2016 likely GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush offered his opinion on Indiana’s discriminatory and anti-gay “religious freedom” lawÂ â€“ and gets so much wrong in the process.
As Americans get to know Jeb Bush, two clearÂ characterÂ traits are emerging.
First, he is cautious. Unlike some of his likely opponents, the elder Bush brother thinks before he speaks. He recognizes that every public statement, every opinion, every action, has weight, especially at this early stage.
And second, he is condescending. It’s not as clear or obvious as is his cautious and thoughtful nature, but it’s very much there.
Take Bush’s interview with Republican talk show host and law professor Hugh Hewitt yesterday.
(Hewitt, who teaches at the same university as NOM Chairman John Eastman, will conduct one of the 2016 presidential debates. He is known for his insightful and intelligent interviews, which is why Donald Trump‘s time with Hewitt was so embarrassing.)
Bush was asked to weigh in on Indiana’s highly-controversial Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which has been the top headline around the nation since Gov. Mike Pence signed it into law Thursday.
Top multi-billion dollar corporations, like Apple, Inc. and Salesforce, multi-million dollar Indiana-based companies, like Angie’s list, states like Washington and Connecticut, and cities like San Francisco and Seattle, have all come out denouncing quite strongly this anti-gay bill as discriminatory.
Does anyone think Apple’s CEO Tim Cook, or Connecticut’s Governor Dan Malloy, did not consult with attorneys before issuing strong statements?Â
Cue Jeb Bush, audio and transcript:
HEWITT: Earlier today, I watched Peter Hamby on CNN, which is on over your head, say that, and I want to quote him correctly, you donâ€™t see a lot of Republicans rallying to Mike Penceâ€™s defense right now. Thatâ€™s a direct quote from Hamby. Heâ€™s a great reporter talking about the Indiana Religious Freedom Act. What do you make of the controversy? Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, great company, had a blast at it in the Washington Post yesterday. What do you think?
BUSH: I think if you, if they actually got briefed on the law that they wouldnâ€™t be blasting this law. I think Governor Pence has done the right thing. Florida has a law like this. Bill Clinton signed a law like this at the federal level. This is simply allowing people of faith space to be able to express their beliefs, to have, to be able to be people of conscience. I just think once the facts are established, people arenâ€™t going to see this as discriminatory at all.Â
HEWITT: You know, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act was signed in 1993. Itâ€™s been the law in the District of Columbia for 22 years. I do not know of a single incidence of the sort that Tim Cook was warning about occurring in the District in the last 22 years.Â
BUSH: But there are incidents of people who, for example, the florist in Washington State who had a business that based on her conscience, she couldnâ€™t be participating in a gay wedding, organizing it, even though the person, one of the people was a friend of hers. And she was taken to court, and is still in court, or the photographer in New Mexico. There are many cases where people acting on their conscience have been castigated by the government. And this law simply says the government has to have a level of burden to be able to establish that thereâ€™s been some kind of discrimination. Weâ€™re going to need this. This is really an important value for our country to, in a diverse country, where you can respect and be tolerant of peopleâ€™s lifestyles, but allow for people of faith to be able to exercise theirs.
First, Bush has not read the bill, does not know the necessary details of the cases he’s cited, and most importantly, does not understand the context of any of this. It’s like he’s Rip Van Winkle and just woke up to this national story that’s based in two decades of events that he’s never observed first hand.
Second, if he had read Indiana’s RFRA, and the federal RFRA, he would immediately recognize how vastly different they are.
Finally, Jeb Bush thinks that once people know the facts they’ll come to support this law.
Does the former Florida governor think people haven’t read the bill, or can’t think for themselves?
The condescensionÂ is subtle, but staggering.
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.
‘I Will Not Stand by Silently’: Sotomayor Blasts SCOTUS Conservatives Over Their Latest Attack on Abortion Rights
“The Court may look the other way, but I cannot.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed outrage at her conservative Supreme Court colleagues Thursday afternoon, after the six right wing jurists went one step further in attacking the constitutional guarantee of abortion.
Voting 6-3 against a women’s health care provider the Court denied a request by Texas Women’s Health, which provides abortion services, to change jurisdictions, which according to Justice Sotomayor the Court should have done.
“The lawsuit is now stalled with the Texas Supreme Court,” Rewire News reports.
Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern, a Supreme Court expert calls Sotomayor’s dissent “stunning.”
“This case is a disaster for the rule of law and a grave disservice to women in Texas, who have a right to control their own bodies,” Sotomayor writes. “I will not stand by silently as a State continues to nullify this constitutional guarantee. I dissent.”
