“I truly feel sorry for our friend. He’s never had a days peace. On the other side of this, he’s exposed a very dark side of the swamp that’s far worse than I ever imagined and I am not particularly optimistic for the future.”Fox celebrity Sean Hannity to White House Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows – December 12, 2020
Kansas state representative from, Republican Cheryl Helmer, said she does not “appreciate the huge transgender female who is now in our restrooms in the Capitol,” obviously referring to her colleague, Rep. Stephanie Byers, the first transgender legislator in Kansas, and a Democrat.
Helmer, from Mulvane, responding in an email to a University of Kansas graduate student, saying she was a biology major in college, said that she knows “the difference biologically between a male and a woman.”
…”no surgeon can cut, remove, wop, add to change the biology that is chemically occurring in each and every fiber, bone and molecule of every human being.”Kansas State Representative Cheryl Helmer
I used to think people who made statements like those by Helmer were simply stupid. Now I think they’re just hateful.
“A doctor can inject meds and dilute but cannot destroy what God has done in the perfection of the HUMAN BEING, Helmer added. We as women have humans that are much larger, stronger, more adrenaline and testosterone and therefore possibly more dangerous and we have to share our restrooms. Not only that but our wee little girls in elementary and middle and high school are having to be exposed and many have been raped, sodomized and beaten in the restrooms by these supposedly transgenders who may or may not be for real.”
I think Helmer has gone out of her way to contradict herself. Whatever/whoever created Helmer (Mom and Pop Helmer?) clearly goofs up on occasion.
Just how hateful must your community be to elect someone like this to office?
The first nomination for Jackass Of the Week (JOTW) goes to LA Sheriff, Alex Villanueva.
CNN reports that on Tuesday, Sheriff Villanueva “alarmed press freedom advocates by lashing out at a press conference and indicating that a Los Angeles Times reporter was under criminal investigation. Later in the day, he attempted to walk back his alarming comments, but it’s important to understand the background, including Villanueva’s highly controversial behavior and his attacks against the media.”
Of course, Villanueva is another in a long line of public officials trying their best to parrot the actions of the former president of the United States, Donald John Trump. It was Trump, more than any politician before him who convinced millions of Americans not to trust in the reporting of the press — in fact, he referred to them as the enemy of our government. If you can convince people to ignore the best source of credible information, you can get away with anything. And that’s exactly what he tried to do. In this case, a law enforcement officer who can convince the citizens to not believe the warnings and findings of the press can be extremely dangerous.
Villanueva has repeatedly singled out LA Times reporter Alene Tchekmedyian, who is just doing her job by covering his department. Tchekmedyian has published a series of stories about an incident in which a deputy kneeled on an inmate — including an article on Monday regarding an allegation that Villanueva was implicated in a coverup.
At Tuesday’s press conference, Villanueva displayed and pointed to a photo of Tchekmedyian, plus one of his political rivals and the sheriff’s inspector general. Arrows implied a connection between all three. Villanueva referred to video of the incident that Tchekmedyian had obtained as “stolen property.” And he declared that he was investigating “all parties” involved in the matter. When repeatedly asked whether Tchekmedyian was specifically under investigation, Villanueva responded that “all parties to the act” were being probed.
Of course, Villanueva’s up for reelection this year.
Villanueva gets our first nomination for JOTW. We’ll be watching.
