Today, Matt Gaetz's nomination to be US Attorney General flopped. Now eyes turn to the hugely embarrassing Pete Hegseth. Hanna Rosin (THE ATLANTIC) explains:
Aside
from being a veteran, Hegseth has little qualification to lead the
Department of Defense. He’s a Fox News host who has written a screed
against DEI in the military. He has faced an allegation of sexual
assault, which he denies, but the Trump team is not balking. “We look
forward to his confirmation,” Steven Cheung, a Trump spokesperson, said in
reply to news reports about the allegation. At another time in our
history, many lines in Hegseth’s latest book alone might have
disqualified him on the grounds of being too juvenile. In the
introduction of The War on Warriors,
he criticizes the “so-called elites directing the military today”:
“Sometime soon, a real conflict will break out, and red-blooded American
men will have to save their elite candy-asses.”
Focusing
on scandals and inflammatory rhetoric, however, may serve as a
diversion from a bigger, more alarming strategy. The real danger of
Hegseth’s appointment lies in the role he might play in Trump’s
reimagined military. In this episode of Radio Atlantic,
we talk with the staff writer Tom Nichols about Trump’s grander plan to
centralize control. “He’s going for the trifecta of putting nakedly
loyalist, unqualified people into these jobs as a way of saying to
everyone in those departments, I’m
in control. I run these. You’re going to do what I say. And forget the
Constitution. Forget the law. Forget everything except loyalty to Donald
Trump,” Nichols says.
Thursday, November 21, 2024. Satan's cabinet picks remain a sorry lot.
Turf wars. That's what DC has always been about.
Nothing ever changes and only the idiots -- like Great Satan Trump --
refuse to adjust to the system. The Constitution gives the Senate
approval on all cabinet level nominees. Not listening to their advice
portion of advice & consent is not going to get him off on the right
foot. Attempting to bypass them will only make things more difficult
for him in the future.
He's
a lame duck. And I did not see the photos from his last week of
campaigning or photos from this weekend until late last night. Is he
going to leave the Oval Office in a coffin? He looks dead. If that's
why he smears that orange make up on his face . . . At any rate, he
won't have another term. He is a lame duck president whose health is
giving out. He hasn't even been sworn in and already the lie that he
has a mandate has been corrected. Applause for Lawrence O'Donnell who
led on that and made the point night after night on his MSNBC program.
Loathe
THE NATION and what it's become under racist Katrina vanden Heuvel but
Joan Walsh and John Nichols did play fair -- maybe that's why they
didn't get the play that all the attack Kamala articles did on THE
NATION's website? -- but Nichols points out:
Let’s put this in perspective: Trump
is winning a lower percent of the popular vote this year than Biden did
in 2020 (51.3), Obama in 2012 (51.1), Obama in 2008 (52.9), George W.
Bush in 2004 (50.7), George H.W. Bush in 1988 (53.2), Ronald Reagan in
1984 (58.8), Reagan in 1980 (50.7), or Jimmy Carter in 1976 (50.1). And,
of course, Trump numbers are way below the presidents who won what
could reasonably be described as “unprecedented and powerful” mandates,
such as Richard Nixon’s 60.7 percent in 1972, Lyndon Johnson’s 61.1
percent in 1964, or Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s 60.8 percent. As Trump’s
percentage continues to slide, he’ll fall below the thresholds achieved
by most presidents in the past century.
Harris,
on the other hand, is looking like a much stronger finisher than she
did on election night. In fact, the Democrat now has a higher percentage
of the popular vote than Presidents Trump in 2016 (46.1), Bush in 2000
(47.9), Clinton in 1992 (43), or Nixon in 1968 (43.4). She has also
performed significantly better than recent major-party nominees such as
Trump in 2020 (46.8), Trump in 2016 (48.2), Mitt Romney in 2012 (47.2),
John McCain in 2008 (45.7), George W. Bush in 2000 (47.9), Bob Dole in
1996 (40.7), George H.W. Bush in 1992 (37.4), Michael Dukakis in 1988
(45.6), Walter Mondale (40.6), Carter in 1980 (41), or Gerald Ford in
1976 (48).
Yes,
some of those historic results were influenced by the presence of
strong third-party contenders. But most were not. And the bottom line is
that the gap between Trump and Harris is narrower than the difference
between major-party contenders in the vast majority of American
presidential races.
Why
make note of all the presidents who ran better than Trump? Why discuss
the narrowness of his advantage over Harris? Why consider, in addition,
that the Republican majorities in the House and Senate will be among the
narrowest in modern American history? Because it puts the 2024 election
results in perspective—and, in doing so, gives members of both parties
an understanding of how to respond when Trump claims that an unappealing
nominee or policy should be accepted out of deference to his “powerful”
mandate.
Despite repeated claims from GOP corners that the United States gave Donald Trump a "mandate" on Election Day, the president-elect has still not secured a majority of the popular vote.
According to the Cook Political Report,
Trump has netted 76.8 million votes to Kamala Harris' 74.2 million
votes. Trump's share of the ballots is good for 49.89% of the current
tallied vote total. If the current margin of roughly 2.4 million votes
holds, it will be the closest margin of victory since the contest
between Al Gore and George W. Bush in 2000.
Trump's current lead in the popular vote count is smaller than the one Hillary Clinton put up on him in 2016. Clinton gained 2.8 million more votes than Trump in her electoral loss.
Yes, Donald Trump won
the election. He will be the next president. There’s no question about
that. But it’s also one of the narrowest popular vote wins in U.S.
history. He got less than half the votes cast, winning a plurality but
not a majority of the popular vote.
So take a step back and keep all of this in mind when you hear Trump and his supporters suggest that the election was this enormous wave in which a transformation swept across the country, in which Americans were just begging for a MAGA makeover.
