Connect with us

NEWS: McCotter McQuits, Fat Vs. Gay, Dump Starbucks, Cain’s Mistress, Boehner’s Bull

Published

on

Above is “a comparison of the unemployment rates in the first 42 months of the Reagan and Obama presidencies.”

Republican U.S. Congressman Thaddeus McCotter, who ran one of the strangest campaigns for president, has just resigned from office, effective immediately. Not only did he get nowhere near to the GOP presidential nomination, he was table to get even enough signatures to run for his own Congressional seat. But his statement explaining why he is resigning will go down in history as curious as, well, Thaddeus McCotter. Michigan needs a new Congressman! But what’s especially interesting is what friend of the blog Jeremy Hooper notes: “Odd fact about Thad McCotter as he abruptly resigns: Until Mitt,he was highest all-time earner on NOM spinoff ActRight.”

“Seven months after the whole spectacle went down, Herman Cain has continued his career as a political eccentric — writing books, landing speaking engagements and hosting his own Web TV network. Meanwhile, I have been called a whore, a liar and a home wrecker. No one will employ me,”  says Ginger White, who allegedly had an extramarital affair with Herman Cain. (We’re not doubting that she did, mind you…)

“The first time I openly laughed at a transgender person I was 12 years old. It was February, but I grew up in Tucson, Arizona, so the movie theater in which I was seeing Ace Ventura: Pet Detective had the AC on. The laughter helped me shake off the chill,” writes Cord Jefferson, a senior editor at the newly-re-formed Good Magazine, in, “How I Learned to Hate Transgender People.” (Don’t worry — it ends well.)

“A U.S. Chamber of Commerce survey showed that 74 percent of small businesses contend that [Obamacare] will make job creation at their companies even more difficult,” writes Speaker of the House John Boehner, the man on any given day just two heartbeats away from the presidency or two yards away from a scotch. What Boehner forgot to mention, in this op-ed that appeared in the same conservative publication that yesterday printed Ted Nugent’s almost-treasonous suggestion that the South should have won the Civil War so we wouldn’t have Obamacare, is that those 74 percent of small businesses that contend that Obamacare will make job creation at their companies even more difficult is because he and his Republican cronies have been jamming that idea down their throats for the past three years.

GetEQUAL stands with Brad Pitt — “not with his mother’s hateful rhetoric” – and they want to place an ad in Brad Pitt’s mother’s local newspaper telling her she, well, has hateful rhetoric. Cough up a few bucks if you can.

“If you indulge your body with sex via pornography, affairs, strippers or hookers, and your secrets are exposed, you will not be preaching on Sunday. Sexual sin is not tolerated in our churches. If clergy are caught in these things, they’re disqualified,” writes Craig Gross, pastor and founder of XXXchurch.com, in a CNN op-ed, motivated by CNN’s Anderson Cooper coming out, that adds:

“What if you indulge your body with food? Well, then you can pastor some of the largest churches on the planet and have the most successful broadcasts on the religious channels and sell a lot of books.”

Pastor Gross tries to say that being fat and being gay are equally sinful, but fails, miserably, at the real issue: there’s nothing wrong — or unhealthy — with being gay.

“Anderson Cooper and Frank Ocean both made public revelations about their sexuality in the past week … but Ocean’s could become the much more significant announcement,” writes friend of the blog Rod McCullom at Ebony. “Ocean is a rising star in hip-hop— where perceptions of Black masculinity are dominated by hyper-sexuality, thug swagger and a deep homophobia. Neither hip-hop nor R&B has ever boasted an openly gay or bisexual mainstream male star.” Go read: “GAME CHANGER: Why Frank Ocean’s Coming Out is More Significant than Anderson Cooper’s.”

“Truth Wins Out has harshly criticized a sham study on gay parents by University of Texas researcher Mark Regnerus. We also launched a petition that has gathered more than 3,600 signatures urging University of Texas to investigate Regnerus for academic fraud, since his rhetoric surrounding his study results do not match his data — and his funding came from virulently right wing sources. However, the individual really driving the campaign against this quack study is Scott Rose, who is writing for the New Civil Rights Movement,” writes (birthday boy!) Wayne Besen, founder of Truth Wins Out, in a very welcome post, “Regnerus Sham Study Under Intense Scrutiny After Scott Rose and Scientists Challenge Bogus Results.” Yes, that’s our Scott Rose, the excellent New Civil Rights Movement writer who almost single-handedly has taken on and taken down any credibility anyone might have given to the flawed Regnerus “study.” We’re very, very proud of Scott. And very grateful to Besen for acknowledging his excellent work.

Conservative commentator George Will doesn’t believe Chief Justice John Roberts will vote for gay marriage, but added that the Supreme Court would side with advocates of marriage equality,” writes Carlos Santoscoy in OnTop. And by “Conservative,” he means, really conservative.

