Connect with us

News

‘Shameful Lies’: Rick Scott Tells Students ‘Demented’ Claim About Abortion

Published

on

U.S. Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) is under fire over video of him baselessly telling students women and doctors would “crush” the “skull” of babies just minutes before they are born, if abortion were legal, apparently at nine months, or starve them to death immediately after. The secretly recorded video, reportedly recorded and leaked by a student, is going viral.

“…you crush a baby’s skull,” Scott says in the video (below), which has received over 400,000 views in under four hours. “A baby that would be born healthy and alive at nine months, two minutes before, okay, it could be crushed and killed,” Scott can be heard saying in the video, remarks very similar to ones he has made before. NCRM has not verified the authenticity of the video or its context, which was posted to social media by attorney and MeidasTouch editor-in-chief Ron Filipkowski.

Senator Scott, the wealthiest U.S. Senator, is the former governor Florida, an attorney, and the former head of a hospital corporation that plead guilty in the largest health care fraud case at the time in history. He is running for re-election after winning his 2018 race by a mere 10,033 votes, a tiny margin of about 0.12 percent.

RELATED: Rick Scott’s IVF Pledge Using His Own Grandkids Slammed as ‘Lie’ by Democrats

“On top of that, all the Democrats have voted to say that a baby born healthy and alive can be allowed to [be] put in the corner and starved itself to death,” he can also be heard saying in the video. Filipkowski says Scott was “speaking to a college class and I got this from a student.”

In a May interview with Politico, Sen. Scott said Democrats “want to crush a baby’s skull at nine months, and they want to leave a healthy baby born alive in the corner to die.”

He also said he would sign an abortion ban if it were at 15 weeks.

Florida Politics reports Scott is leading his Democratic opponent, former state Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, by just three or four points in the latest polls, and calls his position “vulnerable.”

MSNBC‘s Steve Benen earlier this year wrote, “Before becoming a far-right politician, Scott led a company called Columbia/HCA, which faced a federal fraud investigation over Medicare. As the FBI’s investigation advanced, Scott resigned as CEO, though he nevertheless faced considerable scrutiny — including an infamous civil deposition in which the Republican asserted his Fifth Amendment rights 75 times.”

“Scott’s former company ultimately pleaded guilty to 14 felonies and was fined $1.7 billion. It was, at the time, the biggest Medicare fraud case in American history,” according to Benen. “Though the article is no longer online, The Miami Herald reported in 2010 that federal investigators ‘found that Scott took part in business practices at Columbia/HCA that were later found to be illegal — specifically, that Scott and other executives offered financial incentives to doctors in exchange for patient referrals, in violation of federal law, according to lawsuits the Justice Department filed against the company in 2001.'”

Wednesday on MSNBC, Murcarsel-Powell told MSNBC that Rick Scott “has been proudly saying” he supports an abortion ban, and called him “one of the most extreme senators” on abortion.

“Florida is in play,” Mucarsel-Powell said.

READ MORE: ‘They All Think You’re Nuts’: Latest Conway Ad Shows GOP Voices in Trump’s Head

“Shameful the lies that people like Rick Scott are willing to tell to hold on to power. Infuriating,” wrote Democratic former U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill.

“This is demented,” remarked Salon’s Heather Digby Parton.

“These freaks and weirdos really, really hate women. Abortion bans are absolutely rooted in hatred of women,” observed Democratic communications strategist Laura Chapin.

Pulitzer Prize-winning science journalist and author Laurie Garrett asked: “What psycho horror movie alternate reality is this man living in?”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Gender Chasm’: GOP Panics Over Huge Harris Lead Among Women as Trump Chases ‘Bro Vote’

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 Calls for Government Shutdown: ‘CLOSE IT DOWN!!!’

Published

on

Former President Donald Trump urged House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) to cause a government shutdown unless the House passes the SAVE Act.

