Connect with us

DADT: President Obama, Your Opinion Matters, Please Clarify.

Published

on

Editor’s note:

This guest post by Scott Wooledge was originally published at Daily Kos today and is published here with his permission. Scott Wooledge writes at the Daily Kos under the handle Clarknt67.

Mr President,

There’s a matter your administration has been asked about many times, but still your position remains unclear. Your Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked again yesterday in the White House briefing room. Reporters from The Advocate and the Washington Blade pressed Gibbs on a very specific question.

Does [Defense Secretary Gates’ letter last Friday] mean the president is ruling out an endorsement of repeal this year as part of the defense authorization bill?

Gibbs: Let me get some guidance on that. I don’t know the answer to that.

I’m a little confused why your administration still seems confused. Why is the White House is still not sure of on its feelings about a plan that according to Barney Frank has been on the table since at least November, 2009? Since taking office, your administration has had 15 months to consider legislative strategy for DADT repeal.

[A video of the awkward exchange can be found here.] Why does Gibbs have to check and get back to people still? This wasn’t a new question to the administration. Not even within the time frame of this very week. There was an uproard on Friday that your adminstration was asked to respond to. The Associated Press reported that your Secretary of Defense attempted to shut down Congressional efforts to repeal DADT in this legislative session.

In a strongly worded letter obtained by The Associated Press, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen told the House Armed Services Committee that forcing policy changes on the military before it’s ready would be a mistake.

So many people appropriately assumed, surely Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates is speaking on behalf of the administration. But then, the White House response that very same evening was confusing, not clarifying:

The President’s commitment to repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is unequivocal. This is not a question of if, but how. That’s why we’ve said that the implementation of any congressional repeal will be delayed until the DOD study of how best to implement that repeal is completed.  The President is committed to getting this done both soon and right.

No one is questioning you want to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Indeed, we agree, the question is indeed “how,” as in, what legislative strategy do you endorse? The prevailing wisdom is that attaching it to the military spending budget this month is the most efficient plan that ensures its successful passage. But your statement neither confirms not denies your support for this plan. By “soon” do you mean in the month of May? Please clear up what “soon” means.

One reason many people are confused is because there has been much reporting and signs that you are actually opposed to repealing DADT in 2010. At one point, Barney Frank declared outright “That’s because they don’t want it done this year, not because they want it done separately.” Frank later said he “misspoke.” But he’s stood by his assessment that your administration is “ducking” the issue and their message is “muddled about when we should move.”

Some of the mixed messaging we’re receiving:

• Administration Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has sent letters to Congress stating administration opposition to Congress acting in 2010. Source.

• Administration Press Secretary Robert Gibbs spoke from the White House Press podium and was reported as opposing a vote to repeal in 2010. Source.

• White House correspondent Kerry Eleveld has reported, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina told repeal advocates in a meeting just four days after the State of the Union address, repeal was not going to happen in 2010. Source.

• White House has not invited Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, the most powerful, credible and vocal lobbying organization on the DADT issue, to talks about repeal for more than a year. Source.

•White House has tasked its Congressional liaisons with telling members of Congress “No vote in 2010.” Source.

You’re the President of the United States, your opinion matters a great deal. You are the leader of our country. You are the leader of the Democratic party.  Your Secretary of Defense has instructed Congress not to attach the repeal language to the Defense Authorization Bill in the month of May. Many others disagree, among them Governor Howard Dean, Senators Carl Levin (MI), Joe Lieberman (CT), Mark Udall (CO), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Reps Nancy Pelosi (CA), Patrick Murphy (PA), Barney Frank (MA), Jarod Polis (CO), and all the Veterans and LGBT advocacy groups that would appreciate having a voice in the matter.

And the fact remains, the administration still has never declared definitively, publicly, you do want repeal legislation to move forward in 2010. Barney Frank has said.

“His not being for it will give people an excuse to not vote for it. … the President’s refusal to call for repeal this year is a problem.”

 title=

Many people are confused on what to think. Just a few months ago, you stood before Congress and the nation and you said,

“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.”

Because now—the month of May—is the time to “work with Congress” and the moment is passing very quickly.