That
is the line Republicans are selling — and lots in the mainstream media
are granting it in various ways — but it’s just plainly not true. And
we’ve gone through this all before. Just compare all the postmortems in
the past two weeks about “what the American people really wanted” when
Trump won by 1.6 points nationally to the postmortems we got in 2016,
after Clinton beat him by 2.1% nationally, but lost in the Electoral
College. It’s all the same stuff.
President-elect
Donald Trump is poised to skip over FBI vetting of his nominees,
upending more than 60 years of precedent and putting him on a collision
course with members of his own party as he tries to power his
controversial cabinet picks through the Senate.
Republican
senators have balked at Trump potentially forgoing the routine FBI
background checks to install former Representative Matt Gaetz as
attorney general as well as other controversial nominees like Pete
Hegseth to lead the Pentagon and Tulsi Gabbard, another former House
member, to run national intelligence.
Trump’s
transition team hasn’t signed an agreement with the Justice Department
and FBI that would allow the bureau to vet nominees, according to a
person familiar with the matter, who asked not be identified discussing
internal deliberations. The agreement is typically an initial step to
begin the process of vetting.
The
nominees are a joke -- again, -- and they spell doom for the country
if approved and doom for the already struggling Satan if they're not
approved.
“It’s becoming a real possibility,” a source told the outlet’s special correspondent Gabriel Sherman.
The
source said that the Trump team was taken by surprise after a serious
sexual assault allegation against Hegseth came to light, which led
Trump’s incoming chief of staff Susie Wiles to question the former Fox News host on a call last week. Hegseth was never charged with a crime and denies the allegations.
“People are upset about the distraction. The general feeling is Pete hasn’t been honest,” a second source told Vanity Fair.
A
“prominent Republican” close to the Trump transition team told the
outlet that some are also unhappy with the president-elect’s choice due
to Hegseth’s lack of qualifications to lead the nation’s defense.
“There
are Republicans with a background in the Defense Department who are
privately saying, ‘I’m not working for this guy,’” the source said.
He
has no executive experience and serving in the military doesn't mean
knowing all the many issues. We went over this in Tuesday's snapshot
and noted that any Republican serving on the Senate Armed Services
Committee would be a better choice and know the issues involved.
Then
there's plastic surgery junkie and alleged sex trafficker Matt Gaetz
whom Satan has nominated for Attorney General. They're trying to keep
hidden both the Justice Dept's report on their investigation into Gaetz
on charges of assaulting underage females and the House Ethics
Committee's findings as well. Travis Gettys (RAW STORY) reports:
The
Florida Republican resigned last week as soon as Trump announced his
nomination, which complicates the release of that panel's findings, but former ethics chairman Charlie Dent published an op-ed for MSNBC arguing that Gaetz's exit from Congress should not prevent the public from learning what lawmakers found.
"Ordinarily,
nominees for Cabinet positions are thoroughly vetted to identify any
potential obstacles to confirmation," wrote Dent, a Republican former
congressman from Pennsylvania. "Trump has eschewed any pretense of a
normal vetting process and instead has sought an attorney general
nominee prepared to torch the very department he would lead. Not to
quibble about Gaetz’s qualifications,
but he has scant experience as a lawyer and was the subject of a
lengthy sex crimes investigation by the Justice Department that resulted
in no charges filed against him."
[. . . ]
"Gaetz thought his resignation could block the report’s release and avoid having disturbing details from the report going public," Dent added. "Well, not so fast."
There's
no House rule prohibiting the committee from releasing a report on a
departed member, and Dent cites several examples of that happening in
the past, when the panel issued a report on teen sex allegations against
Rep. Don Lukens (R-OH) in 1990, misuse of campaign funds allegations
against Rep. Bill Boner (D-TN) in 1987, and sexual misconduct
allegations against Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) in 2006.
"The precedent of post-resignation disclosure is particularly stronger surrounding sexual misconduct by members," Dent wrote.
As
it should be. He didn't slink off the way most disgraced people
would. He wants to be Attorney General. The American people have the
right to know everything in that report. As Marcia noted last night:
So let's review a few things. We pay for
the work members of Congress do. They are working for us. Remember
that. Matt Gaetz resigned from Congress last week to stop the release
of an ethics report on him -- it would have been released last Friday.
By resigning, he was no longer a member of Congress and killed the
report's release. Riley Beggin (USA Today) explains:
The
House Ethics Committee had an ongoing investigation into similar
allegations. That panel planned to vote on whether to release a report
on its findings just two days after Gaetz abruptly resigned from Congress. Lawyers for two women who
spoke with the committee have said they testified that they witnessed
Gaetz under the influence of drugs and sexually assaulting a minor in
2017. Gaetz has denied the allegations.
Trump
also tapped Fox News host Pete Hegseth to be defense secretary. A woman
alleged Hegseth raped her in 2017. He has denied the allegation, and
police never pressed charges against him. Hegseth admitted to paying the woman a settlement amount, saying he feared he would lose his job at Fox over the accusation.
In a previous political era, the claims against Gaetz and Hegseth would likely be the death knell for a Cabinet nomination.
He
is nominated by Donald Trump to be the next Attorney General of the
United States. And where's the report? He's accused of assaulting
underage women. So where's the report? We paid for it. He's trying to
become the next Attorney General of the United States. Where's the
report?
Republican
Senator Kevin Cramer has publicly rejected the possibility of a recess
appointment for controversial Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz, calling the move "unwise."
Cramer made the remarks during a CNN interview on Monday, a week after Gaetz was nominated by President-elect Donald Trump to be attorney general.
[. . .]
Amid
the controversial pick, Trump has faced scrutiny from some Republican
lawmakers, like Senator Susan Collins of Maine, who have expressed
dismay at Gaetz's nomination. Half of Senate Republicans, including some
in senior leadership positions, privately saying they don't see a path
for Gaetz to be confirmed by the Senate, NBC News reported.
