Sen Cassidy Says SCOTUS Decision Gutting Voting Rights Act Justifies Restrictive State Election Laws

$upport via Cash App

Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) appeared on CNN’s State of The Union show (01/16/22) to put forward the Republican position on the push for a federal voting rights legislation(John Lewis Voting Rights Act), and also discuss the related question as to whether the U.S. Senate should change its filibuster rules to allow for the passage of the said voting rights law via a simple majority vote. When asked by host Jake Tapper why Republicans are now opposed to keeping key provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act(VRA) intact, when as recently as a decade ago they were all for it, Sen Cassidy gave a strange response which appeared to suggest that because the Roberts Supreme Court gutted key provisions of the VRA in Shelby County v Holder(2013), there is no need to be concerned about discriminatory state election laws–that this is not 1965 anymore, things have changed.

Yours Truly, and I suspect a lot of other viewers too, found Senator Cassidy’s Response quite strange because while liberals agree that this is not 1965, and that progress has been made on the civil rights front, we need to restore key aspects of the 1965 Voting Rights Act because Trump’s GOP is taking us back to 1965. In other words, Senator Cassidy, and by extension the Roberts Supreme Court, are totally wrong in their assessment that simply because this is not 1965, Republican states are no longer capable of crafting discriminatory election laws. The facts on the ground clearly show that after the 2020 election, relying on former President Trump’s “big lie“, many Republican-controlled states have hurriedly enacted election laws that reasonable people agree, disenfranchise voters of color.

Senator Cassidy specifically said on CNNSOTU(video @ 2:20 onwards): “The Supreme Court decided[paused for effect], the Supreme Court decided that the conditions in 1965 are different than the conditions now. Imagine that. We’ve had an African-American elected President of the United States, we’ve had an African-American elected to the Vice Presidency, an African-American elected to the[U.S.]Senate in South Carolina. Now, if anyone can’t see that circumstances have changed, they’re just not believing their lying eye…There’s more to do, absolutely, we need safeguards, but to argue we are still the same as we were in 1965 is to deny facts that are clearly before us.”

There’s no other way any reasonable person presented with Senator Cassidy’s response(including his pause for effect), would arrive at any other conclusion other than, because the Roberts Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013 citing changed conditions, the voter suppression laws currently popping up in red states are justified. Think about that, the new Republican rationale for voter suppression, as articulated by Senator Cassidy, is that it’s not a big deal because if it was, the Roberts Supreme Court would never have gutted key provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act–a sad state of affairs indeed.

Bottom line folks, Dems must use every tool at their disposal to get holdout Senators Kyrsten Sinema(D-AZ) and Joe Manchin(D-WV) to agree to a filibuster carveout for a federal voting rights legislation before the 2022 midterms because if they don’t, all the gains we’ve witnessed thus far as a result of the 1965 Voting Rights Act will be lost, and the Roberts Supreme Court will not lift a finger to assist. Simply put, it’s now or never for a federal voting rights law that restores key provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Senator Shaheen Says Havana Syndrome Most Likely Caused By “Microwave Directed Energy Attacks”

$upport via Cash App

Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) appeared on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports (12/15/21), where she gave an update on the investigation into the causes/origins of Havana Syndrome. Senator Shaheen said Russia remains the chief suspect, adding that she agrees with the assessment of the National Academy of Sciences, that these are most likely “microwave directed energy attacks.”

Sen Shaheen said part of the defense authorization bill currently being debated in Congress, seeks to provide a coordinator who will look into Havana Syndrome cases across all federal agencies, and keep Congress apprised on any new findings.

Sen Shaheen told host Andrea Mitchell:“What we want is a coordinator, not just within the various agencies where they’ve had personnel attacked, but also someone who can coordinate the entire effort, and that’s part of the amendment that’s in the defense bill, as well as a regular reporting to Congress. We want to know exactly what’s going on so that we can respond. It’s very troubling that this happened years ago, five years ago, and we still don’t know who’s responsible, we don’t know exactly the cause of the attacks, and we’re not sure who’s doing it.”

