💣 The Disastrous 118th Congress - MAGA Mike Johnson Saved by Shadow Speaker Hakeem Jeffries

[Ben-Prime]

Have they passed any meaningful legislation yet?

The lunatics in the House know everything they would want is DOA in the Senate and the White House. So their best case scenario is to pass something Manchin and Sinema would approve, and dare Dark Brandon to veto it.

And then vote to impeach him for daring to veto because that is clearly overstepping his powers, usurping their authority, and making himself a dictator. Or something.

[raison de arizona]

As GOP House Speaker Kevin McCarthy floats a possible impeachment of Attorney General Merrick Garland over the DOJ investigation into Hunter Biden, @MacFarlaneReports says of the tactic's increasing popularity, "It's as if 'impeachment' is the word on that word-a-day calendar."

[Gregg]

It's like when a toddler learns the phonetic sound of a word without really knowing what it means and they keep repeating it inappropriately.

[RTH10260]

In post-Roe era, House Republicans begin quiet push for new restrictions on abortion access

FARNOUSH AMIRI
Sun, June 25, 2023 at 1:44 PM GMT+2

WASHINGTON (AP) — When the Supreme Court issued its abortion ruling last June overturning Roe v. Wade, House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said "our work is far from done.” He didn't say what might come next.

A year later later, McCarthy is the speaker, Republicans are in the majority and the blanks are beginning to be filled in.

In a flurry of little-noticed legislative action, GOP lawmakers are pushing abortion policy changes, trying to build on the work of activists whose strategy successfully elevated their fight to the nation's highest court.

In one government funding bill after another, Republicans are incorporating unrelated policy provisions, known as riders, to restrict women's reproductive rights. Democrats say the proposals will never become law.

“This is not just about an attack on women’s health,” Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Friday. “I view it as an attempt to derail the entire process of funding the federal government by injecting these riders into the appropriations process.”

Rep. Kay Granger, the Texas Republican who heads the committee, said during a hearings this past week that the riders that were included continue “long-standing pro-life protections that are important to our side of the aisle.”

Using budget bills this way is hardly new, but it points to a broader divide among Republicans about where to go next on abortion after the Supreme Court's decision cleared the way for state-by-state restrictions on abortion rights.

Republicans for years held stand-alone votes in the House on bills to restrict abortion. Now, some in the party — particularly the nearly 20 Republicans running for reelection in swing districts — are hesitant, if not outright opposed, to roll calls on abortion proposals. They say such bills will never see the light of day as long as Democrats control the Senate.

The GOP's new push is taking place line by line in the sprawling legislation drafted each year to fund government agencies and programs.

Nearly a dozen anti-abortion measures have been included so far in budget bills. In the agricultural one, for example, Republicans are looking to reverse a recent move by the Food and Drug Administration that would allow the contraception pill mifepristone to be dispensed in certified pharmacies, as opposed to only in hospitals and clinics.

Anti-abortion proposals have found their way into the defense bill, where GOP lawmakers are aiming to ban paid leave and travel for military service members and their family members who are seeking reproductive health care services. Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said he warned Defense Secretary Llyod Austin about it.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/post-roe-era ... 37202.html

[Kendra]

Yeah, we noticed. And voters who expected you to do something other than turn the House into a taxpayer funded arm of the Trump campaign are noticing too.

[raison de arizona]

Something good, a Renewed Statement of Principles issued by Catholic Democrats.

Renewed Statement of Principles

Today, as Catholic Democrats serving in the House of Representatives, we are proud that we
are part of the faithful pro-choice Catholic majority — 68 percent of whom supported the legal
protections for abortion access enshrined in Roe and 63 percent of whom think abortion should
be legal in all or most cases. Our faith unfailingly promotes the common good, prioritizes the
dignity of every human being, and highlights the need to provide a collective safety net to our
most vulnerable.

We are committed to making real the basic principles at the heart of Catholic social teaching:
helping the poor, disadvantaged, and the oppressed; protecting the least among us; and
ensuring that all Americans of every faith are given meaningful opportunities to share in the
blessings of this great country. We recognize that bans and restrictions on abortion
disproportionately harm those who already endure poverty, discrimination, and racism. Our
values demand that we dismantle economic insecurity, gender inequality, and systemic racism.

As Catholics, we believe all individuals are free to make their own personal decisions about their
bodies, families, and futures. The role of informed conscience is at the very core of our faith.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church plainly states that “A human being must always obey the
certain judgment of his [or her] conscience. If he [or she] were deliberately to act against it, he
[or she] would condemn himself [or herself].” We regard conscience as both a sacred gift and a
responsibility: we are called to follow our conscience.

https://delauro.house.gov/sites/evo-sub ... ples_0.pdf

[raison de arizona]

Someone is lying. If we find it is Biden's Attorney General, Merrick Garland, we will start an impeachment inquiry.

These chairs and committees will get to the full truth:
→ @Jim_Jordan of @JudiciaryGOP
→ @RepJamesComer of @GOPoversight
→ @RepJasonSmith of @WaysandMeansGOP

[Slim Cognito]

Hoookay.

What if it's the three stooges who are lying?

[Ben-Prime]

Someone is lying. If we find it is Biden's Attorney General, Merrick Garland, we will start an impeachment inquiry.