There's the awful Linda McMahon -- see Rebecca's "the immensely unqualified linda mcmahon"
-- proposed for Secretary of (Mis)Education. There's terrorist Tulsi
who members of the unit she served in complained about, who belongs to a
cult and who does not have the experience or skill set to be the
Director of Traffic let alone the Director of National Intelligence --
the post that, believe it or not, Satanic Trump has nominated her for.
And there's always the failure that is Junior. Little man pumps all the
steroids into his veins he can and still comes up short -- see Elaine's
"Only tin foil hat wearing Lisa Pease is impressed with Junior." Rachel Roubein and Dan Diamond (WASHINGTON POST) report:
Republican senators are poised to decide whether Robert F. Kennedy Jr. becomes the nation’s next health secretary.
But in interviews this week, a half-dozen GOP lawmakers said they had
questions or outright concerns about his nomination, with several citing
his vaccine skepticism, as they weighed whether to vote for him.
“Look,
I believe in vaccines. I think they’ve saved millions of lives,” Sen.
Mike Rounds (R-South Dakota) said in an interview. “If he has a
different point of view, then he’ll have to explain them to us.”
The
pick has also scrambled Capitol Hill, with Republicans trying to decide
whether to vote for a former Democrat who has supported abortion,
attacked the pharmaceutical industry and wants to change U.S.
agriculture policies, among other positions that challenge GOP
orthodoxy.
Junior,
of course, brings along his thyroid challenged wife, an 'actress' of no
merit or talent whose 'career' is several rungs below that of Mary Jane
Croft.
So, as the second Trump administration looms and her husband is poised to “go wild on health,”
in Trump's words, pushing to change vaccine requirements, remove
fluoride from water, and more if his nomination to appointed secretary
of health and human services is approved, Hines is in the increasingly
rare position of being a woman with choices.
One
option: Hines could divorce Kennedy. She can point to the Nuzzi
situation, which was reportedly consensual, if generally icky. (A
third-party investigation into Nuzzi's work at New York found no evidence of journalistic bias in her work, but reporter and publication “agreed that the best course forward is to part ways” nonetheless.) A former babysitter has also made credible allegations of sexual assault, as reported by Vanity Fair
(Kennedy responded in other outlets by saying he is “not a church
boy”). The animal stuff is disturbing, and the anti-vaccine stance and
false claims that stir up hysteria and dangerous medical situations that
can result in entirely preventable deaths is not ideal either. Hines’
home state of California does still have no-fault divorce—but maybe not for much longer, if the Republicans have anything to say about it.
She could stay married to him and order up the Melania Trump
Starter Pack: Dark, oversized sunglasses and a tight-lipped grimace
pair gorgeously with legally wedded resentment and a sprinkling of “no
comment” responses. Hell, Melania isn’t even planning to move into the White House
this time around, sources say. Maybe she and Hines could hang out in
Florida (Hines’ state of origin), get some brunch, and not talk about
the havoc their husbands are wreaking on the country. You can be legally
married and quiet, as both women have demonstrated. Last Thursday,
Hines was spotted on Kennedy's arm at a Mar-a-Lago party,
yukking it up with Team MAGA, Trump himself reportedly included. Maybe
this is the sacrifice she's willing make in the name of plentiful shrimp
cocktail.
A third option would be for Hines to
take her own philosophy about improv to heart: Commit, 100 percent, and
lie in the bed she’s made. The apparent path of willful ignorance and
silence Hines has taken so far, as if not acknowledging Kennedy's
campaign and controversial views would make it so that they might as
well not exist, is no longer one she can walk, given the announcement of
Kennedy's nomination and seeming inevitability of his continuing
presence in the political arena.
Welcome to Washington, Cheryl. What'll it be?
Poor
Cheryl, so pathetic. And I'm finding it hard to believe -- well, maybe
not -- that I know who he snuck off with last Sunday and Cheryl
doesn't. But Cheryl, you keep playing doormat -- it's the only role
you've ever pulled off convincingly.
President-elect
Donald Trump’s flurry of announcements about his picks for government
(and extra-governmental) positions seems obviously unburdened by
consideration of how popular those choices might be. It is not common
for a president-elect to identify a number of people with so little experience to
fill high-level government positions, certainly. Nor is it common for a
president-elect to be so uncertain about the confirmation of those
intended nominees — by a Senate his own party controls, mind you — as to
approach his inauguration with a plan in place to sidestep the Senate confirmation process.
It
should not be surprising, then, that the people Trump has tapped are
viewed with little enthusiasm among Americans more broadly.
These
are the nominees we get when 'independent' media like THE NATION,
DEMOCRACY NOW!, THE PROGRESSIVE, IN THESE TIMES, et al fail us by
spending three months leading into a presidential election attacking not
Donald Trump but instead attacking Kamala Harris -- and doing so on a
daily basis.
As Steve Nicks asks, "What shall I say this time?" ("Straight Back").
My kindness is pretty much shot for the year.
So I wish so many of you writers would just stop bothering me.
This
morning it's a guy who wants his COMMON DREAMS column highlighted. And
I've told him not before. He's one of the ones who attacked Kamala
constantly. Now he's going to be our answer? F**k you. You're part of
the reason that Trump will be sworn in.
And now you
think we should just forgive you and ignore what you did? Your actions
have consequences that probably won't effect you -- you're a White,
straight male of a certain age. But it will impact and destroy the
lives of the many of the rest of us.
He wants me to know that he actually wrote some supportive columns about Kamala but COMMON DREAMS didn't run those.
Really?
Is
that the truth? Because if it is (a) you waited to share that until
after it no longer matter and (b) don't share it with me, week after
week, Ava and I documented how the 'independent' media was destroying
Kamala's campaign with one attack after another.
