Connect with us

Fire Virginia Foxx, But Not Because She Lied About Matthew Shepard



Admits She Is Trying To “Scare You To Death”



“The hate crimes bill that’s called the Matthew Shepard Bill is named after a very unfortunate incident that happened where a young man was killed, but we know that that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery.  It wasn’t because he was gay.  This – the bill was named for him, hate crimes bill was named for him, but it’s really a hoax that that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills.”

So said Rep. Virginia Foxx (R -NC) yesterday in a full session of the U.S. House of Representatives, in her bid to defeat the “Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009”, H.R. 1913, better known as the Matthew Shepard Act. There was one special guest in the House too: Judy Shepard, Matthew’s mother. Ten years ago, Matthew Shepard, a gay, 21 year-old college student who stood 5′ 4″ tall, and weighed just one hundred pounds, was lured out of a bar by two men claiming to be gay. He was robbed, pistol whipped, brutally beaten and tortured, and tied to a fence and left for dead until someone came by and found him in a coma eighteen hours later. (At first they thought he was a scarecrow.) Matthew died six days later. The two assailants did this to Shepard because he was gay. They are now in jail. These are facts. They have been proven many times over.

Via Wikipedia:

“Shepard suffered a fracture from the back of his head to the front of his right ear. He had severe brain stem damage, which affected his body’s ability to regulate heart rate, body temperature and other vital signs. There were also about a dozen small lacerations around his head, face and neck. His injuries were deemed too severe for doctors to operate. Shepard never regained consciousness and remained on full life support. As he lay in intensive care, candlelight vigils were held by the people of Laramie.”

For an elected Representative of the U.S. Congress to stand in front of hundreds of her peers, reporters, network television cameras, essentially the world, look at Judy Shepard, who, for ten years has worked to make her son’s death at least have some meaning, for Virginia Foxx to stand up and lie is inexcusable. Our elected officials are supposed to stand for our highest ideals. They are supposed to stand for truth. They are supposed to make the world a better place for all people. For Virginia Foxx to lie to the world, and to Matthew’s mother, is not only unacceptable, it is unforgivable. And it is time for Virginia Foxx to resign.

The country saw Rep. Foxx on television over and over and over last night. There are far too many pundits to quote, but I’ll let share with you perhaps the best portraiture of Rep. Foxx:

Yes, Keith Olbermann called Rep. Foxx’s statement “The most despicable thing said on the floor of the House in decades.” He goes on to say, “She is at best callous, insensitive, criminally misinformed, at worst, she is a bald-faced liar… She is not worthy to represent this country… she is our shame.

But, you say, maybe she made a mistake? Maybe she’s not that bad? Well, the Virginia Foxx of Thursday doesn’t really disagree with the Virginia Foxx of Wednesday. She released a statement today saying,

“The term ‘hoax’ was a poor choice of words used in the discussion of the hate-crimes bill,” Foxx said in a statement. “Mr. Shepard’s death was nothing less than a tragedy, and those responsible for his death certainly deserved the punishment they received.”

She goes on to say she took the information from two news sources,

“Referencing these media accounts may have been a mistake, but if so, it was a mistake based on what I believed were reliable accounts.”

So, here’s what’s wrong:

The name “Matthew Shepard”, sadly, is synonymous with the term “hate crime”. The case is over ten years old. An Amazon book search yields over 1200 results. There is no way any competent staffer could not have come up with the correct facts of the case. A bill this important and this much in the public eye warranted more than a partisan Conservapedia search. Even that biased account admits Shepard’s killers “planned to pretend to be homosexuals so that they could rob Shepard.”

Yes, “hoax” was a poor choice of words. A terrible choice of words, and a lie. Supporters of the hate Crimes Bill are not perpetrating a hoax on anyone. Even if, even if Foxx believed Shepard’s killing was not a hate crime, even if she does not believe in the concept of the term “hate crime”, to stand before the world and Judy Shepard and use that language dishonors every one in that chamber, and the people of America. Be against this important legislation if you must, but never, never abuse he memory of a beloved victim and icon. To do so harms history, your office, and yourself.

