Connect with us

BAD PRESIDENT

Donald Trump Says He’ll ‘Vigorously Pursue the Death Penalty’ Following Biden’s Commutations

Published

on

The day after President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of 37 out of 40 inmates on death row, incoming President Donald Trump doubled down on his commitment to the death penalty.

Trump took to his Truth Social account to condemn Biden and promote the death penalty on Tuesday morning.

“Joe Biden just commuted the Death Sentence on 37 of the worst killers in our Country. When you hear the acts of each, you won’t believe that he did this. Makes no sense. Relatives and friends are further devastated. They can’t believe this is happening!” Trump wrote.

READ MORE: Biden Ignores Military Death Row In Commutation Spree

Not quite three hours later, he had more to say:

“As soon as I am inaugurated, I will direct the Justice Department to vigorously pursue the death penalty to protect American families and children from violent rapists, murderers, and monsters. We will be a Nation of Law and Order again!” Trump added, alongside a screenshot of a tweet by the New York Post promoting their article about the commutations, with the headline “Biden commutes death sentences of child killers and mass murderers 2 days before Christmas.”

Though Biden initially promised to pass a law banning federal executions, once elected, he backtracked on that promise, according to NBC News. His administration did, however, halt all federal executions during his term. Monday, he gave all but three inmates on death row life sentences without parole instead. The three exceptions were Dylann Roof, the man who killed nine at the Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina; Robert Bowers, the Tree of Life Synagogue shooter; and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon bomber. In his statement announcing the move to commute the sentences, he said the only exception were those convicted of “terrorism and hate-motivated mass murder.”

Biden’s move comes after Trump campaigned on increasing the number of crimes punishable by the death penalty. The ACLU warned that Trump would “kill everyone on death row,” if given the chance. During his first term, Trump executed 13 federal inmates, with the last execution happening five days before Biden’s inauguration, according to the Associated Press.

Though Grover Cleveland is best known as the first president to serve two non-consecutive terms as president, he has another thing in common with Trump. Trump’s 13 federal executions is the highest number in the modern era, while Cleveland is the president who executed the most federal prisoners. In Cleveland’s first term, 23 prisoners were executed, and another 24 were killed in his second, for a total of 47.  Only Ulysses S. Grant and James Monroe have more executions than Trump, at 23 and 20 respectively.

Image via Reuters

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.

BAD PRESIDENT

Biden ‘Strongly Opposes’ Measure of Bill Stripping Rights from Trans Kids, Signs It Anyway

Published

on

President Joe Biden said he “strongly opposes” a section of a bill that would strip funding for gender care for trans kids in military families, but signed it anyway.

The National Defense Authorization Act gives $895 billion to the Department of Defense, State Department, Department of Homeland Security and intelligence agencies, as well as national security programs at the Department of Energy. The bill was passed with bipartisan support in the House and Senate.

Normally, this would be a straightforward funding bill, but earlier this month, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) added a provision blocking TRICARE, which funds health care for service members, from paying for gender-affirming care for children. This will affect approximately 2,500 trans kids, according to Newsweek.

READ MORE: Lone Dissenter Calls Texas Supreme Court Transgender Ruling ‘Cruel, Unconstitutional’

Biden signed the bill on Monday, although called out that section in a statement.

“My Administration strongly opposes Division A, title VII, subtitle A, section 708 of the Act, which inhibits the Department of Defense’s ability to treat all persons equally under the law, no matter their gender identity.  By prohibiting the use of appropriated funds, the Department of Defense will be compelled to contravene clinical practice guidelines and clinical recommendations,” Biden wrote.

“The provision targets a group based on that group’s gender identity and interferes with parents’ roles to determine the best care for their children.  This section undermines our all-volunteer military’s ability to recruit and retain the finest fighting force the world has ever known by denying health care coverage to thousands of our service members’ children.  No service member should have to decide between their family’s health care access and their call to serve our Nation,” he continued.

The news created quick backlash, with people calling out what they see as hypocrisy and a failure to protect trans kids.

“And just like that, the first anti LGBTQ bill in nearly 3 decades was signed by Biden and passed by a Democratic senate. It included a ban on gender affirming care for trans children of military families. So much for having our back, you god damn liar,” journalist Alejandra Caraballo wrote on the social media platform Bluesky.

And just like that, the first anti LGBTQ bill in nearly 3 decades was signed by Biden and passed by a Democratic senate. It included a ban on gender affirming care for trans children of military families. So much for having our back, you god damn liar. www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo…

Alejandra Caraballo (@esqueer.net) 2024-12-24T13:11:07.737Z

Caraballo is referring to the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy signed by President Bill Clinton in 1993. While allowing LGBTQ people to serve in the military, it prohibited them from talking about or expressing their queerness, even while off duty. Military officials were, however, also prohibited from asking if a service member was gay. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was repealed by President Barack Obama in 2010.

In the wake of anti-trans ads from Republican candidates in the 2024 election, Democrats have been accused of moving to dump transgender rights from their platform. Some elected Democrats have even called out the party’s prior embrace of LGBTQ rights.

“The Democrats have to stop pandering to the far left,” Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) told the New York Times. “I don’t want to discriminate against anybody, but I don’t think biological boys should be playing in girls’ sports.” He then offered some advice to his party: “Democrats aren’t saying that, and they should be.”

“Democrats spend way too much time trying not to offend anyone rather than being brutally honest about the challenges many Americans face,” Rep. Seth Moulton, (D-Mass.) said. “I have two little girls, I don’t want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete, but as a Democrat I’m supposed to be afraid to say that.”