I'm not your priest and I'm not going to absolve you.
If you want to share what COMMON DREAMS did, share it in a column.
But you won't.
You'll
just whisper it because whether it's Mika and Joe or some non-corporate
lefty, you're all about protecting yourselves and the circle jerk you
try to pass off as an 'independent' media.
Your new
column? Weak sauce. And the points you barely make should have been
made during the election. Cry to someone else because I don't feel
sorry for you. You're guilty and you're responsible. And I'll feel bad
for the way you destroyed hope for so many Americans, but I don't --
and won't -- feel sorry for you.
Senator Patty Murray's office issued the following:
Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Patty Murray
(D-WA), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Dick Durbin
(D-IL), Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, reintroduced their
legislation to clarify that victims of discrimination can seek damages
for emotional harm under federal law—after the Supreme Court curtailed
their ability to do so in its devastating April 2022 ruling in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller. The senators’ Clarifying Civil Rights Remedies Act of 2024
ensures that people who suffer emotional harm because of discrimination
they experienced are able to seek restitution under federal
anti-discrimination statutes—recognizing that while discrimination may
not cause a financial loss, it can and often does cause lasting
emotional distress.
“Our legislation recognizes the plain truth that people who
are discriminated against often suffer lasting emotional harm and should
have the ability to seek justice in our courts, including restitution —
even if the discrimination they experienced did not have a financial
impact,” said Senator Murray. “The Supreme Court’s failure in Cummings to
recognize and account for the humiliation and distress a person can
experience after being discriminated against in a classroom, a doctor’s
office, or other settings was a profound mistake — our legislation would
right this wrong and ensure victims of discrimination can seek the
appropriate damages they deserve.”
“Discrimination can leave a lasting mental impact on those who experience it. That’s why the Supreme Court’s decision in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller is
so harmful. It prevents those who have suffered emotional distress due
to discrimination from seeking damages,” said Senator Durbin. “I’m
joining Senator Murry in introducing the Clarifying Civil Rights Remedies Act
to clarify that damages for emotional harm are available to victims of
discrimination. No one who faces discrimination should be denied justice
in court.”
In April 2022, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision authored by
Chief Justice Roberts that victims of discrimination cannot sue under
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Affordable Care Act to recover
damages for emotional distress caused by illegal discrimination. The
decision denies many victims of discrimination an appropriate remedy for
the harms they have suffered.
The Clarifying Civil Rights Remedies Act of 2024 makes
explicit that remedies available for violations of Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the
Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, and Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act include compensatory
damages, including for emotional harm. The legislation ensures that
victims have recourse and that incentives exist to encourage recipients
of federal funds to comply with our federal civil rights laws.
“As advocates for women and girls, including LGBTQI+
individuals and survivors of sexual violence, we’ve seen the range of
harms that can follow after experiencing discrimination, including
harassment and assault. The Clarifying Civil Rights Remedies Act of 2024
is critical for victims to receive remedies they are entitled to under
our civil rights laws,” said Gaylynn Burroughs, Vice President for
Education & Workplace Justice at the National Women’s Law Center.
“Justice
was impaired when the Supreme Court limited remedies for emotional
distress in its decision in Cummings, but we are grateful for Senator
Murray’s leadership in ensuring that victims of harassment have explicit
rights to remedies for emotional harm.”
“Discrimination can devastate a person’s well-being. It can
lead to anxiety, depression, and even substance abuse. Since the Supreme
Court’s decision in Cummings, students across the country have been
denied a financial remedy for the emotional harm that discrimination has
caused them,” said Adele Kimmel, Public Justice’s Students’ Civil Rights Project Director. “The Clarifying Civil Rights Remedies Act is an important first step in restoring the availability of this crucial remedy.”
“Access to our nation’s courts is critical to make real the
promise of our nation’s civil rights laws,” said Megan Schuller, Legal
Director of the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law.
“When the Supreme Court failed to recognize the intent of vitally
important civil rights statutes and erected yet another barrier to
vindicating those rights, it placed Americans with disabilities and
others at greater risk of experiencing discrimination in schools,
hospitals, workplaces, state and local government programs, and other
settings with no meaningful recourse. We are grateful to Senator Murray
for reintroducing the Clarifying Civil Rights Remedies Act,
which will correct the Court’s flawed interpretation and restore to
people with disabilities and others the ability to access justice.”
In addition to Senators Murray and Durbin, the legislation is
cosponsored by Senators Baldwin, Blumenthal, Booker, Casey, Duckworth,
Helmy, Kaine, Sanders, Van Hollen, Welch, and Whitehouse.
The legislation is endorsed by the National Women’s Law Center, the
Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Public Justice, American
Association for Justice, Autistic Self Advocacy Network, the Arc of the
United States, National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), National Black
Justice Coalition, The Trevor Project, American Atheists, National
Alliance for Partnerships in Equity, National Alliance to End Sexual
Violence, Know Your IX, and Just Solutions.
People need to know their lane. Grifter and carnival barker Nate Silver never has known his lane. Ariana Baio (INDEPENDENT) notes:
Political pollster and writer Nate Silver suggested President Joe Biden is unfit to remain in office for the next two months and should allow Vice President Kamala Harris to take over for the rest of the term.
Wednesday, November 20, 2024. Mika and Joe soil themselves while nut jobs like Francis Boyle harm the left.
Did Mika and Joe destroy MSNBC this week?
I heard what they'd done Monday afternoon and
immediately removed their video from the snapshot -- they were talking
about Pete Hegseth. When the shock faded, the anger remained. And I
wasn't a big fan of MORNING JOE. Two cowards went and sucked up to save
their own asses and their viewers b e damned.
There
was no excuse for it. It tars them as traitors -- they betrayed the
audience -- and as liars because how could you say all that they have
said about the great Satan and then turn around and make nice with him?
