#Florida executive dispute resolution | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

How Many Republicans Are Against The Wall

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/how-many-republicans-are-against-the-wall/

How Many Republicans Are Against The Wall

Tony Romm And Seung Min Kim Washington Post

WASHINGTON – The prospects for a bipartisan infrastructure reform deal dimmed even further on Monday, as Senate Republicans alleged the White House had agreed to narrow the scope of its $2.2 trillion plan – only to reverse course days later.

The dispute centers on President Joe Biden’s proposal to package new investments in roads, bridges and pipes with billions of dollars to help children and families. Republicans say that Biden agreed earlier this month to seek what they describe as “social” spending as part of another legislative effort, only to have his top aides take the opposite approach during the latest round of talks on Friday.

“We thought we had an understanding that social infrastructure is off – they didn’t take any of that off,” said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., the party’s lead negotiator.

Republicans similarly had made clear to Biden that they couldn’t support tax increases to pay for the infrastructure package, Capito added, only to have the White House reaffirm its plan to raise rates on corporations when its submitted its latest counteroffer. Days later, the senator said the move had left her and her colleagues wondering, “Are you not hearing us?”

Asked about the GOP’s characterization of Biden’s position, White House spokesman Andrew Bates said the president is not going to “negotiate through the press.”

“We understood he would try to do the rest of it without us if that was the way they needed to do the rest of it,” he added.

– – – –

Partisans Differ Over Whether Shutdown Is A Very Serious Problem

About six-in-ten adults say the government shutdown is a very serious problem for the country today, while 22% view it as a somewhat serious problem; just two-in-ten say that it is not too or not at all serious a problem for the country.

Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to view the shutdown as a very serious problem for the nation: Nearly eight-in-ten Democrats and Democratic leaners say this, compared with just 35% of Republicans and Republican leaners.

Only about a quarter of conservative Republicans and GOP-leaning independents see the shutdown as a very serious problem facing the country, compared with 47% of moderate and liberal Republicans. Ideological differences among Democrats are more modest: 85% of liberal Democrats consider the shutdown a very serious problem, while 73% of conservative and moderate Democrats say the same.

Democratic Views On A Border Wall

One of the most outspoken and controversial topics of Donald Trumps election campaign and subsequent time in office has been his stance on border control. Most notably, there was much contention surrounding Trumps goal of constructing a border wall between the US and Mexico. In the past, Democrats supported measures to create a physical barrier between the US and Mexican borders. However, the lines were clearly drawn when Trump made the proposal for his wall. While Democrats support border security, Trumps border wall concept was not the route they were hoping for. Democratic views on a border wall are overall negative, though some Democrats have seen the issue as a point of negotiation for other matters, such as Trumps battle against DACA and the Dreamers.

Here Are The 41 Republicans Who Voted Against Securing The Us Border

REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Forty-one House Republicans voted against a bill Friday that would have secured funding for President Donald Trumps border wall, addressed Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and included E-verify, among other conservative provisions.

Members voted on an amended version of GOP Reps. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia and Michael McCaul of Texass bill that provided more border security funding, only granted DACA recipients a temporary protected three-year legal status with no pathway for citizenship which moderate Republicans are fervently asking leadership to provide and included other features.

The bill failed in the House in a 193-231 vote Thursday.

Here the Republican members who voted against the bill:

Paul Gosar of Arizona Frank LoBiando of New Jersey Tom MacArthur of New Jersey Chris Smith of New Jersey Leonard Lance of New Jersey Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey Pete King of New York John Faso of New York Elise Stefanik of New York Tom Reed of New York John Katko of New York Michael Turner of Ohio Kristi Noem of South Dakota Louie Gohmert of Texas Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington David Reichert of Washington

Some of the members who voted against the bill did so because leadership altered the bill before the final vote, adding on amendments and provisions they deemed amnesty.

Medical Malpractice Law Reform

Paul has proposed radical changes in the way medical malpractice claims are handled. Under bills he has introduced multiple times beginning in 2003, a patient planning pregnancy, surgery, or other major medical procedures or medical treatment would be able to buy “negative outcomes” insurance at very low cost. If the patient were to experience a negative outcome in association with the medical procedure or treatment, he or she would then seek compensation through binding arbitration, rather than through a medical malpractice trial before a jury. Paul claims that “using insurance, private contracts, and binding arbitration to resolve medical disputes benefits patients, who receive full compensation in a timelier manner than under the current system,” as well as physicians and hospitals, since their litigation costs, and malpractice insurance premiums, would be markedly reduced.

Many Presidents Have Declared Emergencies But Not Like Trump Has

At stake is nearly $6 billion in federal funds that President Trump redirected in a Feb. 15 emergency declaration. The White House is seeking to take that money from accounts at the Treasury and Defense departments to build physical barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border. The president made the order after Congress agreed on a bipartisan basis to provide $1.375 billion in wall funds for this fiscal year, but Trump said it wasn’t enough.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., initially counseled the president against invoking the national emergency out of concerns it would divide Senate Republicans and test the separation of powers, but he voted with the president on Thursday and defended his actions as lawful.

“He has simply operated within existing law, the National Emergencies Act of 1976, to invoke a narrow set of authorities to reprogram a narrow set of funds,” McConnell said. “If Congress has grown uneasy with this new law, as many have, then we should amend it.”

Democrats broadly oppose the wall, but have argued the resolution bends the intent of the law and the constitutional authority of Congress. “We’ve never had a president like this. We’ve had lots of presidents with lots of foibles but none of them seem to equate their own ego with the entire functioning of the government of the United States except this one. We can’t succumb to that,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

Republicans Help Democrats Vote Against Trump’s Wall Funding Grab

The House voted Tuesday to revoke the national emergency President Trump declared in order to spend federal money to build a physical barrier on the southern border without congressional approval.

The joint resolution passed 245-182 with the help of 13 Republican votes. It now heads to the Senate, where many lawmakers predict it will pass with the help of at least four Republicans who oppose Trumps emergency declaration.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the Senate would vote on the measure by mid-March.

Trump has vowed to issue the first veto of his presidency if the resolution reaches his desk, and the House vote indicates there are not enough votes to override his veto. Democrats would need to find 290 votes to override Trump, 45 short of the total seen Tuesday.

The 13 Republicans voting with Democrats were Reps. Justin Amash of Michigan, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Mike Gallager of Wisconsin, Jaime Hererra Beutler of Washington, Will Hurd of Texas, Dusty Johnson of South Dakota, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, Francis Rooney of Florida, Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, Elise Stefanik of New York, Fred Upton of Michigan and Greg Walden of Oregon.

Trump’s emergency declaration announcement came days after Congress appropriated $1.375 billion to erect physical barriers in the Rio Grande Valley. The money fell far short of the $5.7 billion Trump had been requesting.

