Join us at our brand new blog - Blue Country Gazette - created for those who think "BLUE." Go to www.bluecountrygazette.blogspot.com

YOUR SOURCE FOR TRUTH

Thursday, November 2, 2023

House Speaker Mike Johnson's lifelong position on birth control


House Speaker Mike Johnson's Long Crusade Against Birth Control 

 House Speaker Mike Johnson. (photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call)

Tessa Stuart / Rolling Stone 

The new speaker has been fighting to block access to birth control — both inside and outside of Congress

At the Louisiana Right to Life Forum on Nov. 15, 2013, Mike Johnson — still lawyer, and not yet a public official — spoke about his efforts challenging the Department of Health and Human Services’ contraceptive mandate, a provision of the Affordable Care Act that required employers to provide birth control coverage as part of their insurance plans.

In his view, Johnson explained, certain types of birth control are methods of abortion.

“Everybody asks us all the time: ‘Why do you guys care so much? The HHS mandate it’s really just about contraception, sterilization. … What’s the big deal? Well, those are abortifacients,” Johnson says. “The morning after pill, as we know, is an abortifacient.”

Neither sterilization or emergency contraception medications like Plan B, are abortifacients. Both are forms of birth control that prevent a pregnancy from occurring, but do not end an existing pregnancy. A representative for Johnson, now the speaker of the House of Representatives, did not respond to an inquiry about whether Johnson still believes those forms of birth control are “abortifacients.”

Johnson is known for being among the most anti-abortion lawmakers in Congress, and for railing against the use of “abortion as a form of birth control” before he was in office. But his statements and actions suggest he does not see much difference between abortion as a form of birth control and birth control as a form of birth control.

As a lawyer, Johnson worked on multiple cases representing plaintiffs who refused to dispense, counsel, or provide emergency contraception, which they considered to be abortion-inducing drugs. And as a congressman, Johnson has repeatedly voted against efforts to expand, fund, or protect access to birth control and other family planning services — including for members of the military.

While a certain, largely female segment of the Republican party has undertaken efforts to expand access to birth control in the wake of Dobbs, Johnson has not joined those efforts.

His position places Johnson outside the mainstream: According to an Economist/YouGov poll conducted last year, 91 percent of voters believe birth control should be made free and widely available if abortion is not — including 61 percent of voters who oppose abortion. Earlier this year in Kentucky, Daniel Cameron, the Republican candidate for governor, was forced to clarify his position on birth control, after an outcry over his answers on a candidate survey suggested he believed some methods of birth control were forms of abortion that should be punishable with criminal penalties.

But as Abortion, Every Day has reported, the misconception that certain types of birth control are essentially abortion has in recent years gained a foothold among some of the country’s most strident anti-abortion groups. The prominent anti-abortion advocacy group Students for Life maintains that IUDs, emergency contraception, and hormonal birth control all qualify as “abortifacients.” (When Johnson was elevated to House speaker, Students for Life proudly announced that he holds an A+ rating from the organization.) Concerned Women for America, meanwhile, holds that abortion “is the termination of the development of life in the womb at any time from the moment of fertilization.”

At the time Johnson equated emergency contraception with abortion at the Louisiana Right to Life Forum, he was part of the legal team representing Louisiana College. The small Christian college, based in Pineville, was suing Kathleen Sebelius, then secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, over the ACA requirement that the college provide birth control coverage for its employees. The school, according to the lawsuit, objected to providing “so-called ‘emergency contraceptives’” that they claimed “cause early abortions.”

Years earlier, Johnson was a lawyer for the right-wing religious litigation shop Alliance Defense Fund, later rechristened the Alliance Defending Freedom. While working for the ADF, Johnson represented Toni Lemly, a Louisiana nurse who refused to dispense emergency contraception — or even tell patients about the medication.

Lemly, who worked in the family planning clinic at St. Tammany Parish Hospital’s community wellness center, had her hours reduced from full time to part time after she refused to counsel patients about their birth control options. At the time, Johnson said, “All that she asks of the hospital is to respect her freedom in choosing to not participate in the taking of a human life.”

The Alliance Defending Freedom, like Johnson, did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

Since arriving in Congress, Johnson has continued to champion these views. He supported a rule that allowed health care workers with a “religious or conscience” objection to providing birth control or sterilization to refuse to participate in those procedures. He also voted against the Right to Contraception Act, which would have protected access to birth control, and participated in a number of legislative efforts to keep the bill from getting to the floor. It did so — and passed — despite Johnson’s efforts.