They
now make clear that, at least their section of MSNBC, is nothing but
posing and acting -- and that's really not something a so-called news
network wants to be known for.
Rachel Maddow, Joy Reid, Ari, Chris Hayes, all of them are now suspect.
I'm
not saying they should be -- I can't imagine a time when I won't
applaud and defend Chris -- someone who actually keeps their word and
has a record for doing so -- but I am saying that two on airs
embarrassed the network and put a question mark over the network and the
other on air personalities.
After social media across multiple platforms erupted over Joe and
Mika’s trip to MAL to kiss the ring, or, as Joe put it, “restarting my
communications with Trump,” the response this morning was to insult the
critics. Scarborough opened the show with this:
“Yesterday, I
saw for the first time what a massive disconnect there was between
social media and the real world because we were flooded from phone calls
from people all day, literally around the world, very positive, very
supportive.”
So, the millions of people who expressed outrage
that J&M went to the home of the man they have called a serial
sexual abuser of women and the second coming of Hitler are disconnected
from the real world, but J&M’s friends calling them from around the
world have their finger on the pulse? I guess we will find out when the
ratings from this week come out whether this is just cranks on social
media or real people who used to watch their show. (The show’s ratings
had already tanked since the election even before this).
Sure,
the consensus of the opinions on social media don’t always reflect
society as a whole or the views of the entire country. I get that. But
that’s not really the issue here. Morning Joe’s audience is largely the very same people who are complaining on social media - educated, sophisticated people who follow the news very closely and are on social media. So, with this dismissive statement, Joe insults his own audience yet again.
I
guess I’m just not sophisticated enough to understand why a TV host
would go to someone’s house to kiss and make up who accused him of
murdering a staffer to cover up an extramarital affair (with no
evidence). Or who viciously insulted his wife over her intellect, looks,
and plastic surgery. I guess those of us in the imaginary social media
world don’t get the nuance of how it is necessary to kiss the ring of
that person in order to provide TV commentary to a largely progressive
audience.
People around the world? Joe
is such a damn liar. No one gives a damn about MORNING JOE in Japan or
France or any country that has their own media. There is no excuse for
what took place.
After we reported that Joe Scarborough and
Mika Brzezinski admitted to bending the knee to Trump at Mar-a-Lago this
past weekend, we decided to conduct a survey to see if it impacted
viewers of Morning Joe. We were Morning Joe fans, and it made us not want to watch them again. We wanted to see if MeidasTouch viewers felt as we did.
We surveyed 9,686 people, and the results were shocking: 90.3 percent of those surveyed say they will not watch Morning Joe ever again. It’s sad that Morning Joe screwed over its audience like this and lost the credibility and trust it had gained from us and others
Mika and Joe are exposed as actors, not as journalists. They will say and do anything for a check.
As a physicist and concerned citizen, I find myself outraged every
time I scroll through social media and encounter tweets from the
Department of Energy, or DOE, and the Office of Nuclear Energy, or ONE,
touting nuclear power as “clean, safe, and carbon-free.”
This
narrative not only misrepresents the dirty reality of nuclear power but
also obscures the significant environmental and health risks associated
with its production and waste. It’s infuriating to see government
agencies knowingly lie and promote such misleading information, while
ignoring the pressing issues faced by communities affected by the toxic
reality of the nuclear power industry—propaganda paid for by U.S.
taxpayers!
Oh, Canada! Leading the Charge Against Nuclear Greenwashing
Finally,
someone is doing something about it—but not in the U.S., where you’d
expect it. In Canada, a coalition of seven environmental organizations
recently filed a formal complaint
with the Competition Bureau against the Canadian Nuclear Association
(CNA), accusing it of misleading the public by marketing nuclear power
as “clean” and “emissions-free.” Based on Canada’s Competition Act, the
complaint challenges the CNA for violating provisions related to false
or misleading advertising, similar to greenwashing regulations in other
countries, where deceptive environmental claims distort market
competition and misinform consumers.
The complaint argues that
the CNA omits critical information about the environmental damage and
health risks associated with the nuclear fuel cycle, including uranium
mining, radioactive waste management, and the impacts on communities
near nuclear facilities. By selectively framing nuclear power as a
climate solution, the CNA diverts attention and resources away from
truly sustainable alternatives like solar and wind energy.
In confronting the extremism of a potential Trump administration, it’s
more vital than ever to collaborate with Canada and other nations
committed to challenging nuclear misinformation.
In the U.S.,
similar deceptive practices could be challenged under the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) Act, which includes the FTC’s Green Guides. These
guidelines require that any environmental claims be substantiated,
transparent, and not misleading about the overall environmental impact.
Yet, organizations like the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) and the
American Nuclear Society (ANS) continue to promote nuclear power as a
“clean” energy solution while conveniently ignoring the lifecycle
emissions, radioactive waste, and long-term environmental costs.
Leading
the charge in Canada are groups such as the Canadian Environmental Law
Association (CELA), Environmental Defence Canada, and the Sierra Club
Canada Foundation. Here in the U.S., organizations like the Union of
Concerned Scientists (UCS), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC),
and the Sierra Club could take similar action against the NEI and ANS by
leveraging the FTC’s guidelines to expose deceptive marketing practices
in the nuclear sector.
Let’s Be Real: Nuclear Power is Not Clean or Green
Sure,
nuclear fission may not produce direct carbon emissions, but the
nuclear fuel cycle—including uranium mining, reactor construction,
radioactive waste management, and decommissioning—creates significant
greenhouse gas emissions. In places like the Navajo Nation, uranium
mining has already caused immeasurable harm. Over 523 abandoned uranium
mines and mills continue to contaminate the land and water with
radioactive waste, leading to severe health problems that affect
multiple generations. The DOE’s failure to address these ongoing harms
while simultaneously promoting the narrative of “clean, safe,
carbon-free” nuclear power is not just unethical—it’s a dangerous
distraction from real solutions for our energy needs and the fight
against climate change.
