Connect with us

DOJ: “What’s Past Is Prologue.” Indeed.

Published

on

Attorney General Commemorates Stonewall Wednesday, Defends DOMA Thursday

On Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder, once heralded by the gay community as someone who would work to achieve President Obama’s promise to repeal DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, on Wednesday stood in front of his Department of Justice’s LGBT employees and, as reported in an article just released by The Washington Blade, spoke to the Obama Administration’s promise of equality for all:

DOJ Pride, the gay affinity group for Justice Department employees, coordinated the celebration, which was dubbed, “What’s Past is Prologue: Honoring Our Past, Forging Our Future.”

The employees greeted Holder with a standing ovation before he gave his speech.

Holder said the title of the event “reminds us that yesterday’s sacrifices pave the way for today’s opportunities.”

“Forty years ago this June, members of the gay community said ‘enough,’ he said. “What happened in Greenwich Village, New York, gave rise to a national movement dedicated to achieving equal justice for members of the [LGBT] community. Our presence here today is a testament to that movement and to the change it achieved.”

He noted that DOJ Pride was founded 15 years ago, yet challenges remain in achieving equality.

“Let’s be honest, too many of the same obstacles that existed then remain for us to overcome,” he said. “But neither the frustrations of the past, nor the challenges of the future should deter us from our goal — our responsibility — to continue our efforts to ensure the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans.”

That was Wednesday.

Thursday, Holder’s Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss a gay marriage case the U.S. Court of Appeals is hearing. In “Obama defends DOMA in federal court. Says banning gay marriage is good for the federal budget. Invokes incest and marrying children,” John Aravosis of AmericaBlog writes,

Obama didn’t just argue a technicality about the case, he argued that DOMA is reasonable. That DOMA is constitutional. That DOMA wasn’t motivated by any anti-gay animus. He argued why our Supreme Court victories in Roemer and Lawrence shouldn’t be interpreted to give us rights in any other area (which hurts us in countless other cases and battles). He argued that DOMA doesn’t discriminate against us because it also discriminates about straight unmarried couples (ignoring the fact that they can get married and we can’t).

He actually argued that the courts shouldn’t consider Loving v. Virginia, the miscegenation case in which the Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to ban interracial marriages, when looking at gay civil rights cases. He told the court, in essence, that blacks deserve more civil rights than gays, that our civil rights are not on the same level.

And before Obama claims he didn’t have a choice, he had a choice. Bush, Reagan and Clinton all filed briefs in court opposing current federal law as being unconstitutional (we’ll be posting more about that later). Obama could have done the same. But instead he chose to defend DOMA, denigrate our civil rights, go back on his promises, and contradict his own statements that DOMA was “abhorrent.” Folks, Obama’s lawyers are even trying to diminish the impact of Roemer and Lawrence, our only two big Supreme Court victories. Obama is quite literally destroying our civil rights gains with this brief. He’s taking us down for his own benefit.

So, Attorney General Holder, in a celebration called, “What’s Past is Prologue: Honoring Our Past, Forging Our Future,” on one day claims to fight for us, the next day takes away all our arguments. I don’t think we can afford to have him or Obama leading the charge.

Joe Mirabella, in “Obama defends DOMA, we defend our families,” writes,

Mr. President you flip-flopped.  We should have known.  You started your Presidency with one of the most anti-gay Pastors in the country giving your inaugural prayer, Rick Warren.  You further hurt us by remaining silent on proposition 8.  The one moment you mentioned our advances in Iowa and other states was in jest at the correspondence dinner. You asked the Supreme Court to ignore an appeal on Don’t Ask Don’t tell for “unit cohesion”.  You did all these things and yet your promises remained on Whitehouse.gov (FYI his promise to repeal DOMA is no longer there.)  Some of us still hoped, myself included, that you would do the right thing and not defend DOMA.

I no longer have hope for you President Obama.  I no longer believe you are on my side. Your adminstration is using the arguments of our worst enemies to uphold laws that destroy our families.  I should have known. I should not have been so enchanted by your beautiful speeches and colorful campaign posters. Mr. President you are no different than the rest.  You used our community to get to the White House and now you have pushed us aside. This time is different though, because we won’t take it anymore!

