Dem Rep. Al Green: Trump Should Be Impeached for His Continuing Bigotry
By Pam Key
Tuesday on the floor of the House of Representatives, Rep. Al Green (D-TX) said President Donald Trump should be impeached because Green alledged Trump has “engaged in this kind of bigoted conduct.”
Green said, “And still I rise. And I rise today with love of country in my heart and a belief that the record has to be set straight. The record has to always reflect the truth, and there is a truth that is being obscured. I want to set the record straight because there seems to be a belief that if you have committed acts of bigotry, if you have been a racist, if you have been engaged in homophobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia, if you do one thing, somehow that thing will eradicate and eliminate all of the bigotry that you have perpetrated. I rise to correct the record because I want the record to show that at least one person came to the floor of this Congress and made it clear that, yes, unemployment may be low for African-Americans, yes, it may be low, but it’s still twice that of Anglo-Americans, generally speaking. Yes, you may have signed a bill to deal with some aspects of criminal justice in a just way, and that’s appreciated. But there’s still more work to be done. But notwithstanding the fact there’s more work to be done, it’s still appreciated. But the record has to be set straight. And here is what the record should show; that does not eliminate the bigotry emanating from presidency. Eliminating bigotry does not occur because you signed one bill. It does not occur because unemployment is low. It does you have to do more than simply sign a bill.”
He continued, “And I am not saying to you than an apology is in order. I tell people, tell the truth, just tell the truth. Say I was wrong when I instituted a policy that separated babies from their mothers. That emanates the type of bigotry we don’t condone in this country. Say I was wrong when I said there was good people among those who were the racists, the bigots, the xenophobes and homophobes in Charlottesville. Say I was wrong when you don’t have to be so kind when you are part of the constabulary, you are part of the policing force in this country. Just say you were wrong if you want to atone. Signing bills won’t do it. Going to church won’t do it. Asking forgiveness will cause you to be forgiven, and I will forgive you, but that doesn’t mean you will no longer be sanctioned for your bigotry. I want to thank those who have stood and made their points clear as it relates to bigotry. I’m listening to these morning programs now. They’re all talking about bigotry emanating from the presidency, not necessarily in those words. They’re talking about the racism that the President perpetrates. I appreciate what they are saying. But we got to do more than talk about it. We cannot allow a president to remain in office who has engaged in this kind of bigoted conduct.”
He added, “It is time for us to take a stand here on the floor of the House of Representatives. There were no fine people in Charlottesville. You ought not separate babies from their mothers. You ought not have policies that would condone bigotry and encourage others to engage in it. I believe that we have a duty to take a vote. And at some point in the near future we will take another vote, notwithstanding the Mueller report. I yield back the balance of my time.”
Study: Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal Would Cost Over $600,000 Per Household in the United States
February 25, 2019
The Green New Deal would bankrupt the nation, according to a new study that found it would cost up to $94 trillion dollars to implement.
A study from the American Action Forum found that, in a conservative estimate, it would cost over $600,000 per household over a ten year period.
The study explains that the “heart of the GND is an effort to curb carbon emissions and thus to slow climate change, but the package contains a wide set of other policy proposals that are not directly linked to climate policy: a job guarantee, food and housing security, and a variety of social justice initiatives.”
Since much of the GND is extremely vague, the study focused on the proposals for:
- A 10-year transition to an exclusively low-carbon energy electricity grid;
- Enough high-speed rail transit available that air travel becomes unnecessary;
- Guaranteeing union jobs with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States;
- Universal health care;
- Guaranteed housing for every American; and
- Food security for every person in the United States.
The Free Beacon reports that the American Action Forum calculated guaranteed green housing would cost between $1.6 trillion and $4.2 trillion; a federal jobs guarantee between $6.8 trillion and $44.6 trillion; a net zero emissions transportation system between $1.3 trillion and $2.7 trillion; a low-carbon electricity grid for $5.4 trillion; and “food security” for $1.5 billion.
“The American Action Forum’s analysis shows that the Green New Deal would bankrupt the nation,” Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, told the Free Beacon.