Nuclear energy is not
safe. The byproduct of it is not safe and is deadly for millions of
years. A nuclear plant makes a much better target for terrorism than a
world sky scraper. It is a danger to all of us.
Some people got taken in by Oliver Stone. He's a pig and he lies. But some on the left treated him like a god.
Words? Pretty words trick a lot of people. Equally true, there are a lot of sell outs.
And
there is just the grotesque. That would be people like John Stauber
who made their money and name on the left but turned out to be psycho
nut jobs who now platform and embrace Laura Loomer and other hate
merchants.
I'm not in the mood to play. What John
Stauber puts on his social media is disgusting but the left -- even
those who promoted him -- looks the other way and refuses to call out
what he's become -- a racist troll.
I'm not playing that game.
Francis
A. Boyle is a legal professor who once had a working brain. He's
repeatedly sent stuff to this site over the years and I've tried to
include it where possible. Didn't mean I agreed, didn't mean I
disagreed.
But we're done.
I knew of him through members of Congress -- including John Conyers.
He
keeps sending garbage and doesn't seem to realize that it's not being
missed in the inbox. That can happen. That's not what's happening with
him.
I don't care that he wants to impeach Joe Biden.
That is his 'new' and 'productive' effort.
Joe
Biden steps down in January, it's almost Thanksgiving, buy a damn clue,
read the room. Francis is a damn loser. Maybe he always was, maybe he
just became it.
But not only do I not have time for
that garbage nonsense, I also don't have time for Alex Jones. Is this
the first time his name has appeared here in our two decades? Ava and I
covered his nonsense for a media piece at THIRD.
But Francis has sat down with Alex Jones and done a great interview on impeaching Joe Biden and . . .
And shut the hell up.
Seriously, you embarrass yourself. You shame yourself.
I
am appalled that no one calls out John Stauber. But when I saw all the
e-mails of Francis trying to promote himself and Alex Jones, my first
response was to just ignore it. So maybe that's why some on the left
who were so cozy with John Stauber have refused to call him out for the
hate merchant he's become? I don't know but I'm not playing that game.
Francis
A. Boyle is nuts and has no place on the left. He can join the other
grifters like Glynneth Greenwald and Fatt Taibbi in promoting and
defending Alex Jones.
We won't miss him. If you're
looking what's going on in this country right now and your 'answer' is
to impeach Joe Biden? You're beyond insane.
People are living in fear of what's coming.
And your answer is to defocus with a bunch of nonsense while you play footise with Alex Jones?
You're
a disgrace and a good reason why our country is at the point it is
right now and why so many Americans rightfully are worried about what's
coming after the January inauguration.
Senator Elizabeth Warren issued the following:
Washington, D.C. – Today, in response to the news
that President-elect Donald Trump has named Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to
serve as U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, U.S. Senator
Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released the following statement:
“Donald Trump’s appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. poses a danger
to public health, scientific research, medicine, and health care
coverage for millions of Americans. RFK Jr. wants to stop parents from
protecting their babies from measles and his ideas would welcome the
return of polio. He has spread conspiracy theories on everything from
COVID to mass shootings. I will have a lot of questions about Mr.
Kennedy’s fitness to serve as health secretary when he appears before
the Finance Committee.”
###
Senator Ron Wyden issued the following:
Washington, D.C. — U.S.
Senator Ron Wyden, D-Ore., issued the following statement on Donald
Trump picking Chris Wright to be nominated for Department of Energy
secretary and Doug Burgum to be nominated for Department of Interior
secretary.
“It’s sadly not the least bit surprising
that Trump’s picks to do his bidding at the Department of Energy and the
Department of the Interior have long track records cheerleading for Big
Oil, corporate America, and the ultra-wealthy gas executives plotting
to fill their already over-stuffed pocketbooks,” Wyden said. “These
nominees were selected with the goal of taking our country back in time
and rolling back climate progress. American workers and families will
pay a steep price as Trump's agenda destroys jobs and shuts down
renewable energy projects all over the country that Americans
overwhelmingly support.
“But make no mistake: as a senior member of the U.S. Senate
Energy and Natural Resources Committee, I will watchdog the Trump
administration’s every move. Oregonians voted for elected officials who
will stand up to Trump’s climate denying policies and keep fighting to
protect our state’s beloved public lands from being pillaged for profit.
That’s exactly what I’ll do–all while keeping a spotlight on the urgent
need for climate action so all Oregonians have a bright and better
future.”
###
Senator Richard Blumenthal issued the following:
[HARTFORD, CT] – U.S. Senator Richard
Blumenthal (D-CT) joined Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chair
of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and all Senate Judiciary Democrats in
a letter to the House Ethics Committee urging the House Ethics
Committee to preserve and transmit to the Senate Judiciary Committee all
relevant documentation on former Congressman Matt Gaetz, including the
report that the House Ethics Committee was reportedly prepared to vote
to release tomorrow. The letter follows Mr. Gaetz’s resignation from
Congress yesterday after President-elect Donald Trump announced his
intention to nominate Mr. Gaetz to serve as Attorney General.
The Senators wrote, “The sequence
and timing of Mr. Gaetz’s resignation from the House raises serious
questions about the contents of the House Ethics Committee report and
findings. We cannot allow this critical information from a bipartisan
investigation into longstanding public allegations to be hidden from the
American people, given that it is directly relevant to the question of
whether Mr. Gaetz is qualified and fit to be the next Attorney General
of the United States.”