As Governor Howard Dean said, appearing on MSNBC’s the Rundown on May 4, “There’s no reason not to do this” and attaching it to the Defense Authorization Act—this month—is the way to go. The video is below, the segment begins at the 4:15 mark.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

“There’s no reason not to do this. And we have a vehicle. Carl Levin thinks he’s got the votes for this on the Defense Authorization Act, and the Defense Authorization Act has to pass. The Republicans are not going to filibuster the Defense Authorization Act, so I think now is the time. We may not have the votes for this in six months, so we have to do this now.”

Can you please help change Carl Levin’s assessment from “he thinks he has the votes” into “”he KNOWS he has the votes?”  Frankly, we don’t see any evidence of you doing any work with Congress.

Can you please tell us if you’ve called Jim Webb and asked him, personally, for his support? You were not shy about asking the LGBT community for their support 2007 and 2008. Can you tell us if you’ve called Evan Bayh and told him he’d have the party’s eternal gratitude for helping out? Can you tell us if you’ve appealed to Robert Byrd that he can help usher in a new era of diversity and inclusiveness? Have you made a bipartisan appeal to Scott Brown?

Have you called Ike Skelton and asked him what the party can do to for him ifhe’d please stop fighting Patrick Murphy’s attempts to attach repeal in the House Military Spending Budget?

If you are, indeed, supportive of repeal in 2010, I call upon you to state so clearly in public from the bully pulpit you command and without any ambiguity or confusion. If you oppose it, your honesty would also be appreciated, and your friends and allies in fighting for repeal would like to hear an alternate plan articulated that we can consider.

Thank you.

 title=

To raise awareness to the need for Presidential leadership, DADT repeal activists have launched “Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama.”The new media campaign launched in partnership with Servicemember’s Legal Defense Network,is intended to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT).

Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law.  We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal.  The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk.  It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993.  By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes!  We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

Participating blogs: 365 Gay, The Advocate, AfterElton, AmericaBlog , Ameriqueer, AKAWilliam, The Bilerico Project, BoxTurtleBulletin, BrandFabulousness, The Daily Kos, David In Manhattan, David Mixner, Fired Up Missouri, GoodAsYou, HRCBackStory, Kenneth In The 212, Lez Get Real, LGBTPOV, Michael in Norfolk, Mike Gets Real, Mile High Gay Guy, Open Left, Page One Q, Pam’s House Blend, RepealNow, SayenCroWolf, Seattle PI Stepforward, Signorile’s The Gist, The New Civil Rights Movement, The Queer Times, Towleroad, We Give A Damn.

Today’s Letter: 9/11 Patriot: “The Army taught me honesty and integrity, then forced me to lie.”

 title=

May 6, 2010

President Barack H. Obama

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

My name is Anthony Moll and I am a bisexual veteran.

I served for eight years under the discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law that has failed our nation.   I left the service just 10 weeks ago, and I can now say: this is the time, Mr. President, to push ahead and end this law.

The Senate Armed Services Committee is just a couple weeks away from holding a key vote on including repeal in the Defense budget.  The vote will be close.  Please, do whatever you can.

I have been proud to serve my country since joining the Army shortly after the attacks on September 11, 2001.  My proudest moment was raising my hand and volunteering to serve our country in its time of need.

When I enlisted in 2002, I knew what DADT said, but nothing could prepare me for what it meant.

I had never been closeted about my sexual orientation so joining meant not only keeping quiet, but also being asked to lie to those whom already knew.  While my leaders were instilling the values of honesty and integrity in me, the law in place was forcing me to do the opposite.

I knew that despite serving with distinction as a military police officer protecting fellow soldiers and their families from harm, I could face expulsion.  During my service I was hand-picked as a Phoenix Raven, an Air Force program in which only a handful of soldiers are asked to participate.

While serving as a handler in the military’s working dog program, I worked with the Secret Service in detecting explosives – working to protect you.

In 2008, I was recognized as my installation’s Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year and Joint Service Member of the Year.  Despite this distinction, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law treated me as a second-class citizen.

While I excelled at every turn, this law forced me to be dishonest with my peers, my friends and my community.  Our nation’s heroes should not be forced to carry the burden of serving in silence when we need our troops keenly focused on their missions.

In the meantime, I’m not sitting on the sidelines.  I am now working at the Human Rights Campaign on its efforts to repeal DADT now.  But advocacy alone won’t change the status quo.

