Connect with us

News

‘Save Chick-Fil-A’ Bill’s Author Was Lawyer for Anti-LGBT Hate Group and Named Most Homophobic Legislator

Published

on

Once Invoked Nazis to Defend Anti-Gay Legislation

Texas is now all-but-certain to pass the “Save Chick-fil-A” bill which would deliver special religious protections to people and organizations so they can discriminate against LGBTQ people without fear of government reprisals.

In other words, it enables state-supported discrimination under the cloak of “religious freedom.” The legislation now needs just one more vote each in the House and Senate. The governor is expected to sign it.

While news of the bill, SB 1978, is slowly growing, news about the bill’s top sponsor in the House has been largely absent.

Texas Republican State Rep. Matt Krause, the “Save Chick-fil-A” bill’s author, was first elected in 2012. He is a graduate of San Diego Christian College and Liberty University School of Law, the same Liberty University run by Trump BFF Jerry Falwell Jr. Both are private evangelical Christian colleges.

Krause is among the most conservative lawmakers in the Texas House. And in 2013 Equality Texas named Krause Texas’ Most Homophobic Legislator.

In 2015, as the Supreme Court was gearing up to hand down its ruling that would recognize same-sex couples have the right to marry, Krause tried to pass a different “religious freedom” bill, essentially a “license to discriminate.” And to do so he “invoked the Nazis,” as HuffPost reported at the time, “to fend off criticism that the proposal could be used to facilitate discrimination.”

That bill would have built religious discrimination into the Texas state constitution.

In 2011, as an attorney for Liberty Counsel, an anti-gay hate group according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, Krause defended a Texas high school student who claimed his “religious beliefs” allow him to make anti-gay comments in class. “I said, ‘I’m Christian and, to me, being homosexual is wrong,'” the teen said, reportedly also with “No gays in Christianity.”

Krause called the teen’s hateful words “benign,” and said voicing his anti-gay beliefs was one of “the issues that were important to him.”

 

Image via Facebook

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

There Was Another Sexual Misconduct Accusation About Brett Kavanaugh – The FBI Refused to Investigate

Published

on

NYT Reveals FBI Also Refused to Interview 25 Potential Witnesses in Previously Reported Allegation of Sexual Assault

The New York Times published a bombshell story Saturday night, reporting that a man had contacted the FBI during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Brett Kavanaugh. He alleged, according to the Times, that Kavanaugh was at a drunken dorm party with his pants pulled down, and “friends pushed [Kavanaugh’s] penis into the hand of a female student.

The witness “notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate.”

The Times also took a deep dive into the public allegations made by Deborah Ramirez during the Kavanaugh hearings.

“She and some classmates had been drinking heavily when, she says, a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at her, prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it,” which had been previously reported.

“During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been ‘the talk of campus.’ Our reporting suggests that it was,” the Times reveals.

“At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time.”

The Times reports the FBI did not investigate, despite the Kavanaugh hearings having been put on hold, supposedly to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct, including alleged sexual violence.

“Ms. Ramirez’s legal team gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the bureau — in its supplemental background investigation — interviewed none of them, though we learned many of these potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I. on their own,” the Times continues.

Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.” But the Republican-controlled Senate had imposed strict limits on the investigation. “‘We have to wait to get authorization to do anything else,’” Bill Pittard, one of Ms. Ramirez’s lawyers, recalled the agents saying. “It was almost a little apologetic.”

The Times chose to hide this reporting in its opinion pages as “news analysis.”

This bombshell reporting comes on the heels of another bombshell: Attorney General Bill Barr is giving a prestigious Dept. of Justice award, generally reserved for agents whose investigations uncover, say, attempted terrorism. This year the recipients will be those FBI agents who, as the Times reported separately, worked “to support the nomination” of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh was confirmed by a 50-48 vote in the Senate.

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

Continue Reading

News

DOJ Obstructs House Impeachment Inquiry – Asks Federal Court to Block Release of Mueller Grand Jury Files: Report

Published

on

In a stunning move iAttorney General Bill Barr’s Dept of Justice late Friday afternoon filed a 40-page brief with a federal court, declaring the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment inquiry is not an impeachment inquiry, in an attempt to block release of files related to the Mueller probe.

It appears to be an unprecedented act, in which the top law enforcement agency is attempting to block Congress from carrying out its constitutional duties.

The DOJ is attempting to block the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury files, according to Politico. House Democrats have frequently said they cannot make an impeachment decision without the underlying materials from Mueller’s exhaustive investigation.

Politico’s Kyle Cheney and Andrew Desiderio broke the story, heralding the developments via Twitter:

UPDATE:

 

Developing…

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

Continue Reading

News

Lawyers Say It’s ‘Clear’ Grand Jury Has Not Indicted McCabe and Are Asking End to Prosecution

Published

on

Attorneys for former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe are urging federal prosecutors to drop the case against him, saying it is “clear” the grand jury refused to indict him. McCabe has been a target of President Donald Trump and some believe the attempt to prosecute him is political, or an effort to go after the president’s political enemies.

Noting that both The New York Times and the Washington Post “published stories suggesting that the grand jury may have declined to vote in favor of charges,” McCabe’s attorney writes “the only fair and just result is for you to accept the grand jury’s decision and end these proceedings.”

They also warn that if the grand jury declined to indict, “the justice manual compels you not to resubmit the case to the same or a different grand jury.”

The Washington Post adds that McCabe’s legal team “has asked federal prosecutors in D.C. whether a grand jury had rejected their bid to indict the FBI’s former acting director on charges of lying to investigators, pointing to media inquiries and news accounts detailing a series of unusual events in the case.”

The letter was posted to Twitter by Politico national security correspondent Natasha Bertrand, who is also an MSNBC contributor.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2019 AlterNet Media.