Mike Johnson and the Republican Party are clearly out of touch with America on abortion.

Wednesday, November 1, 2023

The biggest Trump trial of the week could be happening in Colorado

no image description available

By Mark Sumner for Daily Kos

Daily Kos Staff 

Donald Trump is currently facing a civil fraud trial in New York, a second trial related to his sexual assault of writer E. Jean Carroll, a state racketeering trial centered on his attempts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia, a federal trial for election interference in Washington, D.C., and a federal trial in Florida on charges related to his illegal retention of national security documents. That’s a pretty full slate, but another trial got underway this week in Colorado that could potentially have as much impact on Trump’s chances in the 2024 election as any of the above.

The trial, which began on Monday in the Denver courtroom of State District Judge Sarah Wallace, is breaking new legal ground. In it, a group of Colorado voters have requested that Trump be forbidden from appearing on the presidential ballot in that state due to the provisions of the 14th Amendment.

At the moment, this effort has garnered relatively little attention. However, should Wallace determine that Trump cannot run for federal office in Colorado, the effects could spread rapidly. A similar trial is expected to begin soon in Minnesota, and other states are close behind.

The 14th Amendment contains several sections and has been at the core of some closely decided Supreme Court cases. However, the wording of Section 3 is easy to interpret:

“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

There’s not a lot open to interpretation there. Any previous office holder who took an oath to defend the Constitution and who then engaged in an insurrection of rebellion against the United States is not allowed to run for federal or state office.

The only question that Wallace needs to answer is whether that applies to Trump. As The New York Times reported on Monday, the voters who brought this case to court say that Trump’s actions leading up to the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, along with his broader efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, meet the definition of an insurrection or rebellion.

Trump and his attorneys have leveled the same accusation of “election interference” against the Colorado trial that they have used in attempting to halt other legal actions against Trump. However, Wallace has already rejected multiple attempts by Trump’s team to have the case dismissed. That includes rejecting a motion to dismiss on grounds that the trial violated Trump’s rights to free speech—an approach that also met with defeat in the D.C. courtroom of Judge Tanya Chutkan on Sunday when she moved to reinstate a gag order against Trump.

The trial opened with dramatic testimony from D.C. Metro Police Officer Daniel Hodges, who called the events of Jan. 6 “horrific” and said they were a “terrorist attack on the United States of America.” Rep. Eric Swalwell also testified, describing events of Jan. 6 from his perspective inside the Capitol.

According to the Times, Trump’s attorneys argued that the 14th Amendment requirements were not met, because “engaging” in an insurrection requires more than “mere incitement through words,” which seems very much as if Trump’s legal team was admitting that Trump had incited an insurrection. The testimony from Trump’s team on Monday consisted of submitting a pair of Trump tweets encouraging his supporters to leave peacefully, both of which were not issued until hours after the assault began.

As The Washington Post points out, similar lawsuits did not keep Republican Reps. Madison Cawthorn or Marjorie Taylor Greene off the ballots (though Cawthorn went on to lose). However, a county commissioner was removed from office in New Mexico for his involvement on Jan. 6 after a state judge determined he had violated Section 3.

In addition to dealing with whether Trump engaged in an insurrection, Wallace will also need to determine whether Section 3 prevents someone from running for office, rather than holding that office if elected. In an earlier court document, Wallace laid out nine points of discussion, including how Section 3 has been interpreted and applied in the past—which may mean looking at cases going back to the Civil War.

The Minnesota case is expected to get underway this week and will be heard directly by the state supreme court. Since these are cases brought at the state level meant to determine candidates those states allow to appear on ballots, experts believe it’s unlikely that the United States Supreme Court will intervene in these cases.

Just your every day average tourists visiting their Capitol.

 

Tuesday, October 31, 2023

We begin with a peek inside Mike Johnson's GOP House Bible Study Group...

no image description available

Just a few days ago, Mike Johnson was one of the lesser-known members of Congress. Now he’s been catapulted to speaker and into the fierce competition for most loathable House Republican. He worked hard to make the case for himself on that one in an interview with Sean Hannity that aired Thursday night—and managed to distinguish himself on guns by bringing an exceptional level of smarminess and condescension to the same old discredited Republican talking points.