Mr. President, tell Congress to move on repeal.  Please allow my brothers and sisters-in-arms to live up to the Army values of respect, honor and integrity.  Don’t let another life be ruined by a failed policy that hurts our nation as well as our heroes.

Mr. President, lift the ban.

Respectfully,

Former Staff Sergeant Anthony Moll

United States Army

CALL TO ACTION!

Fate of repeal will be decided in the next 30 days. As time grows short, repeal advocates have multiple strategies are in place. One thing they all share is a need to hear from the public the time is now. Now is the time for LGBT allies to get off the fence and call for equality for their fellow Americans.

• Contact the White House: The Servicemember’s Legal Defense Network has put out an action item: Not Another Year. They are asking people to call the White House and tell our Commander in Chief to call for repeal in 2010, repeal can’t wait until 2011. The moment is now. They say: “Our Congressional allies are not giving up. SLDN isn’t giving up. Tell President Obama not to give up either. Call the White House today. (202) 456-1414

• Contact your Senators: Tell them to support adding repeal to the Senate Defense Spending Budget: these Senators are most key: Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, Jim Webb, Robert Byrd and Scott Brown. But call them all. Show them there’s a grassroots movement to vote now. SLDN contact tool here.

• Contact your House Representatives: Tell them to support Representative Patrick Murphy’s plan to offer DADT repeal legislation as a floor amendment to the military bill. SLDN contact tool here.

• Contact Senate Armed Services Committee Chairmain Carl Levin (D-MI) and tell him Military Budget Attachment is the way to go. His office in Washington can be reached at: (202) 224-6221

• Become a citizen co-sponsor of repeal at Senator Udall’s site.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

CRIME

Former DOJ Official Says Audio of Trump Admitting to Keeping ‘War Plans’ Makes it ‘Inconceivable’ He Will Not Be Charged

Published

on

A former top U.S. Dept. of Justice official says it is “inconceivable” that Donald Trump will not be charged, based on reports Special Counsel Jack Smith has an audio recording of the ex-president admitting he was in possession of a classified Pentagon document detailing a possible attack on Iran.

“I think if this audio tape exists, this is not a question of if there are going to be charges. It’s just a question of when,” announced NBC News/MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann, the well-known former FBI General Counsel who worked at DOJ for two decades.

Importantly, Weissmann, who made his remarks on MSNBC Thursday, notes that the document in question, if it is as described, contains “war plans.”

“And the proof that we have learned just publicly is so strong. And Jack Smith is such a competent and aggressive prosecutor. It is inconceivable to me that this would not be charged, and having a tape recording of the prospective defendant admitting his possession of a classified document that he had no right to have,” Weissmann says.

RELATED: ‘Absolutely Blockbuster Evidence’: Experts Stunned Over Trump ‘Espionage Act’ Bombshell That Pressures ‘DOJ to Indict’

“And not just any classified document. I think it’s really important to remember that what he talks about reportedly, is a classified document involving something that is unbelievably sensitive, which is war plans of the United States against another country.”

Where news broke Wednesday NYU Law professor of law Ryan Goodman, a former U.S. Dept. of Defense Special Counsel, wrote: “War plans are among the most highly classified documents. Puts pressure on DOJ to indict, and a jury to convict.”

Some say, based on the audio, Trump might have been holding the document as he was being recorded at his Bedminster, New Jersey golf resort, allegedly discussing it.

“Make no mistake. This is squarely an Espionage Act case,” Goodman also said, calling the news a “bombshell.”

Explaining the gravity of the document, Weissmann notes, “this is not just taking love letters of Kim Jong Un or salacious material about the president in France. This is exactly what the Department of Justice and the intelligence community is worried about.”

Continuing to explain just how serious this is, Weissmann served up the ground rules.

“Let’s remember government documents, whether classified or not, belong to the government. They are not to be retained by a private citizen. And the former president is a private citizen. So for instance, when I was in the Department of Justice, the number of documents I could take when I left the Department of Justice would be zero. So you’re not supposed to have that possession of government documents. If they are classified, there can be an additional type of charge, but it’s not required that that material be classified or classified at a particular level.”

READ MORE: Grassley Admits He Doesn’t Care if GOP’s Accusations Against ‘Vice President Biden’ Are True or Not – He Vows to Pursue Them

“What you’re looking at here is whether the person either knowingly took the documents or knowingly retained the documents. Important this tape recording, if it exists, as recorded, is that you’ve got Donald Trump admitting that he has in his possession a classified document – doesn’t matter if it’s Secret, Top Secret, it’s classified, that itself is a crime.”