The owner of an Akron restaurant where President Barack Obama stopped for breakfast this morning died, apparently of a heart attack, shortly after meeting him,” a report in the Akron Beacon Journal reports:

“I’m sure this was her highlight,” said Frankie Adkins, Harris’ sister, who lives in Tulsa, Okla., and heard about her sister’s sudden death from family members. “She loved Obama.”

Zack Ford at Think Progress publishes the National Organization For Marriage‘s embarrassing signature numbers for their embarrassing Dump Starbucks campaign.

This: 50 attacks on LGBT rights.

Lastly, just because there’s really no comment we can make:
Drudge Promotes Story From Conspiracy Website Claiming Obama Plans To Murder Conservative Journalists

Image, top, courtesy of Hamilton Place Strategies

Image of Frank Ocean by Sweisscheese via Wikipedia

Image of Thaddeus McCotter at ActRight

 

 

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.

News

‘Giddily Bouncing Off the Walls’: Legal Experts Predict Trump Conviction

Published

on

With the jury dismissed for the day after more than four hours of deliberations and a series of notes to Judge Juan Merchan, legal experts are predicting Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg will win his case against Donald Trump, and see jurors convict the ex-president on 34 criminal counts. The ex-president is on trial for allegedly falsifying  business records as a means to cover-up a conspiracy scheme to promote his election to the Presidency by “unlawful means.”

“If I were in the DA’s office I’d be giddily bouncing off the walls right now,” attorney George Conway wrote on social media late Wednesday afternoon.

Minutes later attorney Tristan Snell, who helped secure the New York Attorney General’s $25 million settlement in the Trump University civil case, also predicted a likely Trump conviction:

“BREAKING: Trump jury asks for testimony transcripts, including 3 sections from David Pecker and 1 section from Michael Cohen. VERY bad sign for Trump that David Pecker’s testimony landed with the jury and is something they want to focus on. Jury is likely leaning toward GUILTY.”

READ MORE: ‘No Moral Compass’: Legal Experts Call for Intervention After Alito Refuses to Recuse

National security attorney Brad Moss, appearing on CNN Wednesday afternoon said, “I don’t expect a hung jury but if we get into Friday, or even next week Monday, it certainly would appear that would be more likely what’s going on. But if we have a decision tomorrow, my expectation is it will be a guilty verdict.”

Yale Law School professor of law and professor of philosophy Scott Shapiro offered this short statement:

If Donald Trump is convicted he may be the least surprised, as he appeared to predict a conviction Wednesday morning: “Mother Theresa could not beat these charges,” he told reporters.

The jury returns Thursday at 9:30 AM.

See the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Biggest Felony in American History’: Prosecutor’s Closing Argument Against Trump Praised

Image via Shutterstock

 

Continue Reading

News

‘No Moral Compass’: Legal Experts Call for Intervention After Alito Refuses to Recuse

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has formally refused to recuse from any and all cases involving indicted ex-president Donald Trump or the January 6, 2021 attack on the seat of the American government and American democracy itself. Legal experts and elected Democrats, including the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has oversight responsibility of the nation’s highest court, have demanded the George W. Bush-appointed jurist’s recusal. Now, some legal experts say either the Chief Justice or the Senate Judiciary Committee must intervene.

Justice Alito is standing by his now thoroughly debunked story about why a flag associated with the insurrection and the “Stop the Steal” conspiracy was flying at his home just three days before Joe Biden was inaugurated president, and a different, Christian nationalist flag also associated with those efforts to overthrow the government and disenfranchise 81 million Americans was flying at another of his homes.

Responding to a letter sent to Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Alito in his own letter wrote he was “required” to reject Democrats’ request and not recuse himself, despite numerous legal experts citing both law and precedent, declaring he at least should, or must, recuse himself.

Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern, who writes about the courts and the law, pushed back on Justice Alito’s claim.

READ MORE: ‘Biggest Felony in American History’: Prosecutor’s Closing Argument Against Trump Praised

“Alito reads the Supreme Court’s totally voluntary, non-binding ethics guidelines to impose a seemingly mandatory ‘obligation’ that he sit on any case he’s not recused from.”

Professor of law Steve Vladeck, a CNN contributor, appeared to take that one strep further: “Justice Alito’s insistence in his letters to Congress that he has an ‘obligation to sit’ in the January 6 cases *because* the Code of Conduct says so is an interesting data point for those who have insisted that the Code doesn’t impose *any* requirements on the justices.”

Journalist, author, and foreign policy, national security and political affairs analyst and commentator David Rothkopf observed, “Alito, by saying he should not recuse, demonstrates clearly why he should not be on the court in the first place.”