The minimal pushback on the National Defense Authorization Act is just another signal that Democrats are backing down on defending one of the most vulnerable populations in American society.

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

BAD PRESIDENT

Nearly a Quarter of Republicans Would Vote for Trump to Get Third Term

Published

on

 

Nearly a quarter of Republican voters said that they want President Donald Trump to run for a third term in 2028, despite his being ineligible, according to a new poll.

According to the most recent Emerson College poll, that while 30% would vote for Vice President-elect JD Vance in a hypothetical 2028 Republican primary, 23% want Trump to run for a third term.  Another 28% were undecided. The poll surveyed 1,000 registered voters between November 20-22, and has a margin of error of 3%.

As it stands, the 22nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits a president from holding the office twice. An exception is made if a president is replaced with less than two years left of their term. For example, President Lyndon Johnson replaced John F. Kennedy in 1963 with a year left to his term. Johnson won in 1964, and could have run again in 1968, but chose not to. The only president to serve more than two terms is Franklin Roosevelt, who was elected four times in a row prior to the 22nd Amendment being ratified.

READ MORE: Trump to Seek Third Term If Re-Elected ‘Because They Spied on My Campaign’

Despite the constitutional prohibition, Trump has repeatedly made comments about running again. A common refrain during his rallies during his first term was that he’d never leave the White House. And just last week, he again made a reference to a 2028 run in a meeting with House Republicans, according to The Hill.

“I suspect I won’t be running again, unless you do something,” Trump said. “Unless you say, ‘He’s so good, we have to just figure it out.’”

This summer during his campaign, at a Christian summit he told people that if they voted for him to win the 2024 election, “you won’t have to do do it anymore. Four more years, you know what? It’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine, you won’t have to vote any more, my beautiful Christians.”

However, in an interview on Fox News, Trump said he was referring specifically for voting for him, not voting in general, according to the Guardian.

“That statement is very simple, I said, ‘Vote for me, you’re not gonna have to do it ever again,’” Trump said. “It’s true, because we have to get the vote out. Christians are not known as a big voting group, they don’t vote. And I’m explaining that to them. You never vote. This time, vote. I’ll straighten out the country, you won’t have to vote any more, I won’t need your vote any more, you can go back to not voting.”

In the interview, he said that he would leave after his second term was up, adding “I did last time,” referring to his loss in the 2020 election. While that is true, he constantly claimed that the election was “stolen,” leading Trump supporters to raid the Capitol on January 6, 2021 in an attempt to stop the electoral votes from being certified, formalizing President Joe Biden’s win.

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

BAD PRESIDENT

‘Stop Trying To Make the Logan Act Happen’: Why Trump Is Unlikely To Be Prosecuted Under Law

Published

on

After reports that former President Donald Trump pressured Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to reject a ceasefire deal, some have called for him to be prosecuted under the Logan Act. But it’s unlikely to actually happen.

On Tuesday afternoon, lawyer and CNN contributor Steve Vladeck posted on X, “Stop trying to make the Logan Act happen. (Because it’s unconstitutionally vague and an unconstitutionally overbroad content-based restriction on speech that’s never been successfully used to prosecute anyone.)”

Vladeck is likely correct — particularly since his area of legal expertise is in national security law with an emphasis on war crimes. But let’s look into it.

READ MORE: ‘Close’: Trump Claims World War III Could Erupt if He Does Not Become President Again

What is the Logan Act?

The Logan Act is a law dating back to 1799. It makes it illegal for an unauthorized American citizen to negotiate with foreign governments. It’s a felony, punishable with up to three years in prison.

It was named after Dr. George Logan of Pennsylvania, who in 1798 attempted to negotiate with the French government during the “Quasi-War.” Logan was a Democratic-Republican, but the U.S. government was controlled at the time by the Federalist party. The Federalists said Logan was trying to undermine their government, and passed the act in order to stop it from happening again.

Since then, people have been accused of violating the act, but nothing has ever come from it. Logan himself ended up being appointed and elected to the Senate and even served as a legitimate U.S. ambassador.

How has Trump allegedly violated the Logan Act?

Trump has been accused a few times of violating the Logan Act after the end of his presidency. In July, Trump met with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, according to Newsweek. Orbán said Trump told him that if Trump were re-elected he wouldn’t “give a single penny” to Ukraine. Orbán is an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

More recently, however, Trump allegedly spoke with Netanyahu, according to The New Republic. Reportedly, Trump has asked Netanyahu to not accept the ceasefire deal proposed by the Biden administration until after the election, since a ceasefire could boost the presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris.

Netanyahu’s side denied last week that he discussed the ceasefire deal with Trump.

Why Trump likely won’t be prosecuted

As Vladeck says, no one has ever been successfully prosecuted under the Logan Act. But it goes farther than that. Not only has no one been successfully prosecuted, there’ve only been two people charged with it. And both of those were in the 1800s; once in 1802 and once in 1852.

There are also questions as to whether or not the act is even constitutional. Though it has never been officially ruled on, a 1964 ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York said the act likely ran afoul of the Sixth Amendment, the right to a speedy and fair trial.

“That doubt is engendered by the statute’s use of the vague and indefinite terms, ‘defeat’ and ‘measures’. Neither of these words is an abstraction of common certainty or possesses a definite statutory or judicial definition,” Judge William Bernard Herlands wrote in his decision, though he decided against ruling specifically on the constitutional question.

Given the unlikelihood of a successful prosecution — and the potential for the Logan Act to get thrown out entirely — many prosecutors would find it foolhardy to try to charge Trump under this particular law.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.