Constitutional Rights: Limited Government

Term limits, 1970s: Paul was the first member of Congress to propose term limits legislation in the House, one of several bills considered “ahead of their time” by Texas Monthly magazine.

Market Process Restoration Act of 1999. H.R.Â 1789, 1999-05-13. Repeals United States antitrust law , with intent to restore market economy benefits.

To repeal the Military Selective Service Act. H.R.Â 424, 2007-01-11, originally H.R.Â 1597, 2001-04-26, cosponsored since H.R.Â 2421, 1997-09-05. Abolishes the Selective Service System, prohibits reestablishment of the draft, and forbids denial of rights due to failure to register.

See also the limited government and income tax abolition amendment.

Wall: Republicans Can Learn A Valuable Lesson From Democrats Rush To The Far Left

Since Joe Biden was sworn in as president, Democrats have taken advantage of their narrow majority in Congress and their control of the White House to ram through a radical agenda. From passing a $2 trillion socialist stimulus bill under the guise of pandemic relief, to enacting a flurry of job-killing executive orders, President Biden and his leftist allies in the House and Senate have abandoned their talking points urging unity in favor of pushing partisan legislation.

The policies promoted by Democrats in the few months have been extraordinarily destructive. President Biden and his allies have shown themselves to be catastrophically wrong on every important issue, ranging from tax policy to climate change, and Republicans can learn some crucial lessons from how the far left has governed.

Its clear that Democrats are attempting to consolidate as much power in the hands of the federal government as possible a goal antithetical to protecting individual liberty and the Constitution. While some of this change can be undone if Republicans regain their congressional majority, we know all too well that the GOP has failed to make good on promises to promote limited government and preserve freedom while theyve been in charge.

Noah Wall is an executive vice president at FreedomWorks.

Inflation And The Federal Reserve

In the words of the New York Times, Paul is “not a fan” of the Federal Reserve. In his own words, Paul advocates that we should “End the Fed“. Paul’s opposition to the Fed is supported by the Austrian Business Cycle Theory, which holds that instead of containing inflation, the Federal Reserve, in theory and in practice, is responsible for causing inflation. In addition to eroding the value of individual savings, this creation of inflation leads to booms and busts in the economy. Thus Paul argues that government, via a central bank , is the primary cause of economic recessions and depressions. He believes that economic volatility is decreased when the free market determines interest rates and money supply. He has stated in numerous speeches that most of his colleagues in Congress are unwilling to abolish the central bank because it funds many government activities. He says that to compensate for eliminating the “hidden tax” of monetary inflation, Congress and the president would instead have to raise taxes or cut government services, either of which could be politically damaging to their reputations. He states that the “inflation tax” is a tax on the poor, because the Federal Reserve prints more money which subsidizes select industries, while poor people pay higher prices for goods as more money is placed in circulation.

List Of Republicans Who Opposed The Donald Trump 2020 Presidential Campaign

This article is part of a series about

This is a list of Republicans and conservatives who opposed the re-election of incumbent Donald Trump, the 2020 Republican Party nominee for President of the United States. Among them are former Republicans who left the party in 2016 or later due to their opposition to Trump, those who held office as a Republican, Republicans who endorsed a different candidate, and Republican presidential primary election candidates that announced opposition to Trump as the presumptive nominee. Over 70 former senior Republican national security officials and 61 additional senior officials have also signed onto a statement declaring, “We are profoundly concerned about our nation’s security and standing in the world under the leadership of Donald Trump. The President has demonstrated that he is dangerously unfit to serve another term.”

A group of former senior U.S. government officials and conservativesincluding from the Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, and Trump administrations have formed The Republican Political Alliance for Integrity and Reform to, “focus on a return to principles-based governing in the post-Trump era.”

A third group of Republicans, Republican Voters Against Trump was launched in May 2020 has collected over 500 testimonials opposing Donald Trump.

Proposal To Eliminate Medicare

Paul proposes that all government funding of medical care be eliminated . His Plan to Restore America budget proposal would begin a phase out of Medicare starting in 2013, when workers younger than 25 would be able to opt out of participating in the program. He says that during the transition period, the commitments for coverage under Medicare that have already been made to older workers could be honored by cutting other government spending, such as by closing all US military bases overseas and ceasing to engage in foreign military “adventurism.”

Public Disapproves Of How Shutdown Negotiations Are Being Handled

Most Americans offer negative evaluations of the way that the nations political leaders in both parties Donald Trump, Democratic congressional leaders and Republican congressional leaders are handling negotiations over the shutdown.

Overall, just 36% of the public approves of how Trump is handling negotiations over the government shutdown, including 23% who say they strongly approve. About six-in-ten disapprove of Trumps approach to the negotiations, including 53% who say they strongly disapprove.

Views of how Republican leaders in Congress are handling shutdown negotiations generally parallel evaluations of Trump. Six-in-ten Americans say they disapprove of the way Republican congressional leaders are handling negotiations, while just 36% say they approve. However, fewer Americans characterize their views of GOP leaders handling of negotiations as strong approval or disapproval than say this about the president.

Public views of Democratic leaders handling of the shutdown talks are somewhat more positive than views of Trump or GOP leaders. Still, more disapprove than approve .

The 147 Republicans Who Voted To Overturn Election Results

When a mob of President Trumps supporters stormed the Capitol building on Wednesday, they forced an emergency recess in the Congressional proceedings to officially certify the results of the 2020 presidential election. The disruption came shortly after some Republican lawmakers made the first of a planned series of highly unusual objections, based on spurious allegations of widespread voter fraud, to states election results. The chambers were separately debating an objection to Arizonas results when proceedings were halted and the Capitol was locked down.

When the Senate reconvened at 8 p.m., and the House of Representatives an hour later, the proceedings including the objection debates continued, although some lawmakers who had previously planned to vote with the objectors stood down following the occupation of the Capitol. Plans to challenge a number of states after Arizona were scrapped, as well but one other objection, to Pennsylvanias results, also advanced to a vote. Here are the eight senators and 139 representatives who voted to sustain one or both objections.

Other Former Federal Government Officials

The Weekly Standard

Charles Fried, United States Solicitor General; Associate Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

David K. Garman, Former Assistant Secretary and Under Secretary of Energy

Steve Baer, former president, United Republican Fund of Illinois

Juan Hernandez, political consultant, co-founder of Hispanic Republicans of Texas

Matt Higgins, former press secretary for New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani

Stuart Stevens, political consultant and strategist

Mac Stipanovich, strategist and lobbyist; former Chief of Staff to Bob Martinez

Rick Wilson, political consultant and former Republican strategist.

How Americans See Illegal Immigration The Border Wall And Political Compromise

A standoff between President Donald Trump and Democratic congressional leaders over how to address unauthorized immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border has led to a partial shutdown of the federal government one that is now the longest on record.

Learn about U.S. immigration through five short lessons delivered to your inbox every other day.Sign up now!

