Connect with us

Speaker Paul Ryan’s Ugly Lie (Video)

Published

on

Standing Up for LGBT People and Equality Is ‘Sabotage’ Speaker of the House Says

For a month now the U.S. House of Representatives have been embroiled in a battle over LGBT civil rights. It started when Rep. Steve Russell drafted and passed an amendment to the nation’s critical military spending bill that would gut and nullify President Barack Obama’s 2014 executive orders banning anti-LGBT discrimination by any federal contractor. The Russell Amendment would carve out special rights for anyone who could claim a deeply-held religious belief that LGBT people should be discriminated against. The Russell Amendment literally would provide taxpayer money to enable and support legalized discrimination.

Democratic Congressman Sean Patrick Maloney of New York came up with a solution. His bill would nullify the Russell Amendment, by codifying the President’s executive orders into law. As the full House voted, and time ran out, Maloney’s legislation passed.

But that was unacceptable to the Republican-led House.

Top leaders, supported by Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, held the clock and the votes open, and colluded with at least seven Republicans who had voted for Maloney’s bill, to change their votes. They did, and the measure went from passing to failing.

Usually, when the majority party bends the rules and allows vote changes, Representatives are required to walk up to the clerk to change their votes. It’s a bit of decorum and integrity. Even that was too much for Speaker Ryan’s thugs, who allowed the seven saboteurs to kill the bill anonymously, or so they thought, from their desks. Democrats dug into the record and identified the anti-LGBT lawmakers, later vowing to unseat them.

As the votes were being changed and equality was being thwarted, House Democrats shouted, “Shame!, Shame!, Shame!,” but to no avail.

The bill was dead.

Or so we thought. 

Rep. Maloney introduced his bill and attached it Wednesday night to another spending bill, a water and energy infrastructure bill. It passed, and even the maleficent seven voted in favor of the measure.

But Rep. Ryan’s House henchmen were not done.

Also on Wednesday, two anti-LGBT bills were attached to the infrastructure spending bill.

One effectively overrides the Maloney bill, creating religious carve outs and allowing federal contractors to, yes, you guessed it, discriminate against gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people, in Jesus’ name.

The other would ban the federal government from withholding previously dedicated funds from the State of North Carolina in response to its illegal and unconstitutional anti-LGBT law, HB2.

Both of those bills passed.

But the infrastructure bill, a massive umbrella under which the two anti-LGBT and the one pro-equality bills were nestled, did not.

Georgia Rep. Rick Allen Thursday morning told his fellow Republicans if they vote for it — because of its pro-LGBT part — they would be “going to hell.” He also read from the Bible and quoted Scripture. Some called it a prayer. 

Some of his fellow Republicans, a few who had voted for Rep. Maloney’s bill, according to reports, were so offended they walked out.

Later Thursday morning the spending bill failed — a bipartisan decision, you could say.

Which brings us to Speaker Paul Ryan’s ugly lie.

Holding his weekly press conference, Rep. Ryan warmed up the crowd by denouncing the long lines at airports and announcing legislation to help fix the TSA backlog.

Then he went for the kill.

Speaking about the House’s $37.4 billion infrastructure bill, which included the three LGBT-related amendments, Speaker Ryan attacked the Democrats, claiming they would rather scuttle the bill, and compromise America’s infrastructure, than allow it to pass.

“I want to talk about the vote we just had on the energy and water appropriations bill,” Speaker Ryan told reporters, “this is a very good bill,” he said, despite it failing 305-112.

“It improves our energy infrastructure. It enhances our national security. It uses the power of the purse to stop harmful regulations,” Ryan proclaimed.

“But what we learned today is that the Democrats were not looking to advance an issue but to sabotage the appropriations process,” he insisted. “The mere fact that they passed their amendment, then voted against the bill containing their amendment, proves this point.”

Now. let’s think about that last statement for a moment.

Voting for an amendment that protects LGBT people, but voting against the full bill because it harms LGBT people is “sabotage”?