Neither Senator Shaheen nor MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchel addressed the growing elephant-in-the-room question regarding directed energy attacks, and that is, growing complaints by regular civilians in the U.S.(not diplomats), who claim to be victims of directed energy attacks, leaving them with symptoms of Havana Syndrome–complaints similar to the one below. Will the designated Havana Syndrome coordinator also hear from such regular civilians and report back to Congress? Hmm

Bottom line folks, the U.S. constitution intended for members of Congress to function as representatives of their constituents. Where, as here, we have Congress totally ignoring cries from regular civilians(their constituents) of directed energy attacks, while at the same time enacting a scheme to compensate and treat similarly afflicted government employees, one can only conclude that the era of representative government is long gone–a sad state of affairs indeed. At some point, hopefully soon, Congress will have to entertain Havana Syndrome complaints from regular civilians. Then, and only then, will the public have confidence in the government’s investigation into Havana Syndrome.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Ingraham-Ted Cruz SCOTUS Ultimatum: Strike Down Roe v Wade Or Face Limited Jurisdiction

$upport via Cash App

Senator Ted Cruz(R-TX) appeared on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle show (12/1/21) to discuss the Mississippi abortion law currently playing out at the United States Supreme Court. Conservatives consider this Mississippi law their best shot at dealing a fatal blow to the 1973 Roe v Wade decision which legalized abortion, given the fact that they now enjoy a 6-3 advantage on the high court. What caught Yours Truly’s attention from the interview however, was the very direct way(not subtle any more) both Senator Cruz and host Laura Ingraham, a very influential Republican in her own right, expect, even demand that the conservative Supreme Court justices toe the conservative ideological line. As a matter of fact, Ingraham and Senator Cruz went as far as laying an ultimatum to the six conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court: Strike down Roe v Wade or suffer the consequences of a limited jurisdiction court.

During the interview, as Senator Cruz was going on and on about why he thought the conservative Supreme Court would uphold the Mississippi abortion law, host Laura Ingraham interjected: “Senator if we have six Republican appointees on this court, after all the money that’s been raised, the Federalist Society, all these big fat cat dinners, I’m sorry, I’m pissed about this. If this court, with six justices cannot do the right thing here, the constitutional thing, then I think it’s time to do what Robert Bork said we should do, which is to circumscribe the jurisdiction of this court, and they want to blow it up, then that’s the way to change things finally because this can’t stand. This is insane.”

A concurring Senator Cruz responded: “I would do that in a heartbeat. As you know, the constitution gives Congress the authority to restrict the jurisdiction of the court, I think we should do that…”

There’s no other way any reasonable person would interpret Senator Cruz’s interaction with Fox News host Laura Ingraham other than Republicans have for decades, organized and raised large sums of money through the Federalist Society and others, to put like-minded justices on the United States Supreme Court, for the express purpose of overturning Roe v Wade, and for the high court to generally act as a rubber stamp for other Republican Party/conservative ideals. What Senator Cruz and Ingraham are expressly conveying to the six conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court is pretty clear, and that is, they better toe the Republican Party line by striking down Roe v Wade, or else suffer the consequences of a limited jurisdiction Supreme Court–have their powers reduced.

This direct threat Senator Cruz and Ingraham leveled at the conservative justices of the U.S. Supreme Court confirms what liberals have argued all along, and that is, the U.S. Supreme Court as is currently constituted, six conservatives and three liberals, is for all intents and purposes, a political court. This is especially so when one considers the egregious conduct of then Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell(R-KY), who robbed President Obama of an opportunity to fill the late Justice Scalia’s seat using the bogus “election year” rationale. Sen McConnell then turned around and abandoned his “election year” rationale in late 2020, to rush through the confirmation of Trump’s nominee Amy Coney Barrett to replace the late Justice Ginsburg. Simply put, the conservative Roberts Supreme Court has become a political body, whether or not the justices want to acknowledge that fact.