In a 68-page filing on April 22, 2022 in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Case No. 1:21-cv-3217-CJN), the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capital (Select Committee) posits that because of information they’ve obtained from other sources, they are now able to narrow the focus of the issues they need Meadows to address with the Committee to “seven discrete topics”:
- Testimony regarding non-privileged documents (including text and email communications) that Mr. Meadows has already provided to the Select Committee in response to the subpoena, and testimony about events that Mr. Meadows has already publicly described in his book and elsewhere;
- Testimony and documents regarding post-election efforts by the Trump campaign, the Trump legal team, and Mr. Meadows to create false slates of Presidential electors, or to pressure or persuade state and local officials and legislators to take actions to change the outcome of the 2020 Presidential election;
- Testimony and documents relating to communications with Members of Congress in preparation for and during the events of January 6th;
- Testimony and documents regarding the plan, in the days before January 6th, to replace Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen with Mr. Jeffrey Clark so that the Department could corruptly change its conclusions regarding election fraud;
- Testimony and documents relating to efforts by President Trump to instruct, direct, persuade or pressure Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to count electoral votes on January 6th;
- Testimony and documents relating to activity in the White House immediately before and during the events of January 6th; and
- Testimony and documents relating to meetings and communications with individuals not affiliated with the federal government regarding the efforts to change the results of the 2020 election.
On September 23, 2001, the Select Committee issued a subpoena to Mark Meadows, former White House Chief of Staff under former president Donald Trump. Meadows agreed to appear before the Committee to provide testimony on December 8, 2021. Meadows, on December 7, 2021 informed the Committee that he had changed his mind and would not appear the following day as originally agreed.
Instead, Meadows filed suit against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and members of the Select Committee. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, asks the court to invalidate two subpoenas that the panel had issued to Meadows and Verizon, the carrier for his prior personal cell phone, calling them “overly broad and unduly burdensome.”
On December 14, 2021, the House voted 222-208 to hold the former White House Chief of Staff in criminal contempt of Congress for failing to cooperate with the Committee.
The most recent filing by the Select Committee asks that Meadows’ suits be dismissed
Committee Report rationale for contempt citation
In it’s report filed in the House (Report:117-216), the Committee explains it’s rationale for the charge:
“To be clear Mr. Meadow’s failure to comply, and this contempt recommendation, are not based on good-faith disagreements over privilege assertions. Rather, Mr. Meadows has failed to comply and warrants contempt findings because he has wholly refused to appear to provide any testimony and refused to answer questions regarding even clearly non-privileged information — information that he himself has identified as non-privileged through his own document production.
Mr. Meadow’s relevant documents and testimony are necessary to the Select Committee’s investigation for many additional reasons. Mr. Meadows also reportedly participated in meetings and communicated with senior Department of Justice (DOJ) officials about unsupported election-fraud claims and litigation aimed at disrupting or overturning the election results. Mr. Meadows reportedly participated in a contentious meeting at the White House with private individuals and others linked to Mr. Trump’s re-election campaign during which Mr. Trump and others discussed seizing voting machines and invoking certain laws including the National Emergencies Act for election-related purposes because of purported fraud in the election. Mr. Meadows reportedly joined a January 2 call with Mr. Trump and State and Federal officials to discuss overturning certain States’ electoral college results on January 6, and later sent the former Vice President’s staff a memo drafted by a Trump campaign lawyer urging the Vice President to delay or decline the counting of votes from certain States. Mr. Meadows was also reportedly in contact with at least one of the individuals who planned and organized a January 6 rally, one of whom may have expressed safety concerns to Mr. Meadows about the event. In short, Mr. Meadows appears to have participated in, and been a witness to, critically important communications and events that took place before and on January 6, and the Congress is entitled to hear his first-hand testimony regarding his actions and knowledge. The Select Committee expects such testimony to be directly relevant to its report and recommendations for legislative and other action.”
The Washington Post is reporting that former president Donald Trump will travel to Nebraska later this month to campaign with Republican gubernatorial candidate Charles Herbster, who has been accused of sexually assaulting several women, including a Republican state senator Julie Slama.
According to the Post article by Amy B Wang and Mariana Alfaro, Herbster has been accused by eight women of inappropriate touching, according to a report by the Nebraska Examiner. Two men and a woman on Monday put their names behind what they said they either saw directly or were told immediately afterward about Nebraska gubernatorial candidate Charles Herbster groping young women at political events.All three said they were upset by Herbster’s denials of the behavior. They said they were also upset by how Herbster and some of his political allies have treated State Sen. Julie Slama since the Nebraska Examiner last week reported the allegations against Herbster.