Speaking about the mass shooting in Lewiston, Maine, Johnson insisted, “At the end of the day, the problem is the human heart. It’s not guns. It’s not the weapons. At the end of the day, we have to protect the right of the citizens to protect themselves, and that’s the Second Amendment, and that’s why our party stands so strongly for that.” He added that “this is not the time to be talking about legislation; we’re in that crisis right now,” although he most certainly thinks there is a crisis in Israel and it’s time to be talking about funding for Israel, and that there is a crisis on the border and it’s time to be talking about anti-immigrant legislation.

 As is always observed when Republicans claim that mental illness—or, in this case, “the human heart”—is the real cause of mass shootings, we know it’s the guns. Other countries have mental illness (and human hearts) and they don’t have mass shootings like we do. It’s a claim that’s so false it’s insulting, and yet Republicans continue to lead with it.

Unfortunately, Johnson wasn’t done:

Asked by Hannity if there was any gun legislation he would consider, Johnson layered on the fake self-deprecation, saying with an oily smile, “Well, been on the job for 48 hours, we’ll see.” Then, without having quite said “no, there’s not,” he pivoted to an excuse for that position:

You know, in Europe and in other places, they use vehicles to mow down crowds at parades. They’ve done that here in the United States. It’s not the weapon that’s the underlying problem. I believe we have to address the root problems of these things and mental health obviously, as in this case, is a big issue, and we’ve got to seriously address that as a society and as a government, and there’s lots of measures pending on that as well.

If Republicans wanted to fully fund a national mental health system available to everyone at low or no cost, that would be great! It wouldn’t end mass shootings, but it would be a wonderful thing.

About that “they use vehicles to mow down crowds” thing, though. It is true that vehicles plowing into crowds and killing people is a thing that happens with disturbing regularity. In the United States, sometimes they’re targeting protesters for things like Black Lives Matter, in which case prominent Republicans want to pardon them. But wherever it happens and whoever the victims are, there’s a clear difference. Let’s check out some headlines and then you can head to the comments and tell me if you see it. Here are cars:

Here are guns:

The mass shooting entries could go on much longer. Those cars-mowing-people-down entries are the most serious cases my searches turned up, and they go back to 2003.

It’s safe to say that people are always going to kill other people. It is possible to force them to do it in less efficient ways. Our laws can say, “You can have cars or knives because they have uses other than killing people and are not actually the most effective way to kill large numbers of people at once, but you cannot have the guns that have no real uses other than killing people and can kill a large number of people within minutes.”

Rebutting Republican talking points on guns is like banging your head against a wall, though. It’s easy to do but doesn’t accomplish much. Still, it’s worth noting Johnson’s style: The hackneyed talking points delivered so smoothly, the condescension oozing from every pore as he says just ridiculously false, stupid things. He truly is Jim Jordan in a less shouty package. at 8:45:03a MDT

no image description available


Monday, October 30, 2023

Biden administration calls BS on new House speaker's weak gun statement—twice

no image description available

The mass shooting in Lewiston, Maine, once again reminded Americans that as long as guns of war are readily available to everyday Americans, we are not living in a safe country. That did not stop new Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson from saying this to Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Thursday night: “At the end of the day, the problem is the human heart. It’s not guns. It’s not the weapons.”

The White House has responded twice. Spokesman Andrew Bates released a statement responding to Johnson’s pseudo-intellectual pap, calling his scapegoating of “the human heart” an “offensive accusation.” Bates also questioned Johnson’s history of weak-sauce moralizing on the issue, saying gun violence in our country is “not the result of an imagined deficiency in the hearts of the American people; nor is it because women have the right to make their own health care decisions, as the Speaker once claimed,” referring to statements Johnson made in 2016 about school shootings. Bates added, “Gun crime is uniquely high in the United States because congressional Republicans have spent decades choosing the gun industry’s lobbyists over the lives of innocent Americans.”

In a video you can watch below the fold, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called on Johnson to practice what he preached.

RELATED STORY: Johnson says it's no use passing new gun laws because there are still cars

[Johnson] said he's ready to get to work, and to find common ground. Now is the time. Now is the time to find common ground. Let's work together to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Let's work together to enact universal background checks, require safe storage of guns, and keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous individuals who have no business being armed with a weapon of war.