Of course Democrats and even moderate Republicans would vote for a bill that advances equality, and of course they would vote against one that reverses it, even harms LGBT people. That’s not sabotage, that’s just common sense. 

“The mere fact that they passed their amendment, then voted against the bill containing their amendment, proves this point.”

That’s so illogical, so easily disproven, so embarrassingly false, of course it’s a lie, and an ugly lie at that.

Welcome to Speaker Ryan’s Republican House.

 

Image: Screenshot via Speaker Paul Ryan/YouTube

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.

News

Trump Desperate to Keep Any Possible Criminal Evidence From Supreme Court: Legal Expert

Published

17 hours ago

on

March 25, 2023

By

Donald Trump’s decision to allow one of his lawyers to speak before a grand jury on Friday morning, instead of appealing all the way to the Supreme Court, may have been made out of fear of what the justices on the nation’s highest court might see if they reviewed the case.

According to MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin, under normal circumstances, the former president would have dragged out a legal fight over attorney-client privilege that would have kept attorney Evan Corcoran from testifying under oath about Trump’s possession of government documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort that led to the FBI showing up with a warrant.

As Rubin notes, the fact that Trump let Corcoran testify over three hours raised eyebrows.

“For one, yes, it is indeed unusual, if not unheard of, for a lawyer to be litigating against a party one day and then testifying under court-ordered examination by that same party the next one,” she wrote before suggesting Trump and his legal team were looking at the long game when he might need the predominantly conservative Supreme Court to lend him a helping hand.

RELATED: Revealed: Emails show how Trump lawyers drove Michael Cohen to turn on the president

Writing, “Trump has made clear he believes this Supreme Court — controlled by conservative justices, three of whom he appointed — owes him one,” she added, “My hunch is that Trump’s team let Corcoran’s testimony happen because of what’s likely involved in any request to pause, much less, review a crime-fraud-related ruling: the evidence.”

“Put another way, if Trump had petitioned the Supreme Court to stay Corcoran’s testimony and document production, the justices would have seen some, if not all, of what Judge Howell and the three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit have already reviewed: proof that Trump misled Corcoran and engaged in criminal conduct,” she elaborated.

Rubin went on to note that Trump would likely appeal any conviction to the Supreme Court, writing, “And for someone whose one last hope, if he is ultimately charged or tried by any of the multiple entities now investigating him, is that same Supreme Court, letting the justices see evidence of his alleged crimes now would be a bridge too far.”

“Trump can’t afford to lose the Supreme Court yet,” she suggested.

You can read more here.

Continue Reading

News

No TX Congressional Republican Will Say If They’re Attending Trump’s Rally in Waco – Will He Have Trouble Filling Seats?

Published

1 day ago

on

March 24, 2023

By

Donald Trump‘s Saturday campaign rally in Waco, Texas, falls during the 30th anniversary of the 51-day siege that community is known for, when 86 people died after a failed ATF raid on an anti-government religious cult suspected of illegally stockpiling firearms amid allegations of sexual abuse, statutory rape, and polygamy.

Experts have been warning for a week that Trump’s choice of Waco, synonymous with violent anti-government extremism, was no accident. His rhetoric this week, including most recently Friday when he warned of “potential death & destruction” should he be indicted, has been seen as encouraging violence.

NCRM was among the first news outlets to report experts’ concerns over Trump’s choice to hold a rally in Waco during the 30th anniversary of the deadly siege.

Not a single congressional Republican from Texas will say they are attending, nor has the town’s GOP mayor, according to a report from Insider, which contacted over two dozen Republican lawmakers and other elected officials.

“None of the 30 Texas Republicans Insider contacted about the event said they were going,” Insider reveals.

“Most of the 30 GOP members contacted about Donald Trump’s inaugural visit to the site of a 30-year-old standoff between cult leader David Koresh and federal authorities did not respond to requests for comment about whether they intended to rally with the scandal-plagued candidate and perhaps say a few kind words,” Insider reports.