“If Republicans in the House, and Senate, don’t get absolute assurances on Election Security, THEY SHOULD, IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, GO FORWARD WITH A CONTINUING RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET. THE DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO ‘STUFF’ VOTER REGISTRATIONS WITH ILLEGAL ALIENS. DON’T LET IT HAPPEN – CLOSE IT DOWN!!!” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social Tuesday.

Johnson has paired the continuing resolution, which would fund the government for another six months, with the SAVE Act, which would require proof of citizenship in order to become a registered voter. The SAVE Act was originally introduced by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) and passed in the House on its own in July. Every Republican voted for the SAVE Act, along with five Democrats.

READ MORE: GOP Congressman Admits ‘Most of What We Do Is Bad’ as McCarthy’s Republicans Push for Federal Government Shutdown

The standalone version of the SAVE act is stalled in the Democrat-controlled Senate. It is unlikely to pass, and has yet to be brought to a vote in that chamber. President Joe Biden has promised to veto it should the bill make it out of the Senate.

Attaching the SAVE Act to the continuing resolution has not made it any more popular outside of the House. In fact, at least five House Republicans said they’re against the pairing, according to Roll Call. Republicans’ majority in the House is slim, meaning that providing no absences and a united front against it from Democrats, five Republicans are all that are needed to sink the resolution.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) said in the House Monday that even if the continuing resolution passes as-is, the Senate would remove the SAVE Act and send it back to the House. Even in the unlikely situation where the Senate lets the SAVE Act part stand, Biden’s reiterated that he would veto it, according to The Hill.

Critics of the SAVE Act point out that it’s irrelevant. Only American citizens are allowed to vote by law, and it’s very rare for noncitizens to try to vote illegally.

“This is a crime where not only are the consequences really high and the payoff really low — you’re not getting millions of dollars, it’s not robbing a bank, you get to cast one ballot,” said Sean Morales-Doyle, a lawyer at the Brennan Center for Justice, told MSNBC. “But what also makes this somewhat unique is that committing this crime actually entails the creation of a government record of your crime.

“It’s very easy to catch, and you will get caught.”

Morales-Doyle said that on the other hand, the SAVE Act would make it more difficult for actual citizens to vote because many do not have passports or access to their birth certificates. There is also a law against requiring proof of citizenship in federal elections, MSNBC reported.

Threatening government shutdowns has become a common ploy from the Republicans, and there have been 10 shutdowns since 1981, according to History.com. All but three of the 10 shutdowns were led by Republicans. One exception was in 1982, when both parties of Congress missed the deadline despite agreeing on terms. In confusion, some agencies sent employees home, but the shutdown only lasted three days, between September 30 and October 2.

The remaining two shutdowns were the result of Democrats protesting Trump’s policies. In January 2018, there was a four-day shutdown over Trump’s plans to phase out the DACA program allowing children of undocumented people to remain in the United States. The end of 2018 saw the longest shutdown in history. The issue was over funding Trump’s planned wall along the border of Mexico. The shutdown lasted over a month, until Republicans backed down.

Continue Reading

CORRUPTION

JD Vance Says in 2020 He Wouldn’t Certify Election: ‘Let the Country Have the Debate’

Published

on

Ohio Senator JD Vance, the Republican vice presidential candidate, said Monday that if he were in former Vice President Mike Pence’s place, he would not have certified the election on January 6, 2021.

Speaking as part of a panel on the All-In Podcast, Vance told cohost Jason Calacanis the issue wasn’t necessarily Pence deciding not to “overturn the election results,” but rather that “Mike Pence could have done more to sort of surface some problems.”‘

Calacanis replied by asking Vance directly if he would have certified the election.

READ MORE: ‘BadgerPundit’: Top Trump Attorney in Fake Electors Plot Hid Secret Twitter Account

“I happen to think that there were issues back in 2020, particularly in Pennsylvania. Even some of the courts that refused to throw out certified ballots did say that there were ballots that were cast in an illegal way. They just refused to actually decertify the election results in Pennsylvania,” Vance said. “Do I think that we could have had a much more rational conversation about how to ensure that only legal ballots are cast? Yes. And do I think that Mike Pence could have played a better role? Yes.”