These chairs and committees will get to the full truth:
→ @Jim_Jordan of @JudiciaryGOP
→ @RepJamesComer of @GOPoversight
→ @RepJasonSmith of @WaysandMeansGOP

I mean, at this point, either the US Attorney for Delaware is lying -- since he had previously made public statements that denied this so-called whistleblower's claims and stating that he had full charging authority in the HB case -- or the so-called whistlebower is (from now on, I simply refer to him as 'scw').

[RTH10260]

IFF this whistleblower were blowing more than hot air the issue would have leaked to the press and they would have published it as BREAKING NEWS all over the world US of A

[RTH10260]

FBI director to testify before Republican-controlled House panel
Hearing comes as Republicans have accused FBI and DoJ of political bias in investigations of Trump and Biden’s son

Joan E Greve in Washington
Wed 12 Jul 2023 11.00 BST

The director of the Federal Bureau of Intelligence, Christopher Wray, will testify Wednesday before a House committee as he faces threats of impeachment from Donald Trump’s congressional allies.

The FBI director will serve as the sole witness at a House judiciary committee hearing that will “examine the politicization of the nation’s pre-eminent law enforcement agency under the direction of [Wray] and Attorney General Merrick Garland,” the Republican-controlled panel has said.

The hearing comes as leading Republicans have accused the FBI and the justice department of political bias in their handling of investigations into Trump and Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden. Democrats have roundly rejected those accusations, defending the justice department’s prosecution of Trump as proof that no American is above the law.




https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -committee

[p0rtia]

So, another shit show from the Cheeto Mussolini Lyin', Cryin' Defense Brigade.

Always fun to hear the dems on the committee point out the blatant hypocrisy.

[Kendra]

Adam Schiff finished his five minutes, and did I miss something, or did Gym Jordan just take over the next person's turn? All about ranting at Wray over the difference between one brand of Catholics vs the other.

[raison de arizona]

I still have trouble grokking that they think Wray is in Biden's back pocket despite being appointed by tfg. If Wray is such a bad guy, shouldn't that reflect poorly on the person that hired him? Weird disconnect.

[Kendra]

Swalwell was just up, after that Jordan started a short rant, until the Ds called a point of order and asked him whose time was up. Jordan yielded quickly after that.

Edit: Ted Lieu with a great short Q&A about folks like Roger Stone and others that were convicted during the Trump presidency and who the attorney generals were and who appointed them to the office.

[MN-Skeptic]

Aaron Rupar, Aaron Blake, and Acyn are all tweeting about the hearing.

[Kendra]

Aaron Rupar, Aaron Blake, and Acyn are all tweeting about the hearing.

Yeah, but damn Twitter now won't let folks without a Twitter account view those pages now. Effing Elon.

[Azastan]

Aaron Rupar, Aaron Blake, and Acyn are all tweeting about the hearing.

This really isn't helpful anymore.

If you aren't prepared to copy and paste, please don't link to it.

[Kendra]

After the handoff of a D rep asking ?? of Wray about the MAL search and proper storage of classified docs, Jordan has to take over the narrative to turn it to what about Biden storing docs in the garage. He was out of turn (again), and once the Ds called for point of order, Jordan shut up and turned it over to the one whose turn was up.

[northland10]

Aaron Rupar, Aaron Blake, and Acyn are all tweeting about the hearing.

This really isn't helpful anymore.

If you aren't prepared to copy and paste, please don't link to it.

There was no Tweet posted on TFB, just the links to 3 who were Tweeting about the hearing. Are you asking folks to copy and paste from threads they themselves may not be following?

[Kendra]

Nicole Wallace is opening her show today with a deep dive on today's hearing.

[sugar magnolia]

Aaron Rupar, Aaron Blake, and Acyn are all tweeting about the hearing.

This really isn't helpful anymore.

If you aren't prepared to copy and paste, please don't link to it.

Or you can do like those of us who rarely open a link or video if there is no comment on what it is, and just scroll on past.

[Azastan]

Or you can do like those of us who rarely open a link or video if there is no comment on what it is, and just scroll on past.

But what if I would be interested in it if presented on an alternate social media site?

There was no Tweet posted on TFB, just the links to 3 who were Tweeting about the hearing. Are you asking folks to copy and paste from threads they themselves may not be following?

Why would someone link to something which they themselves are not following?

It's like linking to an article which is hidden behind a paywall, in my humble and obviously not important opinion.

[sugar magnolia]

Or you can do like those of us who rarely open a link or video if there is no comment on what it is, and just scroll on past.

But what if I would be interested in it if presented on an alternate social media site?

There was no Tweet posted on TFB, just the links to 3 who were Tweeting about the hearing. Are you asking folks to copy and paste from threads they themselves may not be following?

Why would someone link to something which they themselves are not following?

It's like linking to an article which is hidden behind a paywall, in my humble and obviously not important opinion.

And yet people post links to articles behind paywalls all the time. and nobody has asked them to stop posting the links just because not everyone has access to them..

[Azastan]

Or you can do like those of us who rarely open a link or video if there is no comment on what it is, and just scroll on past.

But what if I would be interested in it if presented on an alternate social media site?

There was no Tweet posted on TFB, just the links to 3 who were Tweeting about the hearing. Are you asking folks to copy and paste from threads they themselves may not be following?

Why would someone link to something which they themselves are not following?

It's like linking to an article which is hidden behind a paywall, in my humble and obviously not important opinion.

And yet people post links to articles behind paywalls all the time. and nobody has asked them to stop posting the links just because not everyone has access to them..

That's because they can usually find an alternate source of the same information.