The United States was home to 10.7 million unauthorized immigrants in 2016, a 13% decline from a peak of 12.2 million in 2007, according to the most recent Pew Research Center estimates. This decade-long decline was driven almost entirely by a decrease in unauthorized immigrants from Mexico, even as the numbers from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras increased. Meanwhile, a growing share of unauthorized immigrants were not people who had entered the country illegally, but had arrived legally and then .

More recent data from the federal government show that 2018 saw an uptick in border apprehensions . There were nearly 467,000 apprehensions at the southwest border last year, the most in any calendar year since at least 2012. Still, the number of apprehensions in 2018 remained far below the more than 1 million apprehensions per fiscal year routinely recorded during the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published Jan. 11, 2019.

Cabinet Members And Political Appointees

Richard Armitage: NAYArmitage, a former Navy officer who served as deputy secretary of state under George W. Bush and deputy secretary of defense under Ronald Reagan, says he will vote for Hillary Clinton. If Donald Trump is the nominee, I would vote for Hillary Clinton, he told Politico. He doesn’t appear to be a Republican, he doesn’t appear to want to learn about issues. So, Im going to vote for Mrs. Clinton.

Condoleezza Rice: NAY George W. Bushs secretary of state blasted Trump in a Facebook statement and : Enough! Donald Trump should not be President. He should withdraw. As a Republican, I hope to support someone who has the dignity and stature to run for the highest office in the greatest democracy on earth.

Rice previously said she had no plans to get involved in the race or attend the GOP convention, a spokesman told Yahoo News. She also ruled out serving as Trumps running mate.

Brent Scowcroft: NAYThe retired lieutenant general and national security adviser, an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, has announced that he is endorsing Hillary Clinton. Scowcroft did not mention Trump in his statement.

Donald Rumsfeld: YEAIts now a known known: The former secretary of defense under George W. Bush is voting Trump. I’m a Republican, and there’s not any doubt in my mind how I’ll vote, he told the Daily Mail, adding that it was not a close call and I don’t believe Hillary Clinton is qualified to be President of the United States.

Republican Views On A Border Wall

It is a fairly well-known fact that the Republican party is in favor of protection, and therefore a Mexican border wall. In fact, 74 percent of Republicans support building a wall on the Mexican border. Promises to build this wall were a large part of President Donald Trumps campaign, and his supporters were front and center hoping that he stuck to this plan. More than just an immigration issue, the wall became Trumps signature promise and rallying cry during his campaign. The wall goes hand in hand with Republican views that border security should be heightened and that anyone crossing the border should be given a thorough background check. Republicans favor a far stricter immigration policy than Democrats, and want to take much stricter preventative measures against illegal immigration than have been taken in the past. Of course, this isnt to say that there arent differences within the party on this issue.

There’s Battle Lines Being Drawn

But what explains that nostalgic impulse in the midst of a revolution? It is the same emotion that animated the MAGA movement which, after all, stood for make America great, again. It is a desire to return to an earlier time that the members of the movement remember as better than today.

“There’s a feeling I sense across society that people want to go back to a simpler time,” LeGate said. “No one likes Covid. People don’t feel the economy is fair. Everything looks better in hindsight.”

And he argues that efforts to regulate trading will feel to Reddit traders more like suppression, and could fuel more anger.

“If someone on Main Street loses half their portfolio in a day, nothing’s going to happen. But if a hedge fund does, they literally stop the trading,” he said. “I myself question whether this is really about protecting the individual investor or protecting the hedge fund.”

Tax Credits For Healthcare Expenses & Children’s Health Insurance Program

Paul voted in 2007 and 2009 against reauthorization and expansion of the Children’s Health Insurance Program , which is a joint state-federal program to provide health insurance for children and pregnant women in low-income families who do not qualify for Medicaid.

He has been a consistent advocate for offering tax credits for healthcare expenses. In each Congress since 2000 Paul has proposed bills that would provide families with tax credits of up to $500 for the healthcare expenses of each dependent family member, and up to $3000 for the care of each dependent with a disability or serious disease such as cancer.

Since 2003, Paul has several times introduced into Congress proposals to provide tax credits for the cost of health insurance premiums, and to increase the allowable tax deduction for healthcare expenses . He has also advocated expanding the tax benefits of health savings accounts.

Academics Journalists Authors Commentators

Reuel Marc Gerecht, writer

Michael Gerson, columnist and speechwriter for George W. Bush

Peter Mansoor, military historian

Meghan McCain, commentator, daughter of Senator John McCain

Charles Murray, political scientist and commentator

Ana Navarro, strategist and commentator

Tom Nichols, national security affairs scholar

Marc Andreessen, co-founder of Netscape; founder of Andreessen Horowitz

Mike Fernandez, founder of MBF Healthcare Partners

James Murren, Chairman and CEO of MGM Resorts International

William Oberndorf, Chairman of Oberndorf Enterprises

Federal Power: We The People Act

We the People Act. H.R.Â 539, 2009-01-14, originally H.R.Â 3893, 2004-03-04. Forbids all federal courts from hearing cases on abortion, same-sex unions, sexual practices, and establishment of religion, unless such a case were a challenge to the Constitutionality of federal law. Makes federal court decisions on those subjects nonbinding as precedent in state courts, and forbids federal courts from spending money to enforce their judgments.

Because it forbids federal courts from adjudicating “any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion”, secularists have criticized the bill as removing federal remedy for allegations of state violation of religious freedom. As an example of potential for violation, of the Texas Constitution provides the requirement that office-holders “acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being”. The Democratic Underground online community published the holding that the bill would give state sexual-orientation laws special immunity.

Cosponsors include Roscoe Bartlett, Tom Tancredo, Sam Johnson, Walter B. Jones Jr., John A. Sullivan, John Duncan Jr., and Ted Poe.

New Poll: Senator Gardner Losing Colorado Independent Voters As Majority Of Voters Oppose Wall And Blame Shutdown On Republicans

If Elections Were Held Today, Majority of Colorado Voters Would Opt for Senator Gardners Unnamed Democratic Opponent

Washington, DC New polling from Public Policy Polling , commissioned by MoveOn and the Immigration Hub, shows that Colorado voters overwhelmingly oppose President Trump and congressional Republicans government shutdown and calls for the wall. In fact, the shutdown is hurting Senator Cory Gardners 2020 chances among critical Colorado voters.

With over 15,000 federal employees in Colorado are furloughed or working without pay, the majority of Colorado voters polled – including 62% of Independents – want Congress to vote to re-open the government without any funding for the wall. Other topline findings include

You can see the full polling memo here.

The 2018 elections clearly showed that Trumps immigration fear-mongering backfired — Mike Coffmans defeat was proof, said Tyler Moran from the Immigration Hub. Now Trump has backed himself into a corner with a shutdown that polling shows he and Republicans are overwhelmingly blamed for. If Senator Gardner doesnt move his colleagues past the tantrum and against a wall no one wants, 2020 results are going to look a lot like 2018.