Bottom line folks, this ultimatum by Senator Cruz and Ingraham should put to rest this myth that the 6-3 Roberts Supreme Court is some apolitical body, only interested in deciding cases on their legal merits. Republicans have fought for decades, and have succeeded in installing justices they are sure, will tow the GOP line. Now they expect/are demanding results, beginning with Roe v Wade. The only question remaining should be how we free the U.S. Supreme Court from it’s GOP captors, and revert it back to it’s proper realm, as the premier legal institution in America. One possible solution would be to expand the court.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Senator Kyrsten Sinema Addresses Criticism By Progressives Over BIF And Build Back Better

$upport via Cash App

Senator Kyrsten Sinema(D-AZ) in an interview with Arizona’s ABC 15(11/19/21)

***Updated 12/3/21 to include Sen Sinema’s interview with CNN’s Lauren Fox***

On the day the House passed the Build Back Better Act(Nov 19), Senator Kyrsten Sinema(D-AZ) sat down for an interview with Arizona’s ABC 15(KNXV), to discuss what lies ahead for the historic bill in the Senate. It is no secret that a lot of Democrats, especially Progressive Democrats, have been very upset with Senators Sinema and Joe Manchin(D-WV), over what they perceive as a coordinated effort by the two Senators to derail President Biden’s legislative agenda.

Asked by the ABC 15‘s host about the sharp, even personal criticism she regularly receives from Progressives regarding her perceived obstruction of the Build Back Better Act and other key Democratic legislative proposals(voting rights etc), Senator Sinema responded: “When I first was elected to head to Washington DC and represent Arizona about 9 years ago, I promised to be a work horse, not a show horse, and that’s exactly what I’ve done over these last 9 years. In the 3 years that I’ve served in the United States Senate, I’ve been known for just putting my head down and doing the work. And my experience is, if you want to negotiate and get to an agreement on difficult topics, the best way to do that is to build trust, and when you’re building trust with someone, you work one on one, you solve the problem, you stay focused, and you don’t get distracted by the noise outside. Now, I know that a lot of folks wanted to hear that noise outside, but they probably didn’t have the same goal as me, which is to negotiate and pass a historic infrastructure bill into law, and I guess I would just say the proof is in the pudding. Here we are today, the bill has become law, and we move on to the next topic, which is to implement it for the benefit of every day Arizonans. So while there are some who may not like this approach, it works, and I think it represents what Arizonans elected me to do, which is to put my head down, get the work done, and deliver results for every day families. “

There’s no other way to interpret Senator Sinema’s response, especially her work horse versus show horse analogy, other than she looks at her Progressive critics as a bunch of drama kings/queens who are either unwilling or unable to do the hard work of negotiating with the opposing party(Republicans)to advance legislation. Senator Sinema added that her approach, which involves quietly negotiating with Republicans produces results, as opposed to the unproductive “noise” which she attributed to Progressives.

In what could turn out to be a problem for the Build Back Better Act in the Senate, Senator Sinema later in the interview, raised concerns about the bill worsening the already alarming inflation problem. It’s highly likely that Senator Manchin will also raise similar inflation concerns, which may lead to the gutting of some popular Progressive items like paid family leave from the Build Back Better Act. A gutted Build Back Better Act may prove non-palatable to House Progressives thereby killing the bill, or extending it’s passage well into 2022, a tough election year for Democrats.

Bottom line folks, it was good to see Senator Sinema, often shrouded in secrecy, talking extensively to the media about her stance on the Build Back Better Act and other issues important to her constituents. Hopefully this is the beginning of a more “public” Senator Sinema.

Senator Sinema has since sat down with CNN’s Lauren Fox(12/2/21) where she expressed similar reservations about the House-passed Build Back Better Act

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out.

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Is Lt Gov Winsome Sears The New Feel-Good Republican Of Color?

$upport via Cash App

The Republican Party has for decades fought accusations of racism from Democrats and others who do not identify with the party. As a result, Republicans have always latched onto some highly impressive African-American in their midst, as the “feel-good” Republican of color, who the party then holds out as proof that it is not a racist party.

Some of the prominent and most recent “feel-good” Republicans of color include the late General Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, both of whom served as U.S. Secretary of State, former Oklahoma Congressman JC Watts who was a star quarterback for the Sooners, and even current Senator Tim Scott(R-SC)

Well, it appears, given the reaction to her stellar performance on CNN’s State of The Union, that we have a newly-minted feel-good Republican of color—one Winsome Sears from Virginia.

Here are just some of the reactions from Republicans, super excited about Winsome Sears’ performance on CNN’s State of The Union.

It will be interesting to see how the feel-good Republican of color status shapes Winsome Sears’ political career going forward. Will she run for President in 2024? Hmm. As Trump famously says, “We’ll see what happens.”