Her “apology” wasn’t an apology. It wasn’t even one of those “If I offended anyone” apologies. And by releasing her statement saying only that she made a poor choice of words, she is saying she doesn not believe that Matthew Shepard’s murder was in fact a hate crime.

Well, if her egregious comments aren’t bad enough to warrant her resignation, her performance is. Let’s look at some other comments Rep. Foxx has made:

About the Hate Crimes Bill, she said,

“If this bill becomes law, it will have a chilling effect on many law-abiding Americans’ freedom of expression.”

It “will start us down the road towards a public square that is less robust, more restrictive, and that will squelch our cherished constitutional right to free speech. … We should not live and legislate in fear of bankrupt ideas.”

Is “there such a thing as non-hateful violent crime?”

Anyone who is concerned that their actions could be punishable under a hate-crimes bill should be closely monitoring their actions.

Let’s look at how Foxx represents America’s fallen heroes, our military:

Horrendous. Yet again, Rep. Foxx ignored the mother who lost her son, this time in service to his country. Has she no shame? Has she no caring? has she no heart?

Evidently, no American icon is sacred to Foxx. Last year, also on the House floor, in an attempt to shore up her state’s lumber industry, she claimed “the origins of baseball [have] been the subject of debate and controversy.”

And her pattern of truth-transforming emerges: Regarding the October, 2008 Bailout Bill, Foxx said, “I don’t think it is too much of a stretch to say this may be the day America died.” (America hasn’t died. More people now than in the past five years feel America is on the right track.) During the presidential campaign, of Obama and Clinton, she remarked, “basically [they] are socialists, he more than she.”

An elected representative, as I said, should be a role model, an inspiration, someone who makes their people hopeful for the future, and delivers information that’s troubling with honesty and respect. On the eve of President Obama’s inauguration, in a campaign- fundraising letter, Rep. Foxx wrote, “for those of us who believe in limited government, individual liberty, free enterprise, this is a scary time.” Scary? That’s not inspiring. That’s not good leadership. That’s fear-mongering. It gets worse.

In March, just two months after her “scary” comment, Foxx “told a Charlotte Chamber of Commerce group visiting Washington, “You should fear for your country.” The Democratic majority in Congress, she warned, has become “bolder and bolder” with tax dollars and the rules of the House. “I am trying to scare you to death.”

I watched the Hate Crimes Bill debate in the House yesterday on C-SPAN. I heard all the wonderful and all the hateful comments. Rep. Foxx’s comments were the worst, though there were others that came close. Then I wanted President Obama’s press conference last night. And I thought, we have a true leader in the White House. A man who has a grasp of all the issues. A man who looks objectively at problems and tackles them with thought and facts as he attempts to gather consensus. And then I thought more about Representative Foxx. She does none of those things. She is none of those things. She is not a leader, she is a fear-monger. She doesn’t deal in facts, nor does she take time to find out what the facts are. And she doesn’t take responsibility for her mistakes.

I don’t live in North Carolina. But I do live in the United States. And, unfortunately, Representative Foxx, therefore, also represents me. And I am not going to sit by and allow any member of Congress to lie to the world without challenging them on it. Nor should anyone else. The time to replace Virginia Foxx is now. Not only for her hateful and ignorant comments about Matthew Shepard’s murder, but for all the hateful and ignorant comments she has made as the Congresswoman of North Carolina. And for her poor performance in representing those she was elected to serve.

Please take some action.

You can:

  • Call Rep. Foxx and share your thoughts about her cooments and about her performance:

Washington, DC: (202) 225-2071
Clemmons, NC: (336) 778-0211
Boone, NC: (828) 265-0240

  • Write Rep. Foxx:
  • 1230 Longworth House Office Building
    Washington, D.C. 20515

Finally, please share this article.

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.


House Freedom Caucus Republican: Trump Is Spinning Out of Control



A right-wing GOP lawmaker who has backed Donald Trump through both of his impeachments is sounding the alarm that the former president is becoming increasingly erratic which could put the 2024 general election at risk for his party.