###

1 note · View note

statetalks · 3 years ago

Text

Which 12 Republicans Voted Against Trump

Sen Susan Collins Of Maine

12 Republicans Vote With Democrats In Terminating Trumps National Emergency | Hardball | MSNBC

Collins;co-sponsored the resolution out of concern for the precedent an emergency declaration would set for the powers of executive branch.;The Senate appropriator known for bucking her party, splitting with leadership on efforts to repeal the 2010 health care law in 2017. That independent streak has become part of Collins brand in Maine, where she remains popular.

But the four-term senator is likely to face her toughest re-election next year, with Democrats raising millions of dollars for a yet-to-be-determined challenger after she voted for Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. Collins is a top target in a state Hillary Clinton won in 2016, and Democrats will be arguing that shes voted with her party much more often than not. Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales rates her re-election Tilts Republican.

List Of Republicans Who Opposed The Donald Trump 2016 Presidential Campaign

This article is part of a series about

This is a list of Republicans and conservatives who announced their opposition to the election of Donald Trump, the 2016 Republican Party nominee and eventual winner of the election, as the President of the United States. It also includes former Republicans who left the party due to their opposition to Trump and as well as Republicans who endorsed a different candidate. It includes Republican presidential primary election candidates that announced opposition to Trump as the nominee. Some of the Republicans on this list threw their support to Trump after he won the presidential election, while many of them continue to oppose Trump. Offices listed are those held at the time of the 2016 election.

Watch: Sen Susan Collins Explains Just Why 12 Republicans Voted Against Trumps Emergency Declaration

On Thursday, prior to the Senates 59-41 vote against President Trumps emergency declaration for border wall funding, Sen. Susan Collins detailed the reasoning behind her vote :

Collins spoke about the way in which the courts have determined the boundaries of presidential authority, vis-a-vis Congress, using a very specific case regarding presidential seizure of property. That case was Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, which was decided in 1952:

As Justice Robert Jackson explained in his profoundly influential concurrence in that case, the question of whether a Presidents actions are constitutionally valid should be determined by examining the source of the Presidents authority

Collins continued, noting that Trumps National Emergencies Act fails to fulfill a common sense test used by a former president:

Collins also expressed concern that the declaration would take funding from critical military construction projects, although none have been named as of publication.

She concluded with a silent point, saying that this vote is not about whether or not one desires more advanced border security, but whether or not the president should have the power of the purse, which is expressly granted to Congress in Article I, section 9, clause 7 of the Constitution:

The senator from Kentucky also offered his own solution for funding border security: the Border Enforcement, Security, And Funding Enhancement Act.

President Trump vetoed the block on Friday.

You May Like: Who’s Right Democrats Or Republicans

‘a Win Is A Win’: Trump’s Defense Team Makes Remarks After Senate Votes To Acquit

Despite the acquittal, President Joe Biden said in a statement that “substance of the charge” against Trump is “not in dispute.”

“Even those opposed to the conviction, like Senate Minority Leader McConnell, believe Donald Trump was guilty of a ‘disgraceful dereliction of duty’ and ‘practically and morally responsible for provoking’ the violence unleashed on the Capitol,” Biden’s statement read in part.

The president added that “this sad chapter in our history has reminded us that democracy is fragile. That it must always be defended. That we must be ever vigilant. That violence and extremism has no place in America. And that each of us has a duty and responsibility as Americans, and especially as leaders, to defend the truth and to defeat the lies.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called Saturday’s vote the largest and most bipartisan vote in any impeachment trial in history,” but noted it wasn’t enough to secure a conviction.

The trial “was about choosing country over Donald Trump, and 43 Republican members chose Trump. They chose Trump. It should be a weight on their conscience today, and it shall be a weight on their conscience in the future,” he said in a speech on the Senate floor.

With control of the Senate split 50-50, the House managers always had an uphill battle when it came to convincing enough Republicans to cross party lines and convict a former president who is still very popular with a large part of the GOP base.

Sen Lamar Alexander Of Tennessee

The retiring Tennessee lawmaker said that he supports the president on border security but that the emergency declaration sets a dangerous precedent. His declaration to take an additional $3.6 billion that Congress has appropriated for military hospitals, barracks and schools is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution that I swore an oath to support and defend, Alexander said in a statement Thursday ahead of the vote.

The three-term senator, a member of the Appropriations Committee, announced last December that he would not run for re-election in 2020.

Also Check: How Do Republicans Feel About Climate Change

The 17 Republicans Who Voted To Advance The Senate Infrastructure Bill

Seventeen Republican senators voted with all 50 Democrats on Wednesday to advance a bipartisan infrastructure deal, in a win for President BidenJoe BidenElder pledges to replace Feinstein with Republican if he wins California recall electionOvernight Defense & National Security Out of Afghanistan, but stuck in limboOn The Money Delta variant wallops job marketMORE and the bipartisan group of negotiators.

The vote the first of several steps expected before the Senate decides whether or not to ultimately pass the billcomes one week after all Republicans blocked a similar move, arguing that Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerSchumer calls for action on climate after Ida floodingHouse Democrats urge Pelosi to prioritize aid for gymsProgressives launch campaign to exclude gas from Congress’s clean electricity program;MORE was rushing the process as senators tried to finalize their agreement.

But the group announced earlier Wednesday that;it had reached a final agreement with the White House for a $1.2 trillion bill over eight years, with $550 billion in new spending. Because the group is still finalizing text, the Senate is taking up a shell bill that;it will swap the language into once it is complete.

At least 10 Republicans were needed to advance the bill. In the end, Democrats were able to net 17 GOP votes:

Sen Marco Rubio Of Florida

Like many others, Rubio warned of the precedent set by Trumps national emergency.;A member of Senate Appropriations, he said in a February statement that while he agreed there was a crisis at the southern border, a future president may use this exact same tactic to impose the Green New Deal.

Rubio won re-election by 8 points in 2016 after an unsuccessful run for the GOP nomination for president. Trump carried Florida by just;1 point that year.

Read Also: How Many Democratic Presidents Have Republicans Tried To Impeach

Sen Rand Paul Of Kentucky

Paul announced at a GOP Lincoln Day dinner earlier this month that he would support the resolution, noting that Congress did not appropriate the funds Trump was looking to use for the border wall. If we take away those checks and balances, its a dangerous thing, the two-term senator said.

Paul has described his political views as libertarian, and has been known to break with his party on foreign policy and surveillance issues.;He was re-elected to the Senate in 2016 after a failed White House bid, and he will not face voters again until 2022.