And then finally, with respect to dissemination, the recording is that there does appear to be at least some dissemination of the information because Donald Trump, although he doesn’t turn the document over or quote from it, he does talk about what is in there. In other words, the reason we’re all talking about the fact that involves war plans involving Iran is because reportedly that is what Donald Trump said was in the document. If that proves out, that is a form of dissemination.”

On social media later Thursday, Weissman tweeted, “Days, not months…” suggesting he believes an indictment of Trump would be coming sooner rather than later.

Watch Weissmann below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

Evangelical Pastor With Ties to DeSantis Denies He’s Endorsing Biblical Call for Death to Gays

Published

on

A Florida pastor with ties to GOP Governor Ron DeSantis insists his recent remarks attacking U.S. Senator Ted Cruz should not be viewed as an endorsement of the biblical call for gay people to be executed. But he’s not saying he is opposed to it either.

As The Daily Beast first reported, Tom Ascol, the senior pastor of Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida, blasted the Texas Republican Senator, who surprised many when he called Uganda’s new “Kill the Gays” law “horrific & wrong.”

“Any law criminalizing homosexuality or imposing the death penalty for ‘aggravated homosexuality’ is grotesque & an abomination. ALL civilized nations should join together in condemning this human rights abuse,” Cruz actually tweeted.

That would be the same Ted Cruz who in 2015 claimed gay people were waging a “jihad” against Christians.

Pastor Ascol, who delivered the invocation at Governor DeSantis’ second inauguration, has been called the man who could bring evangelicals from Donald Trump and deliver them to Ron DeSantis.

On Tuesday Ascol tweeted, “Tell it to God, Ted.”

READ MORE: Watch: Ron DeSantis Travels to New Hampshire to Claim Kids Are Being ‘Forced’ to Choose Pronouns

He then quoted the Book of Leviticus, writing: “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

“Was this law God gave to His old covenant people ‘horrific and wrong’?” Ascol asked.

Ascol two hours later tweeted, “Amazing how many professing Christians, even self-designated ‘conservative’ ones, are embarrassed by God’s Word. Just quote some unpopular words of God & watch what happens. Many so-called Christians react the same way that unashamed unbelievers do. It’s a commentary.”

Cruz did not reply, but some others did.

David Smith, whose Twitter bio reads, “25 yrs trusting Jesus!” replied: “We no longer live under the Levitical laws @tomascol.”

“If so, we would have to apply the same standard to adultery. (Leviticus 20:10) I agree that all of these things are sin, but where does grace come in? Jesus was clearly in no hurry to condemn in John 8:1-11.”

Pastor Ascol apparently liked the reply from Steven Hasty, which reads: “Many of you are missing the point. If you’re understanding this Tweet to mean Pastor Tom thinks we should start executing homosexuals, you’re missing it. Instead, he’s challenging the standards of Cruz. Where does Cruz derive his standards?”

READ MORE: ‘Barking’: DeSantis Mocked as His Crew Races to Protect Him From Criticism After He Attacks Reporter

Apparently whether or not it’s acceptable to execute LGBTQ people isn’t an issue (except it is, since the entire “debate” its based on Uganda’s new “Kill the Gays” law.)

“Pastor Tom” told Hasty, “You are exactly right. Some people don’t read carefully. Others, evidently, don’t reason well. Thanks for clarifying & accurately expressing what I *actually* wrote. Keep pressing on.”

Ascol didn’t say whether or not he supports the execution of LGBTQ people, he’s merely debating, as Hasty put it, “standards.”

The Daily Beast also reports, “Ascol’s tweet…certainly seemed to suggest that the execution of gay people had a biblical blessing,” and notes that “even on careful reading, most reasonable people would assume Ascol was suggesting that Uganda’s anti-gay law is not intrinsically ‘horrific and wrong.'”

Ascol, The Beast adds, “has repeatedly called for homicide charges against any woman who has an abortion for whatever reason. He has compared choosing to terminate a pregnancy to retaining a killer for hire.”

“’It’s like saying if I don’t murder someone, but I just contracted a murderer to murder someone, I’m not culpable,’ Ascol said on a Christian radio show in 2022.”