According to a report from Politico, the closer Donald Trump gets to becoming the Republican Party’s 2024 presidential nominee the more some GOP lawmakers are growing worried that not only will they lose their shot at taking back the White House, but he’ll take down-ticket GOP candidates down with him.

The report also notes that the battle between Trump and Gov. Ron DeSantis is starting to turn off conservative voters and some are hoping that an alternative will rise from the squabble.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) was blunt about the GOP’s prospects as they stand today, telling reporters, “I’m worried about it,” and expressed fears that Trump will keep independent voters at a distance.

READ MORE: Trump lobs wild bribery claim against DOJ lawyer in all-caps midnight Truth Social rant

With a wide array of candidates having just appeared over the past weekend in Iowa, Rep. Zach Nunn (R-IA) claimed the infighting is turning voters — even Republicans — off.

“We’ll see if the two titans punching each other fires up the base, or if six months from now people are tired of both and ready for a third way,” Nunn explained before making tha blunt observation, “When you talk to Iowans, s–t-talking other candidates will not get you success. We don’t necessarily pick the winner, but we’re pretty good at smelling bulls–t.”

Kentucky Rep. Tom Massie (R), who has sided with DeSantis, is very worried about the possibility of Trump at the top of the ticket.

“I wish Trump were on Twitter. He’s in an echo chamber right now. And people don’t know how far he’s spun out from where he was,” he said in an interview. “The more visibility that we can help Trump get — when he attacks [his former White House press secretary] Kayleigh McEnany, for instance — the better.”

You can read more here.


Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading


Trump Has Been Notified He Is Target of DOJ Investigation – Insists ‘It’s Not True’ He’s Getting Indicted: Reports



Attorneys for Donald Trump reportedly have been notified the ex-president is a target of a criminal investigation into his handling of classified documents. The ex-president denies he is being indicted.

The Guardian Wednesday evening reported federal prosecutors told Trump’s attorneys last week he is a target of the long investigation that is now led by Special Counsel Jack Smith. That investigation, experts believe, could lead to obstruction of justice and Espionage Act charges.

“Trump’s lawyers were notified before they met on Monday with the special counsel Jack Smith leading the Mar-a-Lago documents case and the senior career official in the deputy attorney general’s office and made the case that prosecutors should not indict the former president in the matter,” The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports.

Politico also confirms The Guardian’s reporting, stating: “Federal prosecutors have notified former President Donald Trump in a letter that he is the target of a criminal investigation, according to a person familiar with the matter.”

Earlier Wednesday, a conservative website reported federal prosecutors had informed Trump’s attorneys he is a target and likely to be indicted. That website is run by John Solomon, who Trump named as his official representative to the National Archives last year. That move reportedly gave Solomon access to non-public administration records related to Russia, Politico reported.

READ MORE: Pence Presidential Launch Mocked for Suggesting Drag Queens Are Assaulting ‘American Values’ – With No Mention of Trump

Later Wednesday, The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman reported via Twitter she had been in touch with Trump.

“Trump tells me minutes ago he has NOT been told he’s getting indicted, when contacted. ‘It’s not true,’ he said, adding again he hasn’t done anything wrong,” Haberman tweeted at 2:40 PM.

“When I asked if he had been told he’s a target, he demurred, saying he doesn’t talk directly to prosecutors,” she added.

Haberman says she used the Solomon report as the basis for her conversation with Trump.

Less than one hour after Haberman says she spoke with the ex-president, he again posted an angry rant on his Truth Social platform.

“No one has told me I’m being indicted, and I shouldn’t be because I’ve done NOTHING wrong, but I have assumed for years that I am a Target of the WEAPONIZED DOJ & FBI, starting with the Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX, the “No Collusion” Mueller Report, Impeachment HOAX #1, Impeachment HOAX #2, the PERFECT Ukraine phone call, and various other SCAMS & WITCH HUNTS,” he rambled.