The president will continue to do everything in his power to protect the American people, to protect our communities, to protect our children. And we urge congressional Republicans to come to the table, to come to the table if there truly is common ground at this time.

Those are policies. Those are ideas for legislation that have a chance of helping to mitigate the gun violence plaguing our country. Over the past seven months, the Republican Party has offered up policy prescriptions for gun violence that include “We’re not gonna fix it,” and “the problem is the human heart.” The Republican Party’s complete impotence has reached its nadir.

That young man on the right is Kyle Rittenhouse, for those with short memories.  Bet you didn't know he had a bad heart.
 

RELATED STORY: 'We're not gonna fix it': Tennessee Republican says nothing can be done to stop gun violence

Sunday, October 29, 2023

Senate committee investigates Clarence Thomas for hidden $267,230 RV loan gift

WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 21: (L-R) Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas sits with his wife and conservative activist Virginia Thomas while he waits to speak at the Heritage Foundation on October 21, 2021 in Washington, DC. Clarence Thomas has now served on the Supreme Court for 30 years. He was nominated by former President George H. W.  Bush in 1991 and is the second African-American to serve on the high court, following Justice Thurgood Marshall. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Loan repayment is for suckers.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas loves to hang out in his fancy motor home, spending his vacations in RV camps and Walmart parking lots. That’s the story he likes to tell, anyway. What he doesn’t talk about is how he got that RV, much less how fancy and expensive it is.

Now Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, who chairs the Finance Committee, is shedding some light on that. His committee has been looking into Thomas’ finances, and it has discovered that Thomas never paid back most of the $267,230 loan he took from his longtime friend Anthony Welters to buy the luxury Prevost Marathon Le Mirage XL motor home.

“Today the committee has the answer to one of the pressing questions raised by reporting about his arrangement with Justice Thomas - was the loan ever repaid? Now we know that Justice Thomas had up to $267,230 in debt forgiven and never reported it on his ethics forms,” Wyden said.

Thomas bought the used motor home in December 1999, with the loan from Welters. The New York Times reports that in today’s dollars, the loan—and the vehicle—would be worth $493,700. The loan terms were generous: It required no money down, annual interest-only payments (on a 7.5% interest rate), and the principal due at the end of five years. According to the records the committee obtained from Welters, Thomas appears to have made just one of those interest payments in December 2000, with a check for $20,042.23.

At the end of that five-year period, in 2004, Welters extended the agreement for an additional 10 years with the same interest-only payment agreement. As the Times notes, Thomas should have had the money to pay the whole loan off—he received $500,000 the previous year, part of the $1.5 million advance he was getting for his autobiography.

The next document the committee obtained is a “handwritten note from Mr. Welters to Justice Thomas, dated November 22, 2008, stating that Welters would no longer seek further payments on the loan.” Also, the note states that Thomas “had paid interest only on the loan, indicating that the principal of $267,230 had not been repaid.”

It goes without saying that Thomas did not disclose this apparent gift of $267,230 in his 2008 financial disclosure form for the court. Thomas hasn’t provided his IRS returns to the committee for review, so it’s not clear if he claimed it on his taxes. Wyden called on Thomas to “inform the committee exactly how much loan was forgiven and whether he properly reported the loan forgiveness on his tax return and paid all taxes owed.”

“This was, in short, a sweetheart deal,” Michael Hamersley, a tax lawyer, told the Times. “No bank behaving in a commercially reasonable, arms-length manner would have given that loan in the first place,” Hamersley continued. “And a bank doesn’t just say, ‘Oh gee, you’ve paid a lot in interest — we’re good, no need to pay back what you actually owe.’”

Asked for comment, Welters told the Times, “As anyone who has borrowed from or lent to family or friends knows, it’s simply not the same as a bank.” But as the Times points out, that’s not what the IRS thinks. The forgiven principal balance of the loan, as well as any of the unpaid interest, would be considered income.

The Finance Committee will continue its investigation, Wyden promised, and he said he had “directed the committee to share our findings with the Judiciary Committee to evaluate the ethics implications of this disclosure.”  

Justice Thomas’ lawyer, Elliot Burke, refutes the story saying: “The loan was never forgiven. Any suggestion to the contrary is false. The Thomases made all payments to Mr. Welters on a regular basis until the terms of the agreement were satisfied in full.”

