a hearing scheduled in July for the defense authorization bill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that Democratic leaders might include renaming military bases and removing Confederate statues from the Capitol as part of the defense bill or as standalone legislation.

The Civil War is a part of American history. There were many brave men who fought on both sides. All of the soldiers fighting for the Union were not fighting because they opposed slavery and all of the soldiers fighting for the Confederacy were not fighting because they supported slavery. There were multiple motives on both sides. Can we please get over ourselves and grow up?