House Republicans Join Democrats In Voting To Impeach Trump

2 Times In 2 Days Republicans Vote Against President Donald Trump | The Last Word | MSNBC

Washington Ten Republican members of the House, including one of its highest-ranking leaders, joined Democrats in voting to impeach President Trump for inciting the deadly attack on the Capitol last week by a violent mob of his supporters.;

The final vote was 232 to 197, as the 10 Republicans joined all 222 Democrats in voting in favor of the impeachment resolution.;

The article of impeachment will next be delivered to the Senate, where Mr. Trump will be placed on trial. However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said after the House vote that there is “simply no chance that a fair or serious trial could conclude before President-elect Biden is sworn in next week.”

Mr. Trump is the first president to be impeached twice. When he was;impeached;in 2019 over his attempts to pressure Ukraine to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden, no House Republicans voted in favor of impeaching him. But this time, 10 members of his own party determined his actions warranted impeachment.

Here are the Republicans who voted to impeach Mr. Trump:

Liz Cheney of Wyoming

Tom Rice of South Carolina

Fred Upton of Michigan

David Valadao of California

Cheney, the third-ranking Republican in the House, said in a statement on Tuesday that she would vote to impeach Mr. Trump after he whipped up his supporters Wednesday at a rally not far from the Capitol.

Also Check: Who Said We Are All Republicans We Are All Federalists

Sen Jerry Moran Of Kansas

Moran, a member of Senate Appropriations,; shortly before Thursdays vote that he would support the resolution. I share President Trumps goal of securing our borders, but expanding the powers of the presidency beyond its constitutional limits is something I cannot support, he tweeted.; also attached photos of his handwritten notes outlining his position. Hes up for;a third term;in 2022.

Republicans Oppose Awarding Medals For Capitol Defence

Medals will still be awarded, though Republican no votes draw criticism from across political aisle.

Members of the US Republican party are coming under fire after 21 voted against a bill to award Capitol police officers gold medals for their acts during the that attempted to block the transition of power in the US.

Both the Senate and House agreed to award the medals, but the final vote in the House of Representatives was 406-21. All 21 votes votes against the bill came from Republicans, some of whom aired their differences of opinion about the events of January 6.

The riot was attended largely by supporters of former President Donald Trump who came from myriad far-right and anti-government groups, and the QAnon movement that believes Trump was chosen to defeat a cabal of international Deep State liberal elites who traffic children for their blood to stay young.

They attempted to stop a joint session of Congress from certifying President Joe Bidens electoral victory. Five died after the riot, including Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick.

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, infamous for her past support of aspects of the QAnon conspiracy theory movement and previously claiming that a Jewish Laser caused wildfires, voted against the bill.

I wouldnt call it an insurrection, Greene told reporters after the vote.

Greene joined Representative Thomas Massie in saying the Capitol is not a temple.

Don’t Miss: Did Trump Say Republicans Are Stupid

Republicans Who Voted To Acquit Trump Used Questions Of Constitutionality As A Cover

Following the vote, McConnell gave a scathing speech condemning Trumps lies about election fraud as well as his actions on January 6, only moments after he supported acquittal.

That speech was emblematic of how many Republican senators approached the impeachment vote: Although GOP lawmakers were critical of the attack on January 6, they used a process argument about constitutionality in order to evade confronting Trump on his actual actions.

Effectively, because Trump is no longer in office, Republicans say the Senate doesnt have jurisdiction to convict him of the article of impeachment. As Voxs Ian Millhiser explained, theres some debate over that, but most legal scholars maintain that it is constitutional for the Senate to try a former president.

If President Trump were still in office, I would have carefully considered whether the House managers proved their specific charge, McConnell said. McConnell, however, played an integral role in delaying the start of the trial until after Trump was no longer president.

His statement on Saturday was simply a continuation of how Republicans had previously approached Trumps presidency: Theres been an overwhelming hesitation to hold him accountable while he was in office, and that still appears to be the case for many lawmakers.

Republicans Vote Against Honoring Capitol Police For Protecting Congress

House voted 413-12 to award congressional gold medals to all members of Capitol force for their efforts on 6 January

A dozen Republicans voted against a resolution honoring US Capitol police for their efforts to protect members of Congress during the insurrection on 6 January.

The House voted 413-12 on Wednesday to award congressional gold medals, Congresss highest expression of national appreciation, to all members of the Capitol police force.

The Republicans who opposed this honor included Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Matt Gaetz of Florida and Thomas Massie of Kentucky. They and other opposing members said they had problems with the text of the legislation.

Massie told reporters he disagreed with the terms insurrection and temple in the legislation.

The resolution said: On January 6, 2021, a mob of insurrectionists forced its way into the US Capitol building and congressional office buildings and engaged in acts of vandalism, looting, and violently attacked Capitol police officers.

It also named the three officers who responded to the attack and died shortly after Capitol police officers Brian Sicknick and Howard Liebengood and Metropolitan police department officer Jeffrey Smith and said seven other people died and more than 140 law enforcement officers were injured.

Louie Gohmert, a congressman from Texas, said in a statement that the text does not honor anyone, but rather seeks to drive a narrative that isnt substantiated by known facts.

Read Also: How Many Registered Democrats And Republicans Are There

These 12 Republicans Defied Trump And Voted To Overturn His Declaration Of An Emergency At The Border

Twelve Republican senators defied President Trump on Thursday, rebuffing his public and private pleas for GOP unity and voting for a resolution overturning his declaration of a national emergency at the border.

The vote marked congressional Republicans first significant defection from Trump in more than two years. Throughout his presidency, he has enjoyed almost universal support from his party save for a few GOP lawmakers who bucked him in big moments like the repeal of the Affordable Care Act and some foreign policy issues.

But this was a rejection of Trump on his signature campaign promise. Since the day he announced his candidacy for president, Trump spoke about ending illegal immigration and building a wall along the southern border that he originally said would be paid for by Mexico. It is the defining issue among his core supporters. Build the wall is a Trump rallying cry.

The Senate Republicans who voted to block Trumps ability to unilaterally circumvent Congress and shift money to build his wall were swift to point out they still supported the wall, but they were voting to preserve the constitutional separation of powers.

To make clear, a border fence, a border barrier is a policy that I support, wholeheartedly, unequivocally, said Sen. Mike Lee on the Senate floor, in announcing his support for the resolution.

Will The Stimulus Bill Boost Democrats Electoral Prospects

But is this opposition real or just noise? After all, were still a long way from the 2022 primaries, which leaves plenty of time for anger surrounding their votes to impeach Trump to fade.

related:Sometimes Senators Just Retire. Dont Read Too Much Into The Recent GOP Exodus. Read more. »

At first glance, the seriousness of the primary challengers does vary quite a bit, ranging from the very serious that is, other elected officials, who tend to be stronger candidates to political newcomers like a conservative activist best known for getting married in a MAGA dress. Yet, in most cases, these representatives should all have at least some reason to be concerned about winning renomination in 2022 especially those who hail from more Republican-leaning districts.1

Republicans who voted to impeach face primary challenges

The 10 House Republicans who backed impeachment, including whether they were publicly admonished by state or local Republican Party committees and whether they have a primary challenger

Representative -10.9

*Valadao lost reelection in Californias 21st Congressional District in 2018 but won the seat back in 2020.