Sen. Wyden stands by the committee’s work, and challenges Thomas to prove the loan was paid: “If Justice Thomas disputes that conclusion he has an obligation to provide proof to the committee. Carefully worded statements from high-priced lawyers are not a substitute for facts,” Wyden said.

Justice Thomas's R.V. Loan Was Forgiven, Senate Inquiry Finds

Thomas with friend Mark Paoletta in his Prevost Le Mirage XL Marathon. The loan, from a wealthy friend, was for this luxury motor coach which has become a key part of Justice Thomas’s public persona. (photo: Courtesy of Mark Paoletta)

RELATED STORIES:

That creepy painting shows us Clarence Thomas has been bought by the worst people

Clarence Thomas had a child in private school. Harlan Crow paid the tuition

Clarence Thomas’ 38 vacations: Other billionaires treated Supreme Court justice to luxury travel

Saturday, October 28, 2023

BY RULE OF CLAW: "I never thought I'd grow up and get a bullet in my leg," she said

skinnystraycat.jpg

Note:  while most of the work I put out there is suitable for most age groups, this one contains some graphic descriptions of forensics and a few ear muff worthy words.  Please keep this in mind if talking about this with children.

And yes, I know I am supposed to be on a break.  I get it.  And I was.  For four hours.  Then nearly two dozen people were brutally murdered by yet another maniac with access to a weapon of war in Maine.

heart-5381733_1280.png

For those of you that scrolled through, the descriptions have concluded.  What stands out in recent years is the sheer amount of children giving haunting interviews about their experiences.  It is fair to say that such an experience brings an end to their childhood, and catapults them, in disorientating fashion, into adulthood.  Thus the next section could be fairly titled, 

The "We Could Make A Documentary From Child Victim Interviews Alone" Stage of American Gun Violence.

From an account by a 10 year-old  in Lewiston.

Little Zoey clearly sees herself as an adult now.

Mother Meghan Hutchinson said, "When I turned around, I saw the shooter. ... I don't know if that was just a warning shot or if he shot somebody with that [bullet]."

Her daughter, Zoey Levesque, 10, was grazed by a bullet.

"It's just like, shocking," she said.  "I never thought I'd grow up and get a bullet in my leg," she said. "Like, why do people do this? I was more worried about, like, am I going to live and going to make it out of here? Like, what's going to happen? Are the cops going to come?"

I don’t know what to do for that child.  I don’t have the training or even, the perspective to begin to advise on how to put the pieces of that little girl’s psyche back together.  Any ideas?  

I have some ideas as to how to drive the point home about the toll of this situation.  What we could do is establish a memorial for victims of gun violence, and children could get their own section.  I say that because the number one cause of childhood mortality is not poverty, it is gun violence.  It is not leukemia, it is gun violence.  

Firearms accounted for nearly 19% of childhood deaths (ages 1-18) in 2021, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wonder database. Nearly 3,600 children died in gun-related incidents that year. That’s about five children lost for every 100,000 children in the United States. In no other comparable country are firearms within the top four causes of mortality among children, according to a KFF analysis.

More children in our nation are dying at a clip yearly, than the number of lives lost on 9-11.  Put another way, this is the mortality equivalent of 1.2 9-11’s in children alone, each year, because the guns were deemed by the right wing to be more valuable.

And the ones that are surviving are put through such emotionally scarring experiences that their lives will forever be altered.  We used to care about children right?

But back to the memorial.  What could this wall say?  How about, 

“The Children Who Have Died So You Can Have Your Freedom to Play Toy Soldier Memorial.”

That might work.

But nothing has so far.  

Oh sure the Republicans will send thoughts.

But I am all out of “Fucks to Give” for their thoughts.

I looked online, too.

Couldn’t find them anywhere.  Apparently the whole world is all out of Fucks.  

Must be a supply chain issue.

-ROC

If you like my work you can support me at The Claw News Patreon.

Top: Once upon a time.

Bottom: The new reality.

If you or someone you know has been traumatized by gun violence, BradyUnited.org has a list of resources that may be able to help.

Cartoon: Hearing voices

 MaineMassShooterHearingVoicesWEB.jpg

The latest mass shooter was hearing voices... Please share #laloalcaraz cartoons.

Daily Kos
 

REPUBLISHED BY: