Connect with us

COMMENTARY

Watch: Obstructionist Democratic Senator Kyrsten Sinema Hilariously Roasted in SNL’s Cold Open

Published

on

Add Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) to Saturday Night Live’s Cecily Strong’s list of dead-on impressions as the Arizona Democrat was mocked for her spotlight-hogging and obstructionism in the cold opening of SNL’s new season.

With new cast-member James Austin Johnson introducing his President Joe Biden impression, Strong’s Sinema made her presence known in the sketch by shooting down any proposal being made by fellow Democrats as part of the infrastructure negotiations.

In addition to sticking out her tongue, blowing a raspberry and giving a thumbs-down to raising taxes on the rich, SNL’s Sinema explained what she really stands for.

“What do I want from this bill? I’ll never tell. Because I didn’t come to Congress to make friends. And so far, mission accomplished,” she smirked.

“Look, as a wine-drinking, bisexual triathlete, I know what the average American wants. They want to be put on hold when they call 9-1-1, they want bridges that just stop and car falls down. They want water so thick you can eat it with a fork. And I will fight for that no matter what. Unless my foot hurts, then I’ve got to go back to Arizona,” she added.

Watch below:

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.

COMMENTARY

Another SCOTUS Scandal: Chief Justice’s Spouse Makes Millions Placing Attorneys at Top Law Firms That Argue Before the Court

Published

on

The highly controversial and highly unpopular U.S. Supreme Court isn’t just facing a historic loss of confidence, it’s now facing yet another ethics scandal that is likely to lower even further public opinion of the far-right institution that in under two decades has seen its approval rating slashed.

Although it will not hear arguments, the issue before the Supreme Court and the American people’s view of it, is, should a Justice’s spouse – in this case the spouse of Chief Justice John Roberts – be able to make millions of dollars recruiting attorneys who are placed into top law firms that argue cases before it?

That’s the latest allegation, and already a spokesperson for the Court has issued a statement denying any ethical violations.

The New York Times reports that “a former colleague of Mrs. Roberts has raised concerns that her recruiting work poses potential ethics issues for the chief justice. Seeking an inquiry, the ex-colleague has provided records to the Justice Department and Congress indicating Mrs. Roberts has been paid millions of dollars in commissions for placing lawyers at firms — some of which have business before the Supreme Court, according to a letter obtained by The New York Times.”

Jane Sullivan Roberts left a law firm where she was a partner after her spouse was confirmed as Chief Justice.

READ MORE: Failed Leak Probe Will ‘Add to Public Distrust’ and ‘Accelerate Partisan Rancor’ Surrounding Supreme Court: Analyst

“Mrs. Roberts, according to a 2015 deposition,” The Times reports, “said that a significant portion of her practice was devoted to helping senior government lawyers land jobs at law firms and that the candidates’ names were almost never disclosed.”

Documents in that case “list six-figure fees credited to Mrs. Roberts for placing partners at law firms — including $690,000 in 2012 for one such match. The documents do not name clients, but Mr. Price recalled her recruitment of one prominent candidate, Ken Salazar, then interior secretary under President Barack Obama, to WilmerHale, a global firm that boasts of arguing more than 125 times before the Supreme Court.”

That case involves “a former colleague of Mrs. Roberts,” Kendal Price, a 66-year-old Boston lawyer, who “has raised concerns that her recruiting work poses potential ethics issues for the chief justice.”

“According to the letter,” sent by Price to DOJ and Congress, which the Times reports it obtained, “Mr. Price was fired in 2013 and sued the firm, as well as Mrs. Roberts and another executive, over his dismissal.”

The Times cites two legal experts, one who sees no ethical concerns with the situation, and one who does.

But critics are expressing great concern over this latest ethics issue, as they have been for years.

Doug Lindner, Advocacy Director for Judiciary & Democracy for the League of Conservation Voters, pointing to the Times’ report,  remarked: “Another day, another ethics concern about another life-tenured conservative justice on the most powerful court in the world, which has no binding ethics rules.”

READ MORE: Marshal ‘Spoke With’ Supreme Court Justices, Excluded Them From Signing Sworn Affidavits in Leak Probe

Indeed, the lack of a Supreme Court code of ethics has been repeatedly condemned for years, including by some of the nation’s top critics.

On Sept. 1, 2022, The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin tweeted out her opinion piece: “Ginni Thomas pressed Wisconsin lawmakers to overturn Biden’s 2020 victory .. just another insurrectionist.”

Norman Ornstein, an emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a contributing editor for the Atlantic, responded:

“Another reminder of how unethical is Justice Clarence Thomas, while Chief Justice Roberts turns a blind eye and continues to resist a code of ethics for a Supreme Court now distrusted by a majority of Americans. This defines the Roberts Court.”

The following month Ornstein slammed the Roberts Court once again.

“It is a stain on the Supreme Court that Chief Justice Roberts refuses to support a Judicial Code of Ethics, and stands by silently while Clarence Thomas flouts ethical standards over and over and over,” Ornstein charged.

Less than one month later he again unleashed on Roberts.

“Roberts is culpable,” he tweeted. “He has resisted over and over applying the Judicial Code of Ethics to the Supreme Court. This is Alito’s court, and it is partisan and corrupt.”

Ornstein is far from the Court’s only critic.

“If Chief Justice Roberts really wanted to address Supreme Court ethics, he would have immediately worked to implement a Code of Conduct after Clarence Thomas failed to recuse from cases involving January 6th despite having a clear conflict of interest,” the government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington tweeted a year ago in May. The following month CREW published an analysis titled: “Chief Justice John Roberts is wrong: the American judicial system is facing a major ethics crisis.”

Meanwhile, in late November Politico reported that Democrats in Congress were outraged at the Roberts Court.

“Two senior Democrats in Congress are demanding that Chief Justice John Roberts detail what, if anything, the Supreme Court has done to respond to recent allegations of a leak of the outcome of a major case the high court considered several years ago,” PoliticoJosh Bernstein reported, referring to the leak of the Dobbs decision that overturned the Roe v. Wade decision – itself a massive ethics crisis for the Court.

READ MORE: Revealed: Four Supreme Court Justices Attended Right-Wing Gala — Further Endangering SCOTUS Credibility

“Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) are also interested in examining claims about a concerted effort by religious conservatives to woo the justices through meals and social engagements. They wrote to Roberts on Sunday, making clear that if the court won’t investigate the alleged ethical breaches, lawmakers are likely to launch their own probe.”

Whitehouse and Johnson “also criticized the high court’s response to a letter they sent Roberts in September, seeking information about the court’s reaction to reports in POLITICO and Rolling Stone about a yearslong campaign to encourage favorable decisions from the justices by bolstering their religiosity.”

Nothing has changed.

When the Roberts Court earlier this month announced its lengthy investigation did not find the draft Dobbs decision leaker but also did not include the Justices themselves, Stokes Prof. of Law at NYU Law School Melissa Murray, an MSNBC host, tweeted, “This is a Roberts Court leitmotif–The Chief loves to handle things–even big things–in-house. Ethics issues? No need to get involved, Congress. We’ll sort it out ourselves. Leak needs investigating? No need to call in an actual investigative body, the Marshal will handle it.”

Pulitzer prize winning New York Times  investigative reporter Jodi Kantor, pointing to how the Justices were not thoroughly investigated during the leak probe, in earlier this month said: “Last week the court released statements that confirmed the gap between how the justices and everyone else were treated.”

“The whole situation amplifies a major question about the court: are these nine people, making decisions that affect all of us, accountable to anyone?”

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

McCarthy Sat for an Interview With Trump Jr. – One Bragged About an ‘Illegal’ Act, One Wished His Dad Would ‘Show Some’ Love

Published

on

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), sat down for a freewheeling hour-long interview with Donald Trump Jr., the son of the one-term twice-impeached ex-president currently under multiple criminal investigations including for absconding with hundreds of classified intelligence documents.

McCarthy, who had to battle his own Republican caucus 15 times before finally being granted the Speaker’s gavel, is now tied even more to Donald Trump. Trump reportedly was “working the phones,” making calls to House Republicans for days – and even hours before the final vote – strong-arming them to support the weakened McCarthy.

In one segment of the interview, McCarthy tells Trump Jr., “you know what? I’ve been around you guys privately. It is a real family that has real love for one another. And really, it stems of what [Donald Trump] did as a father.”

READ MORE: Watch: Nancy Pelosi Says ‘I Have Absolutely No Intention of Seeing the Deadly Assault on My Husband’s Life’

Don Jr., a bit choked up, comes out and says point-blank he wishes his father would “show some of that” love.

“I appreciate that, ya know, I want him to show some of that.”

Just before those remarks, McCarthy, again praising Donald Trump, says he’s a great father and grandfather, claims none of the ex-president’s children are “into drugs,” “have problems,” or “laptops” – presumably a dig at Hunter Biden and his father, President Joe Biden.

“I’ve watched him too, the pride he has [in] his children – and this is what I’ll say to you: Look, raising a family is not easy. You know – you’re a great father. But they don’t see him as a grandfather – I see your kids walk up.”

READ MORE: ‘Deliberately Deceived the Nation’: Legal Experts Stunned by ‘Jaw-Dropping’ Report on How Barr and Durham Protected Trump

“But you know what? You think of your life, okay? He was successful,” McCarthy continued, praising the disgraced ex-president. “He comes from a successful life. I’ve watched all you kids, as brothers and sisters love one another. You’re not into drugs. You don’t have problems. You don’t have laptops. You don’t have these other things,” McCarthy claimed.

Trump Jr. interjected, saying, “According to the press I’m really into drugs.”