Admonishment includes a censure or public rebuke by a Republican Party committee at the state, district or county level.

related:Why Republicans Dont Fear An Electoral Backlash For Opposing Really Popular Parts Of Bidens Agenda Read more. »

related:Confidence Interval: Republicans Will Win Back Congress In 2022 Read more. »

Read Also: What Do Republicans Think About Abortion

List Of Republicans Who Opposed The Donald Trump 2020 Presidential Campaign

This article is part of a series about

A third group of Republicans, Republican Voters Against Trump was launched in May 2020 has collected over 500 testimonials opposing Donald Trump.

source https://www.patriotsnet.com/which-12-republicans-voted-against-trump/

0 notes

davidrivkin · 4 years ago

Text

Congress Sowed the Seeds of Jan. 6 in 1887

The Electoral Vote Count Act lets Congress think it can choose the President, but it’s unconstitutional.

By J. Michael Luttig and David B. Rivkin Jr.

March 18, 2021, in the Wall Street Journal

Congress plans to establish a commission to investigate the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol. We already know one reason for that terrible event. Members of the mob acted in the mistaken belief, encouraged by President Trump, that lawmakers had the power to determine the election’s winner. Congress itself sowed the seeds of this belief when it passed the Electoral Vote Count Act of 1887 and could destroy it root and branch by repealing that law.

The EVCA grew out of another bitterly contested presidential election. In 1876 officials in Florida, Louisiana and South Carolina certified competing slates of electors, one for Republican Rutherford B. Hayes and one for Democrat Samuel J. Tilden ; a single electoral vote from Oregon was similarly contested. The 20 disputed votes were enough to decide the election. A congressional commission ultimately chose Hayes in a political deal. In exchange for the presidency, Republicans agreed to end Reconstruction and withdraw federal troops from the South.

The EVCA was enacted 10 years later, largely to limit Congress’s role in determining which electoral votes to accept. Yet Congress gave itself more authority than the Constitution allows, by establishing a labyrinthine process to resolve state electoral-vote challenges. The most constitutionally offensive provision gave Congress the absolute power to invalidate electoral votes as “irregularly given,” a process that a single representative and senator can trigger by filing an objection.

Fortunately, this provision has seldom been invoked—only twice before 2021—and no objection has ever been sustained. But this year Republican lawmakers vowed to contest the results in six swing states that Joe Biden carried. Although the objections had no prospect of success in a Democratic House and those that were filed (for Arizona and Pennsylvania) were voted down overwhelmingly in both chambers, the law put Congress smack in the middle, where it uncomfortably found itself in 1876.

That’s not what the Framers intended. The Constitution’s Electors Clause gives state legislatures plenary authority over the manner of choosing electors and relegates Congress to determining on what day the Electoral College would cast its votes. The 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804, reformed the Electoral College by providing for separate votes for president and vice president. It also reiterates the Article II, Section 1 language that the certified state electoral results are to be transmitted to Washington, opened by the president of the Senate, and counted in the presence of both congressional houses.

No constitutional provision empowers Congress to resolve disputes over the validity of a state’s electoral slate—or for that matter addresses who is to resolve these disputes. Significantly, the 12th Amendment gives Congress no power to enact legislation to enforce its provisions, unlike subsequent amendments expanding the franchise. The Necessary and Proper Clause doesn’t support such legislation either. The constitutional text contains further indications that the Framers chose to exclude Congress from participating in presidential elections. While Article I, Section 5 grants Congress the authority to judge the elections of its own members, no such power is given with regard to presidential elections. And Article II, Section 1 forbids members of Congress from being appointed as electors.

In fact, after much debate, the Framers deliberately chose to deny Congress any substantive role in selecting the president and vice president, except in the rare case that no candidate has an Electoral College majority. This was for compelling separation-of-powers reasons. As Gouverneur Morris explained at the time, “if the Executive be chosen by the [National] Legislature, he will not be independent [of] it; and if not independent, usurpation and tyranny on the part of the Legislature will be the consequence.”

Thus Congress’s prescribed role as audience during the process of opening and counting the electoral votes is ministerial. With electoral college votes coming from all of the states, the counting had to be performed by a federal government entity, and both the executive and judicial branches had potential conflicts of interest. That Congress has no constitutional “skin in the game” of presidential selection made it perfectly positioned for this role of official observer.

Who then does have the power to settle disputes over electoral slates, such as those in 1876 and 2020? Whether electors are validly chosen is a quintessentially legal determination, not a political one. When state legislatures select presidential electors, they exercise power vested in them by the U.S. Constitution, not by state law. As the power to say what federal law is rests with the federal judiciary, it is the federal courts that have the authority and the responsibility to resolve these disputes.

Congress should promptly repeal the Electoral Vote Counting Act. Given the tight constitutional timeline for casting and counting votes and inaugurating a president, lawmakers should enact a statute providing for expeditious federal judicial resolution of all questions relating to compliance with state legislatively established procedures for selecting presidential electors, the validity of elector selection, and the casting of electoral votes—and requiring eventual mandatory Supreme Court review.

By ridding the country of this unconstitutional and anachronistic law, lawmakers would remove themselves from the process for choosing the president and surrender back to the federal judiciary the role Congress unconstitutionally arrogated to itself almost a century and a half ago. That would go a long way toward ensuring that America never witnesses a siege on the National Capitol on a future Jan. 6.

Mr. Luttig served as a judge on the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 1991-2006. He advised Vice President Mike Pence on the 2020 vote certification. Mr. Rivkin practices appellate and constitutional law in Washington. He served in the White House Counsel’s Office and Justice Department under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/congress-sowed-the-seeds-of-jan-6-in-1887-11616086776