It’s time to recognize that Obama has used us. Obama – while we never expected him to complete his promises within his first one hundred days, or even wthin his first year – has not ignored them, but actually broken, stomped on, and thrown his broken promises at our feet. Attorney General Holder has taken one of our most sacred pieces of history and all but used it against us. What’s past IS prologue, Mr. Holder, Mr. Obama. You too should know that better than most Americans. We certainly do.

It’s time to march. It’s time to fight for our rights. It’s time to win.

Related Topics:
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.

BREAKING NEWS

Will Santos Choose Jail? Judge Rules Names of Persons Who Provided His Half-Million Dollar Bond Must Be Made Public

Published

31 mins ago

on

June 6, 2023

By

A district magistrate judge Tuesday afternoon ruled the names of the three people who put up the $500,000 bond for U.S. Rep. George Santos (R-NY) must be made public. Santos, under indictment on 13 federal charges including money laundering, wire fraud, theft of public funds, and lying to Congress, has said he would rather go to jail than allow the names to be released to the public.

Santos pleaded not guilty and was released on a $500,000 bond on May 10. He could face up to 20 years in prison if convicted.

Law & Crime News’ Adam Klasfeld reports, “The identities of Rep. George Santos’s bond co-signers must be UNSEALED, a magistrate judge ruled. Santos has a brisk schedule for an appeal.”

Santos has until Friday at noon to appeal, or the documents and bond will be unsealed.

READ MORE: ‘Isn’t There a Beach in Mexico Waiting for You?’: Cruz Mocked for Claiming Garland Will Indict Trump Over SCOTUS Seat Loss

The embattled New York Republican Congressman’s legal team has argued “the three people who helped provide Santos’ bond ‘are likely to suffer great distress, may lose their jobs, and God forbid, may suffer physical injury,'” CBS News reported Monday evening.

“There is little doubt that the suretors will suffer some unnecessary form of retaliation if their identities and employment are revealed,” the motion also says.

“My client would rather surrender to pretrial detainment than subject these suretors to what will inevitably come,” Santos’ attorney said in the filing.

CBS News adds that the House Ethics Committee is also requesting the names of the three people who helped the Congressman make bail be made public.

Continue Reading

News

‘Isn’t There a Beach in Mexico Waiting for You?’: Cruz Mocked for Claiming Garland Will Indict Trump Over SCOTUS Seat Loss

Published

1 hour ago

on

June 6, 2023

By

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is being roundly mocked after claiming Attorney General Merrick Garland will indict Donald Trump because he “hates” the ex-president and because he is angry his early 2016 nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court was blocked.

“They hypocrisy is massive,” Sen. Cruz declared on Fox News Monday night. “And mark my words: I believe Merrick Garland will indict Donald Trump. He wants to indict Donald Trump because he hates Donald Trump. He hates him – he’s angry – Merrick Garland is angry that he wasn’t confirmed to the Supreme Court. he wants to indict him.”

Cruz, who has a law degree from Harvard, is wrong on the basic facts, and he’s being widely mocked for it.

As many are pointing out, first, Attorney General Garland appointed Jack Smith as Special Prosecutor. Smith, who was appointed as Acting U.S. Attorney by Donald Trump in 2017, will make the decision on whether or not to present charges to a grand jury. The grand jury, not Garland and not Smith, will make the decision on whether or not to indict Trump.

Also, whether or not Garland has any anger about not being confirmed by the U.S. Senate, that anger would rightly be pointed to then Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who took the unprecedented step of refusing to even allow a committee hearing to consider his nomination.

READ MORE: Jim Jordan Demands Merrick Garland Hand Over Documents Authorizing Special Counsel’s Trump Investigation

McConnell did that in early 2016, even before Trump was the GOP’s presidential nominee. Trump had nothing to do with blocking Garland’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“This is dangerous,” warned foreign policy and intelligence expert John Sipher, who spent nearly three decades in the Central Intelligence Agency’s National Clandestine Service. “He knows what he’s doing and he’s risking violence.”