The Senators continued, “The
Senate has a constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on
presidential nominees, and it is crucial that we review all of the
information necessary to fulfill this duty as we consider Mr. Gaetz’s
nomination. We thus request that you immediately provide to the Senate
Judiciary Committee your Committee’s report and all documentation
related to your investigation into Mr. Gaetz’s alleged misconduct. The
Senate Judiciary Committee will accept this information in any format
that accords with your Committee’s rules, but please include all
underlying source materials on which you relied, including interviews
and contact information for any of these sources.”
In April 2021, the House Ethics Committee
announced that the Committee was “aware of public allegations that
Representative Matt Gaetz may have engaged in sexual misconduct and/or
illicit drug use, shared inappropriate images or videos on the House
floor, misused state identification records, converted campaign funds to
personal use, and/or accepted a bribe, improper gratuity, or
impermissible gift, in violation of House Rules, laws, or other
standards of conduct,” and as a result, the Committee had “begun an
investigation and will gather additional information regarding the
allegations.”
In June 2024, the House Ethics Committee
issued a statement noting that the Committee had “determined that
certain of the allegations merit continued review” and that “the
Committee has also identified additional allegations that merit review,”
including allegations pursuant to Committee Rules 14(a)(3) and 18(a)
that Representative Gaetz may have: engaged in sexual misconduct and
illicit drug use, accepted improper gifts, dispensed special privileges
and favors to individuals with whom he had a personal relationship, and
sought to obstruct government investigations of his conduct.”
There is substantial precedent for the
release of such materials in both chambers of Congress. In 1987, the
House Ethics Committee released a preliminary report
about former Rep. Bill Boner after he left Congress, stating: “In the
Committee’s view, the general policy against issuing reports in cases
such as here involved is outweighed by the responsibility of the
Committee to fully inform the public regarding the status and results of
its efforts up to the date of Representative Boner’s departure from
Congress.” Similarly, in 2011, the Senate Select Committee on Ethics
released its preliminary report
on former Senator John Ensign after he resigned from Congress. The
House Ethics Committee has also continued investigations after Members
have left Congress, such as in 2010 when it twice reauthorized its
investigation into former Rep. Eric Massa after his departure.
Along with Blumenthal, the letter was
signed by U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI),
Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Chris Coons (D-DE), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT),
Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Jon Ossoff
(D-GA), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Laphonza Butler (D-CA).
Full text of today’s letter is available here and below:
November 14, 2024
Dear Chairman Guest and Ranking Member Wild:
In light of President-elect Donald Trump’s
announcement of his intent to nominate former Congressman Matt Gaetz to
be Attorney General, we request that the House Committee on Ethics
immediately preserve and transmit to the Senate Committee on the
Judiciary all relevant documentation on Mr. Gaetz, including the report
that your Committee was reportedly prepared to vote to release tomorrow.
In April 2021, you announced that the
Committee was “aware of public allegations that Representative Matt
Gaetz may have engaged in sexual misconduct and/or illicit drug use,
shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, misused state
identification records, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or
accepted a bribe, improper gratuity, or impermissible gift, in
violation of House Rules, laws, or other standards of conduct,” and as a
result, the Committee had “begun an investigation and will gather
additional information regarding the allegations.”
In June 2024, the Committee issued a
statement noting that the Committee had “determined that certain of the
allegations merit continued review” and that “the Committee has also
identified additional allegations that merit review,” including
“allegations pursuant to Committee Rules 14(a)(3) and 18(a) that
Representative Gaetz may have: engaged in sexual misconduct and illicit
drug use, accepted improper gifts, dispensed special privileges and
favors to individuals with whom he had a personal relationship, and
sought to obstruct government investigations of his conduct.”
The sequence and timing of Mr. Gaetz’s
resignation from the House raises serious questions about the contents
of the House Ethics Committee report and findings. We cannot allow this
critical information from a bipartisan investigation into longstanding
public allegations to be hidden from the American people, given that it
is directly relevant to the question of whether Mr. Gaetz is qualified
and fit to be the next Attorney General of the United States.
The Senate has a constitutional duty to
provide advice and consent on presidential nominees, and it is crucial
that we review all of the information necessary to fulfill this duty as
we consider Mr. Gaetz’s nomination. We thus request that you immediately
provide to the Senate Judiciary Committee your Committee’s report and
all documentation related to your investigation into Mr. Gaetz’s alleged
misconduct. The Senate Judiciary Committee will accept this information
in any format that accords with your Committee’s rules, but please
include all underlying source materials on which you relied, including
interviews and contact information for any of these sources.
Thank you for your time and prompt consideration of this important request.
Sincerely,
US House Rep Joaquin Castro's released this:
WASHINGTON — Today, Rep. Joaquin
Castro (TX-20), Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee
on the Western Hemisphere, Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (NY-05), Ranking
Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Sen. Majority Whip
Dick Durbin (Ill.), Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, led the
release of a new report from the nonpartisan Government Accountability
Office (GAO) that examines the role of U.S. firearms in Caribbean arms
trafficking. The report found that nearly three-quarters of firearms
recovered from the Caribbean and traced by the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) could be sourced back to the
United States, with many originating from U.S. retail sales.
A bicameral group of top Foreign Affairs, Homeland Security, and
Judiciary Democrats joined Castro, Meeks, and Durbin in releasing this
report, including Reps. Bennie Thompson (MS-02), Ranking Member of the
House Homeland Security Committee, Lou Correa (CA-46),
Ranking Member of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border
Security and Enforcement, Dan Goldman (NY-10), Seth Magaziner (RI-02), Ranking
Member of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Counterterrorism,
Law Enforcement and Intelligence, and Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick
(FL-20), Co-Chair of the House Haiti Caucus.
Key findings in today’s report include:
73% of firearms recovered from 25 Caribbean countries and tracked by
ATF’s eTrace system between 2018 - 2022 could be sourced to the United
States. Among these firearms, 45 percent could be sourced back to an
initial retail purchase in the United States, with most sales
originating in Florida, Texas, and Georgia.