“On the upper end, every American household would have to pay $65,000 per year to foot the bill,” he said. “The total price tag would be $93 trillion over 10 years. That is roughly four times the value of all Fortune 500 companies combined. That’s no deal.”
Barrasso’s office estimates it would also skyrocket electric bills by up to $3,800 per year.
Overall, the study found that the burden to taxpayers would be roughly $361,010 and $653,010 for each American household over 10 years.
CNN’s Symone Sanders in Denial over Jussie: ‘Very Concerning’ Police Leaked Smollett Was ‘Staunchly Believable’
By Tony Lee
CNN commentator Symone Sanders insisted on Thursday that things are still not adding up in the Jussie Smollett case, saying that his story was “staunchly believable” as of two days ago.
She said it is “very concerning” that the leaks all came from the Chicago Police Department and insisted that Smollett’s claim that he was attacked by two President Donald Trump supporters in near sub-zero temperatures in Chicago who were yelling “this is MAGA country” and hurling racial and homophobic slurs was “staunchly believable” as of two days days ago.
On February 19, when Sanders said she thought Smollett’s story was still “staunchly believable,” news reports had already surfaced that indicated that Smollett had paid two Nigerian-American brothers to orchestrate the attack after the the hate letter that he allegedly mailed to himself on the Empire set did not get enough attention. Celebrities such as Snoop Dogg and Dave Chappelle had already mocked Smollett for his alleged hoax while Cardi B had declared that Smollett “f*cked up Black History Month.”
“I have spoken with Jussie Smollett’s team. I’ve heard Jussie tell his account in his own words. And I want to tell you… When I had this conversation about two days ago, I believed him,” she insisted. “It was staunchly believable.”
Sanders said she only changed her mind when the video of the two Nigerian-American brothers buying ski masks and a red cap surfaced. Smollett reportedly paid the brothers $3,500 to stage the attack and gave them an additional $100 to buy supplies.
“When the video came out today of the two gentlemen buying what I’ve referred to as a hate crime starter pack, I, like everyone else, had questions,” Sanders said. “At this point, my thoughts are…. we need to see some of the evidence… I think it’s very concerning that all of these leaks came from the Chicago Police Department… So frankly all we have is leaks from the Chicago Police Department… now what they’ve said at this press conference and what Jussie Smollett and his team have said.”
Sanders insisted that “things do not add up here” and “this just doesn’t seem right” because, in reference to the $3,500 that Smollett reportedly paid to the brothers to stage the attack, “$3,500 won’t even buy a round-trip ticket to Nigeria.”
“So I, like many people in America, are confused… even though I’ve heard, I’ve seen what the police department’s said,” she said. “So at the very least I think we should see the police report.”
Sanders said Smollett has lost in the court of public opinion, adding that “this is not a good day for Jussie Smollet” and “frankly it’s a terrible day for folks who have not come forward who have experienced hate crimes and who now are maybe hesitant to come forward if something does actually happen to them because of this.”
“So it’s just not a good day,” Sanders said. “It’s still a terrible Black History Month.”
House Dems Ask For Secret Copy Of President’s Taxes…
By Hunter Walker
WASHINGTON — House Democrats have asked for a confidential copy of President Trump’s tax returns from the IRS, but obtaining them won’t be simple or fast, Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., said during an interview on Yahoo News’ “Skullduggery” podcast. Beyer said Democrats will need a “good legal rationale” to request Trump’s financial documents, adding that he believes the questions surrounding Trump’s ties to Russia are sufficient reason to ask for the documents.
Beyer is a member of the powerful House Committee on Ways and Means, which has the power to obtain a copy of President Trump’s tax returns thanks to an obscure law that’s almost a century old.
Trump’s tax returns have been something of a holy grail for Democrats who have consistently requested the release of the documents, particularly given the questions surrounding foreign business dealings at Trump’s sprawling real estate company. Beyer predicted that his committee will ultimately be able to get their hands on Trump’s elusive financial documents. But he explained that there are several obstacles to the process.