Also in that interview, McCarthy admitted to “flipping cars” (buying for one price, quickly selling at a higher price) when he was in college, only to say it was illegal.

“I didn’t have the athletics to get a scholarship. I went to junior college, which was a great school,” McCarthy says. “But while I’m going there, I meet this guy that owns a liquor store but has a car dealer license – I’ll let you figure out how I met him,”

“But one day I say, ‘I’ll give you 100 bucks if you take me to L.A.,’ because L.A. has these car auctions – you got to be a dealer to get in there.”

READ MORE: ‘X-Rated’: Christian Nationalist Mastriano Promises Bill to Ban Public Drag Shows After High School’s ‘Queer Prom’

“So I started going down there, I start flipping cars, to pay my way through college. I find out later it’s illegal but I don’t know why I do it, I’ve been an entrepreneur, right?”

Don Jr. again interjects, telling the camera, “By the way, just just so you understand. We may have to cut this. Nancy Pelosi is gonna try to figure out how to impeach you for doing something like that.”

Trump Jr. also criticized most members of Congress who he said don’t have the same “hustle” as he does. He claimed his father made him work minimum wage jobs and he worked “for tips,” which both agreed was important.

“Like, no one’s ever had to make payroll. No one’s gonna sign the front of a check as opposed to the back,” Trump Jr. complains.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

‘Destroying the Nuclear Family’: Laura Ingraham Falsely Claims New Marriage Law Takes Rights Away From Christians

Published

on

It was May of 2019. Joe Biden less than a month earlier had just tossed his hat into the ring to run for president amid a field of strong Democratic candidates, and Fox News host Laura Ingraham falsely suggested that the former Obama Vice President was opposed to same-sex marriage because he’s a Catholic.

Telling disgraced Republican former House Speaker Newt Gingrich she was “just demonstrating how far left the Democrats have been pulled,” Ingram said, “I think Obama has always been there, but the party hasn’t.”

“And so whether it’s on the question of gay marriage or, or the issue of abortion or now gender bending and also – I mean,” Ingraham continued. Her voice started to crack as she disdainfully and mockingly opined, “you gotta, you gotta sense that Biden is not comfortable with any of this. I mean, he, he’s got to be like, ‘my consultants are telling me I’ve got to say this stuff, but my God, I still got to go to Mass on Sunday. Like, I still got to figure this out.'”

RELATED: Franklin Graham’s Extremely False Claims About the Senate’s Same-Sex Marriage Protection Bill Are Riling Up His Base

Joe Biden, as Vice President seven years earlier, in 2012, had famously said on “Meet the Press” that he supported same-sex marriage, before President Barack Obama had publicly stated his support. That sent the administration into a temporary bit of chaos and set the course for, ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court declaring same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional three years later, in 2015.

Fast forward from May of 2019 to December of 2022.

President Joe Biden on Tuesday signed the historic Respect for Marriage Act into law, requiring the federal government and states to recognize legal same-sex marriages regardless of what jurisdiction they were performed in.

Ingraham had a very different take on Tuesday than she did in 2019.

READ MORE: Former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows Under Investigation for Voter Fraud: Report

The far right Fox News host charged President Biden with “destroying the primacy of the nuclear family” and taking away the rights of “any serious person of faith.”

Implying same-sex couples marrying is “aberrant behavior,” Ingraham continued her years-long attack on marriage equality.

Referring to the “aberrant behavior” she had just mentioned, Ingraham declared that “today that got elevated as I mentioned earlier, at the White House.”

“Joe Biden held kind of an over-the-top, you know, celebration, this extravaganza that was named the Respect for Marriage Act,” which Ingraham described as “a bill that moves to restrict freedom of religion and freedom of speech even.”

That’s false. More than twenty faith-based organizations and even the main Mormon Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – Mitt Romney’s church – announced support for the law. Even Romney, a Republican Senator from Utah who once said he didn’t know LGBTQ people had families, supports the Respect for Marriage Act.

“We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters,” the LDS Church said, according to The Salt Lake Tribune.

Ingraham continued her false claims, saying: “whether you’re Catholic or evangelical or maybe Muslim, any serious person of faith, you will not necessarily have the rights tomorrow that you had yesterday.”

She did not state what rights people of faith allegedly lost on Tuesday when President Biden signed a law that changes little unless the U.S. Supreme Court overturns any of several decisions, including those that made constitutional access to contraception, same-sex intimacy, and same-sex marriage.

READ MORE: ‘Treason Out Loud’: Critics Call Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Remarks ‘Fantasizing About Killing Her Colleagues’ (Video)

After attacking a drag queen who was one of apparently thousands invited to celebrate President Biden signing the Respect for Marriage Act into law, Ingraham issued a warning.

“Let’s be very clear here. This push by the left, Biden included, is about destroying the primacy of the nuclear family.”

That, too, is false.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.