Two of the three who came forward Monday had previously spoken to the Examiner to corroborate accounts of women who had made allegations. The third person commented after the initial article was published.
The Examiner corroborated six of the women’s accounts with at least one witness to each incident. The other two women told at least one person about the incident on the same day it occurred. Each witness and confidant confirmed the women’s descriptions of what happened.
The Examiner has a detailed story of the allegations and statements supporting the allegations here.
The Republican National Committee voted UNANIMOUSLY to withdraw from the primary organizer of general-election debates, called the Commission on Presidential Debates “biased” and unwilling to “serve the interest of the American people.”
The motion virtually guarantees potential nominee Donald Trump would avoid any forum which reminds voters just how dim he really is. Expect the GOP to propose debates that require hosts from Fox (Not)News, and then attack the Dems as cowards for refusing to participate in the charade.
About the Commission:
The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) was established in 1987 to ensure, for the benefit of the American electorate, that general election debates between or among the leading candidates for the offices of President and Vice President of the United States are a permanent part of the electoral process. CPD’s primary purpose is to sponsor and produce the quadrennial general election debates and to undertake research and educational activities relating to the debates. The organization, which is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) corporation, sponsored all of the presidential debates in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020.
To meet its ongoing goal of educating voters, the CPD is engaged in various activities beyond producing and sponsoring the presidential debates. Its staff prepares educational materials and conducts research to improve the quality of debates.
Further, the CPD provides technical assistance to emerging democracies and others interested in establishing debate traditions in their countries. In recent years, the staff worked with groups from Bosnia, Burundi, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, Haiti, Jamaica, Lebanon, Niger, Nigeria, Peru, Romania, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, and the Ukraine, among others. Finally, the CPD coordinates post-debate symposia and research after many of its presidential forums.
Four days after joining the New Hampshire Republican primary, U.S. Senate hopeful and bitcoin millionaire, Bruce Fenton, compared the widespread adoration of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to the reaction to Osama bin Laden, warning that bin Laden was also once seen as a “hero.”
Fenton spun up the cautionary tale last week in his first televised interview as a candidate, telling WMUR’s Adam Sexton that “there’s so many parallels right now between Ukraine and the Taliban.”
“Remember, as Zelensky is a hero now, Osama bin Laden was once considered a hero,” Fenton said.
Fenton previously served as an executive director for the non-profit Bitcoin Foundation, originally founded in 2012. His early bitcoin-roots allowed Fenton to amass a small fortune preparing him for his eventual self-funded campaign driven by his $5 million injection.
After his tenure with the Bitcoin Foundation, Fenton turned his eyes to New Hampshire and the Free State Project, which is a political pro-freedom movement that calls for smaller government and lax regulatory burdens.
A Nebraska state lawmaker apologized after he publicly cited a persistent rumor alleging that schools are placing litter boxes in school bathrooms to accommodate children who self identify as cats. Yes, you read that right.
Sen. Bruce Bostelman, a conservative Republican, repeated the false claim during a public, televised debate on a bill intended to help school children who have behavioral problems. His comments quickly went viral.
“They meow and they bark and they interact with their teachers in this fashion,” Bostelman said during legislative debate. “And now schools are wanting to put litter boxes in the schools for these children to use. How is this sanitary?”
Republicans will stoop to any level to distract their constituents from the important issues of the day. Elections were won in 2021 by unqualified Republicans who used unproven rumors about activities in the schools to win, and once they find something that works, they’ll work it until it’s no longer useful.
Senator Bostelman didn’t bother to research the rumor before repeating it in a televised debate watched by his constituents. For this alone he should be drummed out of office when his next election rolls around. I’m guessing in Nebraska, as long as you’re a Republican, the requirements for office are a little less stringent.
America, we’re in a sad, dangerous place.