0 notes

orbemnews · 4 years ago

Link

What Jeffrey Epstein Did to Earn $158 Million From Leon Black He styled himself as a math whiz and “financial doctor” to the rich — even though he was a college dropout who had only a brief tenure at a traditional Wall Street firm. It was said his services were available only to billionaires, whose affairs he handled mostly from a tropical island hideaway. So what did Jeffrey Epstein do to earn hundreds of millions of dollars from a handful of wealthy clients like the private equity billionaire Leon Black? The answer: help rich people pay less in taxes. In the case of Mr. Black, the chief executive of Apollo Global Management, his advice could have been worth as much as $2 billion in savings, according to a law firm’s review of Mr. Black’s business dealings with Mr. Epstein. On Monday, Mr. Black announced that he would step down as Apollo’s chief executive this year after the review found he had paid Mr. Epstein $158 million over five years for his services. Mr. Epstein’s specialty was suggesting ways for wealthy clients to use sophisticated trusts and other investment vehicles to reduce their tax liability while passing on assets to their children, according to documents reviewed by The New York Times and interviews with 11 people familiar with his work. In the process, he collected hefty fees — usually based on a cut of the anticipated tax savings. In the years after 2008, when Mr. Epstein pleaded guilty in Florida to prostitution charges involving a teenage girl, he often advised clients on the use of grantor retained annuity trusts, or GRATs, according to three people familiar with his work. GRATs are a form of sophisticated trust that broke into the mainstream after a high-profile court fight involving a Walmart heir, and have been used by wealthy people including the father of former President Donald J. Trump, according to published reports. These trusts permit a person to keep collecting income from assets of all kinds — including stocks, real estate and art — and then hand them off to family members without paying the large gift or estate taxes normally associated with such transfers. One person who did business for Mr. Epstein over the past decade said the disgraced financier’s “biggest thing was GRATs.” The person, who stopped working with Mr. Epstein in 2018 but spoke on the condition of anonymity because he continues to advise wealthy clients, said Mr. Epstein had bragged about using GRATs to save money for a small group of clients, including Mr. Black. In Mr. Black’s case, according to the review by the law firm Dechert, the savings were enormous: about $1 billion for a single GRAT. Mr. Epstein’s detection of a problem in a trust set up in 2006 and his proposed solution were “the most valuable piece of work” that he performed, the report said. “Outside legal counsel described the solution as a ‘grand slam,’” according to the Dechert report, which was commissioned at Mr. Black’s request after The Times reported in October that he had paid Mr. Epstein at least $75 million in fees. The Dechert report — 22 double-spaced pages delivered to Apollo’s board — cleared Mr. Black of any wrongdoing, but he said he would step down as chief executive by the time he turned 70 in July. Another Apollo founder, Marc Rowan, will take over that role, and Mr. Black will remain the company’s chairman. Apollo’s shares were up 7 percent on Tuesday. The report provided no details about the problems with the GRAT or Mr. Epstein’s fix, said William LaPiana, a professor and associate dean at New York Law School and a trust and estates expert. Mr. LaPiana said GRATs could provide enormous savings — especially when packed with assets expected to rise sharply in value over time. And a wealthy person would pay dearly for good advice on such trusts. Mr. Epstein was compensated for the resolution of the GRAT problem as part of a $23.5 million agreement with Mr. Black in 2013, according to the report. After that, they entered a series of agreements that netted Mr. Epstein more than $100 million more before the two men parted ways in 2018. The split was the result of a dispute over Mr. Epstein’s demand for a 10 percent fee on another transaction, which the Dechert report said could have been worth $600 million in savings. Mr. Black ultimately paid Mr. Epstein $20 million for that transaction, which involved loans between Black family trusts to achieve a tax benefit for Mr. Black’s children, the report said. In 2019, Mr. Epstein killed himself inside a Manhattan jail cell while facing federal sex-trafficking charges. Jack Blum, a Washington lawyer who has led corruption investigations for several Senate committees, said he was surprised by the size of the fees Mr. Epstein’s work commanded. “You could be the best lawyer in Manhattan working on the most complicated trusts and estates and it would never come anywhere close to that kind of money,” he said. The Dechert report conceded that the compensation that Mr. Black had paid to Mr. Epstein “far exceeded any amounts” paid to his other professional advisers. Mr. Black has repeatedly said all of Mr. Epstein’s work was thoroughly vetted by outside lawyers and accountants. The only law firm mentioned in the Dechert report is Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, which has done tax and estate work for Mr. Black for many years. It also is one of Apollo’s main outside law firms. The Dechert report does not identify who drew up what it described as the problematic trust for Mr. Black, except to say the person was a tax and estate expert whom Mr. Epstein had recommended. The lawyer who did most of the early work for Mr. Black was Carlyn McCaffrey, a tax and estate partner at McDermott Will & Emery, according to three people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Ms. McCaffrey, who is widely acknowledged as a leading expert on GRATs, said, “We will not comment on any issues relating to Jeffrey Epstein.” Mr. Epstein frequently functioned as an ideas generator who would then outsource some of the work to high-powered law firms or to his clients’ current financial and tax advisers, according to five people familiar with the arrangements. That was how it worked when Mr. Epstein advised a technology executive on a tax matter, according to a representative of the executive who agreed to discuss the matter on the condition of anonymity. Mr. Epstein offered his help after learning that the executive — an acquaintance he once deemed not rich enough to qualify for his services — needed help reducing his taxes on a large stock grant from his employer. The executive believed Mr. Epstein was offering his services as a favor to a friend, because Mr. Epstein referred much of the work to a large law firm, which billed the executive for the assignment. The executive and Mr. Epstein had never discussed any payment, according to the representative, so the executive was surprised when Mr. Epstein sent his own bill — for a sum that was 10 percent of the tax dollars saved. The executive initially balked but ultimately paid up to avoid a public spat with Mr. Epstein and never worked with him again. Although Mr. Epstein frequently took his compensation as a percentage, he also offered services at a flat rate — a fee structure he suggested as part of a pitch to a New York real estate executive that was otherwise short on details. In 2013, Mr. Epstein sent the executive a six-page engagement letter, which The Times reviewed. It proposed using a proprietary “database of financial information” to analyze and evaluate estate planning matters for the executive. It did not describe what sort of information the database contained. For this service, Mr. Epstein proposed $10 million in fees for 10 months of work. The executive turned him down, according to a representative, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Katherine Rosman contributed reporting. Source link Orbem News #Black #earn #Epstein #Jeffrey #Leon #million

0 notes

jamesgierach · 4 years ago

Text

THREE CLASSIC FAILURES OF AMERICAN JUSTICE

by James E. Gierach [and Wikipedia excerpts in brackets]

A. Forum – The United States Supreme Court

[In 1857 the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Dred Scott concerning an enslaved black man whose owners had taken him from Missouri, which was a slave-holding state, into the Missouri Territory, most of which had been designated "free" territory by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. When his owners later brought him back to Missouri, Scott sued in court for his freedom, claiming that because he had been taken into "free" U.S. territory, he had automatically been freed, and was legally no longer a slave. Scott sued first in Missouri state court, which ruled that he was still a slave under its law. He then sued in U.S. federal court, which ruled against him by deciding that it had to apply Missouri law to the case. He then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In March 1857, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision against Dred Scott. In an opinion written by Chief Justice Roger Taney, the Court ruled that black people "are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word 'citizens' in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States." Taney supported his ruling with an extended survey of American state and local laws from the time of the Constitution's drafting in 1787 purporting to show that a "perpetual and impassable barrier was intended to be erected between the white race and the one which they had reduced to slavery."] (Excerpt from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford)

B. Forum – The O.J. Simpson Jury Room

[Orenthal James Simpson (born July 9, 1947), nicknamed "the Juice", is an American former football running back, broadcaster, actor, advertising spokesman, and convicted felon. Once a popular figure with the U.S. public, he is best known for being tried for the murders of his former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman. Simpson was acquitted of the murders in criminal court, but was later found responsible for both deaths in a civil trial.