“Rep. Pete Sessions, a Waco native who now represents the surrounding 17th congressional district, praised Trump for shining a light on his hometown but said he’d have to miss the spectacle,” Insider adds. “Aides to Rep. Troy Nehls, one of the four House Republicans from Texas who have formally backed Trump’s 2024 run, told Insider he wouldn’t be heading to Waco because of a prior commitment in Washington, DC, this weekend.”

READ MORE: ‘Utter Cowardice’: Jim Jordan Blasted for Telling Reporter He Can’t Read Trump’s Violence-Threatening Post Without Glasses

Meanwhile, in addition to guest list challenges – the campaign refused to tell Insider who the guest speakers will be – Trump may have trouble filling seats.

Mary Trump, the ex-president’s niece who opposes him, has been running a campaign to get anti-Trump Americans to “sign up” for tickets to the Saturday rally, in the hopes of being able to turn away supporters.

“Donald has a rally in Waco this Saturday,” she also said via Twitter. “It’s a ploy to remind his cult of the infamous Waco siege of 1993, where an anti-government cult battled the FBI. Scores of people died. He wants the same violent chaos to rescue him from justice.”

“But we can stop him. If we book the 50,000+ venue, we can make sure most of the seats are empty when the traitor takes the stage,” she said. “We can no longer fail to hold powerful men accountable for their crimes against our country.”

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

‘Utter Cowardice’: Jim Jordan Blasted for Telling Reporter He Can’t Read Trump’s Violence-Threatening Post Without Glasses

Published

2 days ago

on

March 24, 2023

By

Countless GOP lawmakers over the years have professed ignorance over Donald Trump’s tweets as reporters ask them to respond, often claiming they hadn’t read them, but House Republican Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan took that performance to a whole new level Friday afternoon.

NBC News senior national political reporter Sahil Kapur asked the Ohio Republican congressman to weigh in on Trump’s social media post threatening “potential death & destruction” if he gets indicted.

“Jordan said he hasn’t seen Trump’s post,” Kapur said via Twitter. “When I showed [it] to him on my phone, he said he can’t read well without his glasses.”

“He added he’s reviewing DA Bragg’s letter,” Kapur added.

READ MORE: ‘Big Shoe Drops’: Bad Day for Trump on Multiple Fronts in Special Counsel’s Grand Jury Probes

Jordan, who didn’t need glasses to appear on Fox Business just two days ago (photo) is getting blowback.

VICE News Deputy DC Bureau Chief Todd Zwillich explained the progression.

“The stages of ignoring incitement,” he tweeted. “2016: I don’t respond to tweets —> 2018: I havent seen the tweet —-> 2023: I literally can’t see the tweet.”

“Utter cowardice,” declared former GOP Congressman Joe Walsh. “Not at all the @Jim_Jordan I knew & served with in Congress 10 yrs ago. Or…maybe it is.”

“The sheer dishonesty and cowardice of these people,” lamented MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan, echoing Walsh’s remarks.

Government watchdog group Citizens for Ethics said the “extent to which Trump’s backers in Congress are going to not condemn [his] calls for violence are ludicrous.”

RELATED: Ninth Wrestler Comes Forward to Say Jordan ‘Snickered’ When He Complained of Sexual Abuse: Report

Some tied Jordan’s inability to see the post to his apparent inability to see or remember all the Ohio State wrestlers who say they complained to Jordan when he was their assistant coach, about being sexually harassed or assaulted by the team doctor. To this day despite numerous reports and people publicly coming forward, Jordan denied it ever happened.

“Apparently, Jim Jordan is unable to see wrestlers being sexually abused or Donald Trump social media posts,” attorney and Republican turned Democrat Ron Filipkowski tweeted.

“Well, @Jim_Jordan has shown before that he has trouble seeing threats right in front of his nose, so this checks out,” tweeted historian Kevin M. Kruse.

But Jordan’s Democratic colleagues on the Judiciary Committee may have served up the best response: “Why do you need your glasses to condemn violence @Jim_Jordan?”

READ MORE: ‘Pits Parents Against Parents’: House Republicans Pass Anti-LGBTQ Florida-Style K-12 ‘Parents’ Bill of Rights’

 

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.