She begins her dissent by explaining the case:
“It has been over four months since Texas Senate Bill 8 (S. B. 8) took effect. The law immediately devastated access to abortion care in Texas through a complicated private-bounty-hunter scheme that violates nearly 50 years of this Court’s precedents.”
“Today, for the fourth time, this Court declines to protect pregnant Texans from egregious violations of their constitutional rights. One month after directing that the petitioners’ suit could proceed in part, the Court countenances yet another violation of its own commands. Instead of stopping a Fifth Circuit panel from indulging Texas’ newest delay tactics, the Court allows the State yet again to extend the deprivation of the federal constitutional rights of its citizens through procedural manipulation. The Court may look the other way, but I cannot.”
In response the Guttmacher Institute, an organization focused on sexual and reproductive health and rights, accused the Supreme Court of “once again putting ideology over the rule of law.”
Image via Shutterstock
Ivanka Trump Responds to Committee’s Invite by Saying She Called for End to Violence – Leaves Out ‘Patriots’ Part
Ivanka Trump is responding to her invitation from the January 6 Committee by issuing a statement that is being seen suggesting she has no intention of accepting. Earlier Thursday the Committee sent the former First Daughter and White House senior advisor a lengthy 11-page letter asking for her voluntary cooperation.
A statement from her spokesperson given to CNN White House Correspondent Kate Bennett references a tweet posted by Ivanka Trump the day of the attack on the Capitol – a tweet she was forced to delete after massive outrage.
“As the Committee already knows, Ivanka did not speak at the January 6 rally,” the statement reads. “As she publicly stated at 3:15pm, ‘any security breach or disrespect to our law enforcement is unacceptable. The violence must stop immediately.”
NEW: @IvankaTrump's spokesperson tells me Ivanka "just learned" of the 1/6 Committee's invitation to appear before them, but from the response below, it sounds as though she isn't planning to do so: pic.twitter.com/VXpUXDnEuP
— Kate Bennett (@KateBennett_DC) January 20, 2022
But in the actual Ivanka Trump called the insurrectionists “American Patriots,” as CNN reported that day:
— CNN (@CNN) January 6, 2021
Georgia Prosecutor Asks to Convene Special Grand Jury to Investigate Donald Trump’s Alleged Election Interference
A Georgia county district attorney has requested to convene a special grand jury to assist in her investigation of Donald Trump‘s alleged election interference.
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in a letter to the county’s Superior Court chief judge writes that her office “has received information indicating a reasonable probability that the State of Georgia’s administration of elections in 2020, including the State’s election of the President of the United States, was subject to possible criminal disruptions,” according to the Associated Press.
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (photo) was forced to release audio of then-President Trump appearing to intimidate him into fixing the election in his favor.
Trump, in the audio, can be heard berating and threatening the Republican Secretary of State, demanding he “recalculate” the losing election results and “find 11,780 votes” for him, which would have enabled Trump to falsely be declared the winner. Raffensberger refused.
“So look. All I want to do is this,” Trump told Raffensberger. “I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state.”
“There’s no way I lost Georgia,” he added, falsely. “There’s no way. We won by hundreds of thousands of votes.”
Willis told the AP the scope of her investigation “includes — but is not limited to — a Jan. 2, 2021, phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a November 2020 phone call between U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham and Raffensperger, the abrupt resignation of the U.S. attorney in Atlanta on Jan. 4, 2021, and comments made during December 2020 Georgia legislative committee hearings on the election.”
- 'FULL PANIC MODE'2 days ago
‘Incredibly Dumb’: Former Federal Prosecutor Mocks Eric Trump for Telling NY AG ‘We Are Prosecuting You’
- COMMENTARY2 days ago
Legal Experts Blast ‘Jerk Gorsuch’ for Refusing to Wear a Mask – Forcing Sotomayor to Stay in Chambers
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM3 days ago
Former Top FBI Official: ‘Concerning’ Ginni Thomas Signed Letter Saying Jan. 6 Participants ‘Have Done Nothing Wrong’
- 'STANDING ALONE'2 days ago
Top Democratic Donor Groups Pulling Endorsements – and Funding – From Sinema and Manchin Over Filibuster
- CRIME2 days ago
‘Very Ominous Development’: Legal Experts Explain Matt Gaetz Ex-Girlfriend’s Deal Could Mean a Lot of Trouble
- News1 day ago
‘You Always Ask Me the Nicest Questions’: Biden Takes Down Doocy as Press Conference Nears End
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days ago
‘Put Up, Shut Up, or Flee’: Internet Cheers 1/6 Committee Subpoenas of Trump ‘Big Lie’ Lawyers Giuliani, Ellis, Powell
- CRIME2 days ago
New York AG Finds ‘Significant Evidence’ Donald Trump Committed Fraud — and Files Motion to Force Him to Testify