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out.

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Fox News Sunday Host Grills Texas AG Ken Paxton About His Felony Indictments

$upport via Cash App

At his appearance on Fox News Sunday(11/14/21), Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was confronted with a question about his felony indictments, which his 2022 Republican primary challenger George P. Bush(Jeb’s son) argues, renders Paxton unfit for public office. A-G Paxton’s rattled and incoherent response to host Chris Wallace’s direct question shows that he did not expect such a question from Fox News.

A-G Paxton’s full interview on Fox News Sunday is available here, but the relevant clip is below.

Host Chris Wallace: “You face your own legal problems…You are under indictment on an allegation of securities fraud and you are also the subject of an FBI investigation because some former top officials in your own office accused you of bribery. George P. Bush, the son of Jeb Bush is running against you next year…Here’s what he says:’Our top lawyer needs to be above reproach. There shouldn’t even be a question of one’s character and competence for this important role.’ How big a problem do you think these allegations against you will be in your effort to win reelection?”

AG Paxton: “Look, I’ve been dealing with this kind of fight. When you go out and do the type of things that I’ve done, you are going to be challenged, you are going to have issues like this pop up. This happened 7 years ago, almost 7 years ago, I was reelected when it happened, and I think we’ve done a great job defending the state of Texas. That’s what I’m going to talk about…I’m going to continue doing my job.”

A-G Paxton’s rattled and incoherent response to this valid question basically boils down to (1) his felony indictments are the result of some vast left wing conspiracy, and (2) the fact that he got reelected even with the indictments means he’s innocent–both of which are bogus. In the eyes of the Texas public, it is A-G Paxton who’s the beneficiary of political favors. Simply put, no regular Texan would still be waiting for a criminal trial stemming from 7 year old indictments. Unless and until A-G Paxton’s indictments are resolved, either by being quashed, or by Paxton beating them at trial, he is simply not fit to continue serving as Texas’ top lawyer.

Bottom line folks, there was a time not very long ago, when public officials would swiftly resign if their character had been credibly called into question. Nothing credibly calls one’s character into question more than felony indictments. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton should save the Lone Star State from any further embarrassment by either stepping down now, or scrapping his reelection plans. There are many capable indictment-free Texans who can serve as Attorney General.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out.

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo:”Texas Is Being Run From Maralago”

$upport via Cash App

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo appeared on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show (09/24/2021), where she blasted elected Republicans in Texas for giving in to former President Trump’s baseless demands for an audit into the state’s 2020 election results. The decision by the Texas Secretary of State’s office to conduct an audit into the election results of Collin, Dallas, Harris and Tarrant counties, came literally a few hours after Trump’s demand, which led a visibly upset Judge Hidalgo to tell host Maddow that Texas was “being run from Maralago.”

Judge Hidalgo told Maddow:“We have to remember we had incredibly successful elections here in Harris County in 2020. We had innovations that led to record turnouts from both parties, the highest in 30 years, I mean it was beautiful, and since then, no evidence has come out that would in any way cause the need for this kind of audit. All we’ve seen is [former]President Trump exhorting the state, or [Governor]Abbott, to have this audit…The reality of it is Texas is being run from Maralago, and that is dangerous, and it’s not appropriate…it’s extremely concerning.”

Judge Hidalgo added that time had come for politicians in Washington to get off the sidelines, and actively join the fight against voter suppression in the states, telling host Maddow, “We need the federal government to act, I mean, this has gone too far… This should be another call to action. We’ve got the writing on the wall. We’ve got to get off our chairs and get moving on all this.”

Bottom line folks, as Judge Hidalgo correctly pointed out, time has come for some decisive action to be taken against these naked efforts by Republicans at the state level, to restrict the voting rights of minorities. Democrats in Washington cannot just sit on the sidelines, and watch their counterparts in Republican-led states like Texas, go to war against GOP’s efforts to restrict minority voting rights. Simply put, time has come for Democrats in Washington to finally do away with the filibuster, and institute a national voting standard geared towards making it easier for people to vote, as opposed to GOP’s scheme of limiting access to the ballot box. As Judge Hidalgo correctly put it, congressional Democrats need to “get off their chairs and get moving” on a comprehensive federal voting rights law.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com