According to Beyer, the law allows “entities in Congress” to “request the tax return of any American citizen.” He said the Joint Taxation Committee theoretically could ask for the returns, but would be unlikely to do so due to Republican control of the Senate. This leaves the Ways and Means Committee, which is led by Democrats since they won control of the House last year. While Beyer said the Democrats on the committee have “begun the process,” he said it would be slow going.
“Our chairman, Richie Neal of Springfield, Mass., is going about this in a deliberate, thoughtful way. As he says, this is a really big, important, historic thing. He doesn’t want to not do it right. He wants to make sure that he’s crossing all the t’s and dotting all the i’s,” Beyer said.
Beyer said Neal had described some details about the process to his committee colleagues.
“As I understand it, at least as he’s explained it to us, the first step with his request is that the Internal Revenue Service will share it with him as the chairman confidentially,” Beyer said of Neal. “He will then review it and decide what can be shared with the full committee, and then ultimately, what can be shared with the American people.”
Trump became the first president in decades to break with longstanding tradition and not release his returns when he won the 2016 election. Democrats have consistently questioned what information might be in the documents, particularly given the questions surrounding foreign business dealings at Trump’s sprawling real estate company. Trump, who once promised to release the information, has cited a “routine audit” as why he has declined to do so.
While he stressed that he isn’t writing legal briefs on the issue, Beyer said he saw clear grounds for the request.
“There are so many suggestions that the president’s behavior with Russia, among others, … must be inextricably linked to his financial fortune. Why else would he give Putin a pass on damn near everything from Crimea to believing his intelligence rather than our own?” he said.
Beyer also predicted that Trump’s attorneys and allies would fight the release of the president’s returns.
“There is also anticipation that the White House is going to fight back right away, that once that request goes to them there’ll be requests for injunctions,” Beyer said.
Based on that opposition, Beyer predicted that Trump’s returns will remain hidden through the 2020 election.
“I think we need to do the best we can to get them, but it has been suggested more than once that it could be tied up in courts for two years,” he said.
Warren, Harris Add Reparations to 2020 Campaign Platforms
By
All Democrats have to do is not be insane. And they can’t do it.
In an effort to pander to black voters, Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), both presidential candidates, said they will back reparations for black Americans as part of their campaign platforms.
“We have to be honest that people in this country do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities,” Harris reportedly said. “I’m serious about taking an approach that would change policies and structures and make real investments in black communities.”
That statement followed a radio interview in which she explicitly agreed with the host when that “government reparations for black Americans were necessary to address the legacies of slavery and discrimination.”
Warren echoed a similar sentiment.
“Ms. Warren also said she supported reparations for black Americans impacted by slavery — a policy that experts say could cost several trillion dollars, and one that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and many top Democrats have not supported,” The New York Times said.
The report said that Warren “declined to giver further details” about her reparations plan.
These are the same candidates that also support a “Green New Deal,” which will also cost trillions of dollars at the expense of the American taxpayer.
But there are more questions surrounding reparations than exactly how much they would cost.
Mainly, who would pay them?
Would reparations be paid only by white people who have slave-owning lineages, like Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam of Virginia? Would I, as an Arab American whose family immigrated to the United States through Ellis Island, be required to pay for something in which my ancestors had no part?
Likewise, who exactly would receive them?
Would all blacks receive some form of reparations, regardless of whether their ancestors were slaves? What if someone is half black? Or a quarter? Is that person owed a fraction of the reparations of a fully black American?
And what about poor white people? There are millions of whites who “do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities,” as Harris argued. Will they be buried more deeply – will they have to become poorer – simply to atone for the color of their skin? Is that justice?
Most importantly, would reparations help repair the cultural strife in this country, which is mostly promulgated by the mainstream press for ratings and Democrat politicians for votes? Wouldn’t the Harris/Warren plan cause more strife and racial tension?
Do these loons really believe that – in a perfect world – reparations would be paid and everyone would simply shake hands, walk away, and that the country will be more united than it has ever been?
These are practical questions that remained unanswered by politicians who are race-baiting for votes.
Tom's Blog 