Calacanis asked Vance again if he’d have certified the election, and Vance appears to back the plan to send fake electors to cause confusion in the certification process.

“I would have asked the states to submit alternative slates of electors and let the country have the debate about what actually matters and what kind of an election that we have. That’s what I would have done,” Vance said. “The important part is we would have had a big debate. And it doesn’t necessarily mean the results would have been any different, but we would, at least, have had the debate in Pennsylvania and Georgia about how to better have a rational election system where legal ballots are cast.”

Democrats heavily criticized Vance’s statement.

“Donald Trump picked JD Vance as his running mate because he knows that Vance will do what his last vice president wouldn’t—undermine our democracy and help him try to overturn election results. Now, Vance is making it clear: instead of certifying the 2020 election, Vance ‘would have asked the states’ to send slates of fake electors and throw our election into chaos to help Trump stay in power. Vance is clearly laying out the stakes of this election for our democracy and our basic freedoms, and showing voters that if given the chance, he’ll try to replace the rule of law with the rule of Trump,” Alex Floyd, the rapid response director for the DNC, said in a statement.

Vance’s claims of there being illegal ballots in Pennsylvania appears to be based on a claim from former President Donald Trump in 2022. Trump said that a then-recent Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that ballots sent in undated envelopes will not be counted in that year’s election meant that the 2020 election was “rigged, but they’ll let that result stand.”

The Associated Press debunked Trump’s claim, reporting that not only did Trump misrepresent the court’s ruling, but even if his claim was accurate, throwing out these ballots would not have mattered in the election.

 

 

 

Continue Reading

GOOD MOVE

Federal Court Unanimously Votes to Overturn Arizona Trans Athlete Ban

Published

on

A Transgender Rights in October fought against the administration's erasure of transgender people

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 3-0 Monday that Arizona’s trans athlete ban was discriminatory, as trans kids have no physical advantage.

The case involved two transgender girls, “Jane Doe,” 11, and “Megan Roe,” 15. Both girls have been on puberty blockers, and lived as girls since ages 5 and 7, respectively. Doe is a soccer player, while Roe plays volleyball and swims. The defendants include Thomas Horne, the state school superintendent, as well as the local district superintendents, the school, as well as State Senator Warren Petersen and State Representative Ben Toma. Both Petersen and Toma are Republicans.

Defendants justified the ban by claiming that it was protecting cisgender girls from players with a significant athletic advantage. However, the court ruled that there “are no significant differences in athletic performance between boys and girls” and “transgender girls who receive puberty-blocking medication do not have an athletic advantage over other girls.”

READ MORE: Trans Kids Wanting To Play Team Sports Get Legal Wins

“Our clients are thrilled to be able to continue to play on girls’ sports teams with their friends while this case proceeds to trial,” Rachel Berg, a lawyer for the girls, told the Chronicle. Berg is a staff attorney for the National Center for Lesbian Rights.

The fight isn’t entirely over, however. The state could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, or request a hearing with an 11-judge panel. Still, barring further decisions, the Chronicle points out that this decision could easily be cited in similar cases.

And there are indeed similar trans athlete bans going before courts. Last month, a federal judge issued an injunction forcing a Hanover County, Virginia school board to let an 11-year-old transgender girl try out for her school’s tennis team. The injunction put the ban on hold while the full case is decided.

In New Hampshire, two trans teens filed suit against that state’s similar ban. Again, the judge ruled for an emergency injunction until the case is decided. One of the plaintiffs, Parker Tirrell, 15, attended the hearing in her sports uniform. She headed directly to her soccer practice following the ruling.

“We’re there for each other, win or lose,” Tirrell said in a press release. “Not being allowed to play on my team with the other girls would disconnect me from so many of my friends and make school so much harder. I just want to be myself and to learn, play, and support my teammates like I did last year.”

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.