The New York Times’ Michael Barbaro notes, “As with his statement to the NYT, Alito in his response to Congress never disavows the meaning of the upside down flag that flew over his house for days or its link to the Jan 6th riot/Stop The Steal movement that was at its height during this period. Notably, Alito does deny that link with the Appeal To Heaven flag, but not the upside down flag.”

Saying Alito is “really is a piece of work,” attorney and former FBI special agent Asha Rangappa suggested the justice is flipping the script: “Alito does a Reverse Uno, suggesting that people calling for his recusal are trying to influence the outcome of cases before the Court.”

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a government watchdog, noted: “That Justice Alito responded *at all* to the demand that he recuse from these cases shows the gravity of his misconduct. But this response changes nothing about the ethical issue here. Since he will not recuse on his own, Chief Justice Roberts should intervene.”

READ MORE: Supreme Court ‘Puppetmaster’ Slammed Over Report He’s Flying Alito’s ‘Theocratic’ Flag Again

Constitutional law scholar and professor of law Eric Segall served up a scathing assessment: “To be clear, if we found a love letter written to Donald Trump from Sam Alito saying, ‘Can’t wait till you’re back in office,’ Alito still would not recuse. He has no moral compass at all.”

The Atlantic’s Ronald Brownstein suggests Democrats will need to take further action: “Alito’s dismissive response, which [Chief Justice John] Roberts is unlikely to challenge in any way, has placed the ball squarely in the court of @SenatorDurbin, @SenSchumer and Senate Democrats.”

CNN’s Edward-Isaac Dovere, posting a screenshot of Donald Trump’s response to the justice’s decision to not recuse, writes: “Trump thanks Alito for not recusing himself from cases pending about Trump after Alito’s being criticized for a flag flying at his house that has been interpreted as a sign of support for Trump.”

See the social media post above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Wildly Lawless’: Judge Cannon’s Removal Predicted by Top Legal Scholar

Continue Reading

News

‘Doesn’t Know Most Basic Rule’: Conway Blasts Cannon Over ‘Perplexed’ Reaction

Published

on

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon suffered more strong criticism, this time from attorney George Conway who blasted the Trump-appointed jurist over a New York Times report in which, he said, she appeared to not understand the basics of a criminal rule.

Judge Cannon is already under fire after likely delaying until after the 2024 presidential election one of the most important cases in American jurisprudence – an ex-president, his party’s presumptive nominee, running again for the White House, charged under the Espionage Act with unlawful removal and retention of some of the nation’s top classified documents, including nuclear secrets.

On Tuesday, a top legal scholar declared a recent Cannon ruling against Special Counsel Jack Smith’s motion to expand the limits on the ex-president’s release, “wildly lawless.” He also predicted it would result in her removal from the Trump Espionage Act case, also known as the classified documents case.

On Wednesday, attorney Conway responded to a portion of that New York Times profile of Judge Cannon.

READ MORE: ‘Liar’: Critics Question Alito’s Integrity After His Insurrection Flag Story Disintegrates

“The portrait that has emerged so far,” The Times reported, “is that of an industrious but inexperienced and often insecure judge whose reluctance to rule decisively even on minor matters has permitted one of the country’s most important criminal cases to become bogged down in a logjam of unresolved issues.”

“Regardless of her motives, Judge Cannon has effectively imperiled the future of a criminal prosecution that once seemed the most straightforward of the four Mr. Trump is facing,” The Times continued. “She has largely accomplished this by granting a serious hearing to almost every issue — no matter how far-fetched — that Mr. Trump’s lawyers have raised, playing directly into the former president’s strategy of delaying the case from reaching trial.”

Conway was responding to an exchange “that occurred last week when Judge Cannon was debating with Jay Bratt, one of the prosecutors, about a common theory of legal liability called the Pinkerton rule. The rule holds that all members of a conspiracy can be held accountable for any crimes committed by their co-conspirators.”

“Mr. Bratt said the rule would likely apply to Mr. Trump’s dealings with his two co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, employees of Mar-a-Lago who have been accused of conspiring with the former president to obstruct the government’s repeated efforts to retrieve the classified materials,” The Times’ story stated. “Judge Cannon seemed a bit perplexed and asked Mr. Bratt what authority he intended to rely on in applying the Pinkerton rule. Mr. Bratt seemed almost sheepish in having to lay things out for her so simply.”

READ MORE: Supreme Court ‘Puppetmaster’ Slammed Over Report He’s Flying Alito’s ‘Theocratic’ Flag Again

“’So the authority is Pinkerton,’ he said, and launched into a quick explanation.”

Conway, appearing to express shock, wrote: “There are no words for this. Judge Cannon doesn’t know the most basic rule governing criminal conspiracies.”

See the social media post above or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.