After Cruz’s Fox News appearance, he posted video of his own remarks and baselessly tweeted, “Merrick Garland is the most partisan Attorney General in American history. He has corrupted the DOJ, the FBI, and the machinery of government. And now, out of nothing but a sense of hatred and political retribution, Garland is trying to indict Trump.”

Later, on Tuesday he added, “Merrick Garland has corrupted the Department of Justice and effectively turned it into an arm of the Democratic National Committee. The FBI and DOJ want to protect and insulate Joe Biden and the Biden family’s corruption.”

None of his allegations have any basis in publicly-known fact.

Cruz came under fire in 2021 after advising Trump’s legal team during the ex-president’s second impeachment, even though he would also be a juror – and supposedly impartial – in Trump’s Senate trial. In December of 2020 Cruz told Trump he would “be happy” to argue a proposed Supreme Court lawsuit designed to keep Trump in power despite having lost the election one month earlier.

Author Cliff Schecter labeled Cruz’s claims on Fox News, “Complete horses*t, which is Ted’s brand.”

READ MORE: ‘This Is It, Make No Mistake’: ‘Nihilistic Moron’ Trump Heading for Another Indictment Says George Conway

“But, if true, Garland would be doing more re his SCOTUS rejection than @tedcruz did when Trump called his wife ugly,” he added. “Ted doesn’t get why Garland wouldn’t just make hostage video phone calls for Trump’s campaign.”

Historian and author Kevin M. Kruse: “The line that ‘they’re only indicting Trump for the crimes Trump clearly did because they hate Trump’ is pathetic when it comes from Trump himself, but Jesus Christ, it is twelve kinds of sad when it comes from one of his lickspittles.”

Reporter and award-winning columnist David Lazarus noted, “Republicans keep insisting Trump is being investigated and prosecuted because people in power hate him. That’s one theory. Or Trump is being investigated and prosecuted because he kept breaking the law.”

Lincoln Project co-founder Jennifer Horn, a former New Hampshire Republican State Committee chair, blasted Cruz.

“I’m sure it has nothing to do with classified documents or inciting an insurrection,” she said, referring to the two major portions of Smith’s investigation. And referring to Cruz’s infamous exit during a state-wide crisis when he hightailed out to Cancun, she asked: “Isn’t there a beach in Mexico waiting for you?”

Watch video of Cruz above or at this link.

Continue Reading

News

Jim Jordan Demands Merrick Garland Hand Over Documents Authorizing Special Counsel’s Trump Investigation

Published

3 hours ago

on

June 6, 2023

By

House Republican Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan has sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding documents related to Special Counsel Jack Smith‘s two-tiered investigation into Donald Trump.

Chairman Jordan’s letter (below) comes just days before Smith’s grand jury is expected to reconvene after a short hiatus, and one day after Trump’s legal team met with DOJ investigators, including Smith.

Jordan is asking Garland to hand over an unreacted, full version of the memo that authorized Smith’s appointment as Special Counsel to investigate Trump, along with all supporting documentation. NBC News first reported on the existence of the letter.

Jordan, a staunch ally of Donald Trump, is claiming his request is part of his committee’s investigation into “the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) unprecedented raid of President Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago on August 8, 2022.”

READ MORE: ‘This Is It, Make No Mistake’: ‘Nihilistic Moron’ Trump Heading for Another Indictment Says George Conway

The letter in part states, “we write to request an unredacted copy of the memorandum outlining the scope of Mr. Smith’s probes regarding President Trump and any supporting documentation related to his appointment as special counsel. Accordingly, please provide the Committee with an unredacted copy of the memorandum outlining the scope of Special Counsel Smith’s investigations pursuant to his appointment on November 18, 2022, and any other document describing, listing, or delineating the authority and jurisdiction of the special counsel as soon as possible, but no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 20, 2023.”

Legal experts across the board anticipate Smith will ask the grand jury to indict the ex-president on a litany of federal felonies centered on his unlawful removal from the White House, retention, refusal to return, and possible sharing of classified and top secret documents. That indictment appeared even more likely after it as reported Smith has audio of Trump admitting he held on to a Pentagon document he knows is classified, and allegedly said he would like to be able to share it. Some experts say an indictment could come as early as this week.

Read Jordan’s letter below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.