Handguns represented the majority (88 percent) of firearms recovered
and traced from the Caribbean. During the study period from 2018 to
2022, the number of long guns submitted for tracing across the Caribbean
nearly tripled from five percent to fifteen percent of all weapons
examined.
“The
most effective way to address violence and instability in the
Caribbean is to prevent U.S. guns from falling into the hands of
criminals,” said Congressman Joaquin Castro, Ranking Member of the House
Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. “During
my time on the Foreign Affairs Committee, I’ve met with dozens of
leaders from Latin America and the Caribbean who plead with the United
States to stop the gun trafficking that is wreaking havoc on their
countries. Today’s report from the nonpartisan Government Accountability
Office demonstrates how criminal organizations across the Caribbean
source their weapons from the United States in a deadly trade that has
contributed to the collapse of Haitian society and devastating loss of
life across the region. The Biden-Harris administration has taken
important steps to curb gun trafficking, including through strict
enforcement of penalties in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and the
subsequent establishment of a Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms
Prosecutions at the Department of Justice. To continue this progress,
Congress must pass my Americas Regional Monitoring of Arms Sales (ARMAS)
Act, which mobilizes resources across the federal government to disrupt
firearms trafficking from the United States. No approach to the
challenges facing our hemisphere can be complete without a comprehensive
strategy to end gun trafficking. I hope the next administration will
treat this issue with the gravity it deserves.”
“Leaders across the Caribbean have long called on the United States
to address the pernicious effects of arms trafficking from our shores to
their countries. These weapons destabilize communities and compound the
challenges faced by our Caribbean neighbors, enabling gangs and
transnational criminal networks to perpetrate crime that undermines U.S.
national security and regional stability. We must invest in efforts to
stem the flow of illicit weapons from our shores to the Caribbean. Doing
so will protect communities in the United States, Caribbean and wider
Western Hemisphere,” said Ranking Member Gregory W. Meeks.
“Enabled by the NRA and Republican extremists, our country’s lax gun
laws have created a vicious cycle of firearms trafficking to
international drug cartels and criminal organizations,
recklessly destabilizing countries throughout the region. Today’s report
demonstrates the severity of this phenomenon, which unleashes violence,
drug trading, and chaos in its wake. We need to stem the ‘iron river’
of firearms trafficking and pass additional commonsense gun safety
legislation. I stand ready to do so with any of my colleagues ready to
fight this fight,” said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
“As
this report shows, the overwhelming majority of guns recovered in
the Caribbean were trafficked from the United States. We need to ensure
that guns from the U.S. are not getting in the hands of the cartels and
criminal organizations. Our homeland security depends on it,” said
Congressman Bennie Thompson, Ranking Member of the House Homeland
Security Committee.
“As this nonpartisan report highlights, nearly three-quarters of
firearms recovered in the Caribbean can be traced back to the United
States, underscoring the urgent need for stronger action to combat arms
trafficking. We must strengthen screening and enforcement at our ports
and hold bad actors accountable for smuggling firearms into the region.
That’s why I introduced the Caribbean Arms Trafficking Causing Harm
(CATCH) Act — to build on the progress we made with the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act by specifically targeting illegal gun exports to the
Caribbean. Together, these efforts will help curb the flow of deadly
weapons, reduce violence, and enhance security for our neighbors and
ourselves,” said Congresswoman Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, Co-Chair of the House Haiti Caucus.
“Illicit firearms trafficking from the U.S. is fueling violence in
Caribbean countries including Haiti, destabilizing the region and
causing a growing number of people to flee their home countries for
their safety,” said Congressman Seth Magaziner, Ranking Member
of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law
Enforcement and Intelligence. “We need double down on efforts
that will crack down on illicit firearms trafficking and stop cartels
from spreading violence using U.S. weapons.”
"American firearms traffickers aren’t just fueling a gun violence
epidemic here at home, they’re also arming cartels abroad and
contributing to the drug and human trafficking operations at the border,
including the fentanyl crisis,” said Congressman Dan Goldman.
“The GAO's startling report drives home the urgent need to crack down
on the trafficking of American firearms abroad. Congress must pass
legislation like Congressman Castro's ARMAS Act and my Disarming Cartels
Act – to keep these American manufacturers from fueling the crisis at
the border.”
Background
According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Caribbean
countries accounted for six of the world’s 10 highest national murder
rates in 2021, with the majority of homicides stemming from gun
violence. Data from the Small Arms Survey indicates that legal civilian
firearm ownership rates in the Caribbean are relatively low, with gun
laws and regulations that are restrictive by global standards.
Nevertheless, the Department of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI)
has reported a significant increase in the quantity, caliber, and type
of firearms illegally trafficked from the U.S. to the Caribbean.
Particularly in Haiti, the flow of illicit firearms from the United
States has facilitated the growth of violent gangs and contributed to
increasing displacement and U.S.-bound emigration.
In 2022, Congress passed, and President Biden signed the Bipartisan
Safer Communities Act, which created new federal criminal offenses for
firearms trafficking. More than 500 defendants have been charged to date
under these new provisions. In 2023, the Department of Justice
appointed a Coordinator for Caribbean Firearms Prosecutions to elevate
regional firearms trafficking investigations and prosecutions. In
today’s report, GAO recommended that the State Department additionally
establish indicators specific to firearms trafficking in the Results
Framework for the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI), a
longstanding security cooperation partnership between the United States
and thirteen Caribbean countries. The State Department has concurred
with GAO’s recommendation.
But we've got nut jobs like Boyle taking up oxygen with nonsense about impeaching Joe?
The
left is never wrong to promote the expansion of civil rights and
liberties and that battle does not hurt election results. What does
hurt is nut jobs and not calling them out to make clear that we do not
stand with them.