The tweet posted to the top of Ascol’s Twitter page says, “If your commitment to the authority of Scripture is limited by cultural sensitivities then it’s not really Scripture’s authority to which you are committed.”

Supporting or opposing the execution of LGBTQ people isn’t about “cultural sensitivities.”

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Barking’: DeSantis Mocked as His Crew Races to Protect Him From Criticism After He Attacks Reporter

Published

on

Continuing his official presidential campaign kickoff this week, Florida GOP Governor Ron DeSantis delivered a speech to New Hampshire voters Thursday morning but refused to take questions from the audience. Afterward, when a reporter simply asked why, DeSantis blasted him, saying repeatedly, “Are you blind?” because he was talking to individual supporters at the time.

The candidate’s campaign team immediately swarmed to protect him on social media.

NBC News senior national political reporter Jonathan Allen on Twitter posted the video (below) and wrote that DeSantis had “lashed out at a reporter for asking him about it while he was chatting with members of the crowd individually.”

At NBC News, Allen’s headline reads: “Ron DeSantis loses his temper with a reporter: ‘Are you blind?'”

Allen reports DeSantis “became noticeably agitated” and “lashed out at a reporter — twice barking ‘Are you blind?'”

The reporter who had asked DeSantis why he wouldn’t take questions was Steve Peoples, chief political reporter for The Associated Press, who tweeted: “Here in Laconia, NH at his first stop in state as presidential candidate, DeSantis speaks for 58 minutes. He takes no questions from audience.”

READ MORE: Grassley Admits He Doesn’t Care if GOP’s Accusations Against ‘Vice President Biden’ Are True or Not – He Vows to Pursue Them

“People are coming up to me, talking to me,” DeSantis said. “What are you talking about? Are you blind? Are you blind? People are coming up to me, talking to me whatever they want to talk to me about.”

Allen adds that the Florida governor’s decision to not take questions “was surprising and frustrating to some Republicans who came to hear DeSantis speak.”

On social media, many were also not impressed.

“Some of us warned that DeSantis wasn’t ready for the national media or public spotlight, that he had been coddled in Florida for far too long, and that his media team of Pushaw, Redfern, et al spend too much time trolling on Twitter and not helping him,” observed MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan.

But the question really is why wouldn’t a candidate for president, who has been in politics for over a decade, be excited to talk to prospective supporters and take their questions, especially given the history of states like New Hampshire and Iowa, where establishing that personal relationship historically has been critical to the success of a candidate’s campaign?

Former federal prosecutor, former DeSantis administration official, and former Republican Ron Filipkowski noted, “Ron DeSnowflake lost his cool again and had another freakout. This guy can’t deal with people.”

READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Blockbuster Evidence’: Experts Stunned Over Trump ‘Espionage Act’ Bombshell That Pressures ‘DOJ to Indict’

Observing DeSantis is “so out of his depth,” former journalist Ed Moltzen writes: “There are towns in New Hampshire with the official title ‘Town Moderator’ – people who assist with fielding audience questions to political candidates during forums. That’s how much open Q & A is in the political DNA of New Hampshire.”

Huffpost White House correspondent S.V. Dáte had warned, “Just watch. DeSantis’ social media arsonists will fan this interaction for days.”

And indeed, DeSantis’ crew was quick to attack, which Dáte pointed to.

Governor DeSantis’ press secretary Bryan Griffin quickly moved to falsely frame the interaction.

“This @AP reporter asked this question while @RonDeSantis was surrounded by voters in New Hampshire asking him questions and taking pictures,” Griffin tweeted. “Perfectly illustrative of the modern media shutting their eyes and ears to the truth to push their narrative.”

The question was clearly about DeSantis’ refusal to take questions from the audience, so the audience could hear his answers.

Christina Pushaw, DeSantis’ far-right former press secretary who moved to his presidential campaign as his rapid response director, responded to Griffin to attack the reporter.

“Very diplomatic of you to refer to the AP activist as a reporter!” she said.

But journalist Marcus Baram replied to Griffin: “You KNOW what the reporter meant.
Not a meet-and-greet with lots of people in a crowded room.
Questions asked in a setting where the person has time to ask the governor without distractions, and he has the time to respond with a substantive answer.
Campaigning 101.”

Watch DeSantis below or at this link.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.