In 1994, Simpson was arrested and charged with the murders of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman. He was acquitted by a jury after a lengthy and internationally publicized trial. The families of the victims subsequently filed a civil suit against him. A civil court awarded a $33.5 million judgment against him in 1997 for the victims' wrongful deaths. In 2000, he moved to Florida to avoid paying any more of the liability judgment and settled in Miami.] (Excerpt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson)

C. Forum – U.S. Senate Trump Impeachment Trial (Case and witness/document decision of the Senate pending* as of this writing)

In 2020, the U.S. Senate, discharging its constitutional duty to try the legal and factual issues concerning the U.S. House impeachment of Pres. Donald John Trump, decided* to try the case without witnesses being sworn and heard, and without documents being produced pursuant to subpoenas.

The U.S. Senate decided not to hear witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the president’s alleged abuse of power and obstruction of Congress (e.g. John Bolton, https://apple.news/AMHIJjSd2S4K1qZnrre27qg, Lev Parnas, https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/16/politics/lev-parnas-cnn-interview/index.html, Michael Duffey, https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/10/ukraine-impeachment-inquiry-white-house-authority-michael-duffey-who-led-wisconsin-gop/3930233002/, etc.) and without witnesses relating to Joe Biden’s alleged abuse of power and influence on behalf of his son (Hunter Biden, son of a Joe Biden, https://nypost.com/2020/01/27/trump-lawyers-hunter-bidens-burisma-job-reason-enough-to-seek-probe/, etc.) The Senate refusal to hear from Hunter Biden would have supported (the evidence relevant to the defense of the president in the Trump impeachment, or not) the president’s justification for his actions, namely, the ethical misconduct of his leading Democratic Party rival Joe Biden in the upcoming 2020 presidential election.

In a novel outcome — trial without witnesses or documents — the U.S. Senate also decided* not to issue any subpoenas for documents related the issues in dispute based upon objections going to the form and manner in which the House issued subpoenas for documents and witnesses. Specifically, the objection concerned the House issuing subpoenas for witnesses and documents without the House first adopting a resolution announcing it was undertaking an impeachment proceeding concerning Pres. Trump. The resolution loophole.

Because of this failing, the president’s supporters claimed in the Senate that witnesses did not have to appear in the House to testify under oath, and, now, no witnesses had to appear in the Senate because the witnesses were not properly called to testify in the House. Catch 22.

Again, ironically, at the trial in the Senate, senators resisting conviction of the president relied upon the failure of the U.S. House of Representatives to seek judicial enforcement of its subpoenas, though attorneys supporting the president in another forum, court, (in a case involving Don McGahn, https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/23/house-democrats-mcgahn-trump-103306, where the House did seek to enforce one of its Trump impeachment subpoenas) claimed the courts had no authority to enforce House impeachment subpoenas. Catch 22.

Attorneys supporting the president in the Senate had another reason why no witnesses should be heard in the Senate: executive privilege. Though the president’s defenders did not assert reliance on the privilege in the House, it did in the Senate. Catch 22.

And there you have it. The Trump Impeachment Trial was another classic failure of justice.* (Note: Senate trial is still pending as of this writing) Blacks aren’t citizens, OJ didn’t do it, and a Senate impeachment trial can proceed without witnesses or documents.

Palos Park, Illinois

30 January 2020, 4 pm EST

(Posted 1.9.2021)

0 notes

sandrabuloc · 4 years ago

Text

0 notes

maria-vania · 4 years ago

Text

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

Which 12 Republicans Voted Against Trump

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/which-12-republicans-voted-against-trump/

Which 12 Republicans Voted Against Trump

Sen Susan Collins Of Maine

12 Republicans Vote With Democrats In Terminating Trumps National Emergency | Hardball | MSNBC

List Of Republicans Who Opposed The Donald Trump 2016 Presidential Campaign

This article is part of a series about

Watch: Sen Susan Collins Explains Just Why 12 Republicans Voted Against Trumps Emergency Declaration

On Thursday, prior to the Senates 59-41 vote against President Trumps emergency declaration for border wall funding, Sen. Susan Collins detailed the reasoning behind her vote :

Collins continued, noting that Trumps National Emergencies Act fails to fulfill a common sense test used by a former president:

Collins also expressed concern that the declaration would take funding from critical military construction projects, although none have been named as of publication.

The senator from Kentucky also offered his own solution for funding border security: the Border Enforcement, Security, And Funding Enhancement Act.

President Trump vetoed the block on Friday.

You May Like: Who’s Right Democrats Or Republicans

‘a Win Is A Win’: Trump’s Defense Team Makes Remarks After Senate Votes To Acquit

Despite the acquittal, President Joe Biden said in a statement that “substance of the charge” against Trump is “not in dispute.”

Sen Lamar Alexander Of Tennessee

The three-term senator, a member of the Appropriations Committee, announced last December that he would not run for re-election in 2020.

Also Check: How Do Republicans Feel About Climate Change

The 17 Republicans Who Voted To Advance The Senate Infrastructure Bill

At least 10 Republicans were needed to advance the bill. In the end, Democrats were able to net 17 GOP votes:

Sen Marco Rubio Of Florida

Rubio won re-election by 8 points in 2016 after an unsuccessful run for the GOP nomination for president. Trump carried Florida by just;1 point that year.

Read Also: How Many Democratic Presidents Have Republicans Tried To Impeach

Sen Rand Paul Of Kentucky

House Republicans Join Democrats In Voting To Impeach Trump

2 Times In 2 Days Republicans Vote Against President Donald Trump | The Last Word | MSNBC

The final vote was 232 to 197, as the 10 Republicans joined all 222 Democrats in voting in favor of the impeachment resolution.;

Here are the Republicans who voted to impeach Mr. Trump:

Liz Cheney of Wyoming

Tom Rice of South Carolina

Fred Upton of Michigan

David Valadao of California

Also Check: Who Said We Are All Republicans We Are All Federalists

Sen Jerry Moran Of Kansas

Republicans Oppose Awarding Medals For Capitol Defence

Medals will still be awarded, though Republican no votes draw criticism from across political aisle.

They attempted to stop a joint session of Congress from certifying President Joe Bidens electoral victory. Five died after the riot, including Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick.

I wouldnt call it an insurrection, Greene told reporters after the vote.

Greene joined Representative Thomas Massie in saying the Capitol is not a temple.

Don’t Miss: Did Trump Say Republicans Are Stupid

Republicans Who Voted To Acquit Trump Used Questions Of Constitutionality As A Cover

Following the vote, McConnell gave a scathing speech condemning Trumps lies about election fraud as well as his actions on January 6, only moments after he supported acquittal.

Republicans Vote Against Honoring Capitol Police For Protecting Congress