Trump made clear he expects House Republicans to protect him: “REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS MUST MAKE THIS THEIR # 1 ISSUE!!!”


Continue Reading


Mark Meadows Reportedly Agrees to Plea Deal – Attorney Denies



Mark Meadows, the former Trump White House Chief of Staff and former North Carolina Republican Congressman, reportedly has accepted a plea deal from the Dept. of Justice in exchange for pleading guilty to federal charges.

According to The Independent’s Andrew Feinberg, Meadows has also been co-operating with Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigators, which several legal experts have recently suggested was likely happening.

“Over the course of the last year, grand jurors have heard testimony from numerous associates of the ex-president, including nearly every employee of Mar-a-Lago, former administration officials who worked in Mr Trump’s post-presidential office and for his political operation, and former high-ranking administration officials such as his final White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows,” Feinberg reports at The Independent.

“Mr Meadows has already given evidence before the grand jury and is said to be cooperating with the investigation into his former boss,” the article, published Wednesday afternoon, states. “It is understood that the former North Carolina congressman will plead guilty to several federal charges as part of a deal for which he has already received limited immunity in exchange for his testimony.”

In an update to its reporting, The Independent adds Meadows’ attorney denies he would ever enter any guilty plea:

“A source who was briefed on the agreement claimed that the alleged agreement will involve the ex-chief of staff entering pleas of guilty to unspecified federal crimes but an attorney for Mr Meadows, George Terwilliger, denied that to The Independent. Mr Terwilliger said that the idea that his client would enter any guilty pleas was ‘complete bulls***’ but did not address the matter of immunity in a brief telephone conversation with this reporter.”

READ MORE: Pence Presidential Launch Mocked for Suggesting Drag Queens Are Assaulting ‘American Values’ – With No Mention of Trump

But in addition to breaking news that Meadows allegedly has accepted a plea deal, The Independent reports Trump is expected to be indicted under a portion of the Espionage Act. NCRM has not verified either of these reports.

“The Department of Justice is preparing to ask a Washington, DC grand jury to indict former president Donald Trump for violating the Espionage Act and for obstruction of justice as soon as Thursday.”

“The Independent has learned that prosecutors are ready to ask grand jurors to approve an indictment against Mr Trump for violating a portion of the US criminal code known as Section 793, which prohibits ‘gathering, transmitting or losing’ any ‘information respecting the national defence,'” The Independent adds.

In early June, former Nixon White House Counsel John Dean remarked, “Meadows has a really good lawyer, a former deputy AG, who could guide him through cooperation and a minimal plea deal of some sort.”

That attorney, George Terwilliger, played coy when asked about his client’s possible grand jury testimony. Terwilliger told The New York Times in an article published late Tuesday, “Without commenting on whether or not Mr. Meadows has testified before the grand jury or in any other proceeding, Mr. Meadows has maintained a commitment to tell the truth where he has a legal obligation to do so.”

Former Deputy Asst. Attorney General Harry Litman on Tuesday said, “I’ve already observed Terwilliger’s skill in representing Meadows. But if he got him an immunity deal–as opposed to a guilty plea + promise to cooperate deal–he is a wizard. [Would] think that Meadows is way too culpable to merit a pass, but if Smith [couldn’t] make case w/o him…”

U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), a former JAG attorney, tweeted on Tuesday:

“Mark Meadows had three options: 1. Take the Fifth Amendment. 2. Voluntarily cooperate. 3. Cooperate because he was given immunity or a plea deal. Based on the public reporting, it appears he did 2 or 3 above. This makes it more likely Donald Trump will be indicted, again.”

Meadows is a former chair of the far right House Freedom Caucus, and former chair of the House Oversight Committee.

NYU Law professor of law Ryan Goodman, a former U.S. Dept. of Defense Special Counsel, Wednesday morning said it is “NOT a big if” if Meadows has been granted immunity in exchange for his testimony.


This article has been updated to include remarks from Ryan Goodman, and The Independent’s additional reporting with comment from Meadows’ attorney.

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. 

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.