IMPEACH SESSIONS

While under oath during his confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, then-U.S. Senator, and now-U.S. Attorney General, Jefferson Beauregard “Jeff” Sessions III claimed, “…I did not have contact with the Russians.”

As multiple media outlets are now reporting, Sessions did, in fact, have contact with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, on at least two occassions during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions met twice last year with the top Russian diplomat in Washington whose interactions with President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Mike Flynn led to Flynn’s firing, according to the Justice Department.

[…]

Sessions met with (Sergey) Kislyak twice, in July on the sidelines of the Republican convention, and in September in his office when Sessions was a member of the Senate Armed Services committee. Sessions was an early Trump backer and regular surrogate for him as a candidate.

Regardless of what type of communication took place between Sessions and Kislyak, two indisputable facts are important here. First, Sessions told a U.S. Senate committee that he “…did not have contact with the Russians”. Secondly, and contrary to Sessions’s statement under oath, there are at least two documented instances of Sessions meeting with the Russian ambassador to the United States during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign.

The fact that Sessions committed perjury during his confirmation hearing for U.S. Attorney General is grounds for impeachment. U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has called for Sessions to resign the office of U.S. Attorney General. I am not an attorney or a Member of Congress, but Sessions should either resign from office or face at least one impeachment charge (for perjury).

Advertisement

The women of America are leading the opposition to Donald Trump

Sign carried by a participant in the Madison, Wisconsin Women’s March (Photo taken by Kari Nelson and provided by Sarah Lloyd)

Ladies and gentlemen, the opposition to President Donald Trump is officially here!

Earlier today, millions of people across the United States and on all seven continents around the world (including Antarctica!) participated in Women’s Marches in Washington, D.C. and numerous other locales. The Women’s Marches are the single largest action by the women’s rights movement that I have witnessed in my lifetime by far.

Although I was unable to attend any of the Women’s Marches, here are some observations from the Women’s Marches (all of these are courtesy of either social media of participants or news sources with an online operation of some kind):

• In some cities, there were so many participants, the marchers were literally too numerous to march. The flagship march in Washington, D.C., as well as the march in Chicago, were both turned into rallies due to extremely large crowd sizes.

  

  A Women’s March in Idaho (photo courtesy of Lisa Howard)

• In Champaign, Illinois, good attendance was reported for the march there. The Champaign march is the top story on The News-Gazette website; it is extremely rare for a political protest of any kind to get considerable media attention in east-central Illinois.
• The northernmost city in the world that I know of where a march was held was Utqiagvik, Alaska (if you know of a march held in a more northerly city than Utqiagvik, feel free to reply to this blog post with information), and a women’s march was held in Antartica by researchers stationed there.
• In some heavily-conservative U.S. states, very large turnout was reported for marches there. In Mentone, Alabama (population: 360), “about 50” people participated in a women’s march, which is nearly 14% of the heavily-Republican town’s population. The Mentone precinct, which includes a larger area than Mentone’s municipal borders, had 170 people vote for Hillary Clinton in the November 2016 election.

The opposition to Donald Trump is not going to be led by a single person. It’s going to be led by a large segment of the American people.

What do Rebecca Bradley, Robert Bentley, and Ted Cruz have in common?

All three of those far-right Republicans either have been involved in, or are alleged to have been involved in, explosive sex scandals.

First, I’ll start with Rebecca Bradley. She’s a justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, having been appointed to Wisconsin’s highest bench thanks to Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI). She’s also extremely right-wing, believing that birth control is a form of murder (it’s not) and spewing bigotry towards LGBT people. She was also an attorney in private practice before being appointed to her first judgeship, and she represented a former co-worker who…you guessed it…she had an extramarital affair with.

Now, on to Robert Bentley. He’s the Republican Governor of Alabama, and he was recently caught on audio tape making sexual remarks about an aide that he’s accused of having sexual relations with. It’s not 100% clear as to whether or not Bentley actually had sexual relations with that aide, but it’s clear to me that he talked about his aide in a very sexual manner.

Last, but certainly not least, is Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz. After a pro-Cruz PAC posted a nude picture of Melania Trump, the wife of Donald Trump, online, Trump threatened to “spill the beans” on Heidi Cruz, Ted’s wife. Well, as it turns out, the National Enquirer may have spilled the beans on Ted Cruz himself. The National Enquirer is running a story about Cruz allegedly having sexual relations with five women. The story cites “private detectives” as the source for the story.

Now, I have every reason to be extremely skeptical about the “Cruz sex scandal” story. First off, it’s the National Enquirer running this story, and they’re not exactly a credible source. After all, they’ve been known to run stories that people or entities have sold them, such as the story about the knife in the mid-1990’s O.J. trial. Secondly, the fact that the National Enquirer is citing “private detectives” as their source for the Cruz story makes the story suspect. I’d love to know who the “private detectives” are. In fact, I have every reason to suspect that the “private detectives” are affiliated with the Trump campaign. I can’t confirm or disprove that, but it wouldn’t surprise me if Trump’s goons were behind the Cruz sex scandal allegations.

Donald Trump condones mob violence against a black person

Jeremy Diamond, a reporter for CNN, posted this Twitter video of a black man being physically assaulted by attendees of a Donald Trump presidential campaign rally in Birmingham, Alabama earlier today:

A black protester at Trump's rally today in Alabama was shoved, tackled, punched & kicked: https://t.co/Aq0wuaAtax pic.twitter.com/cTRDMtjuBl

— Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) November 21, 2015

According to CNN and Raw Story, the protester was heard saying “black lives matter”, referring to the Black Lives Matter movement, which prompted several Trump supporters to physically assault the protestor. Trump himself can be heard saying “get him the hell out of here” or something along those lines, which, in effect, amounted to condoning the violence against the protester. According to the Birmingham (AL) Police, three people were removed from the rally by law enforcement as a result of the scuffle.

With Donald Trump calling for an unconstitutional surveillance scheme of mosques in the United States and preventing Syrian refugees to enter the U.S. instead of facing the threat of death at the hands of ISIS and/or the Assad regime in Syria, it’s no surprise that a mob of Trump’s far-right supporters would physically assault a peaceful protestor. While Trump has every right to remove people he doesn’t like from a campaign event (all other presidential candidates have the same right to remove people they don’t like from their campaign events), his supporters don’t have the right to form a mob and beat up a peaceful protestor.

47 House Dems side with ISIS and Nazi-like bigotry from the GOP

A total of 47 Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted for anti-Syrian refugee legislation straight out of a Nazi Germany mindset. Here are the House Democrats who voted for the legislation:

Pete Aguilar	California 31st
Brad Ashford	Nebraska 2nd
Ami Bera	California 7th
Sanford Bishop, Jr.	Georgia 2nd
Julia Brownley	California 26th
Cheri Bustos	Illinois 17th
John Carney	Delaware At-large
Gerry Connolly	Virginia 11th
Jim Cooper	Tennessee 5th
Jim Costa	California 16th
Joe Courtney	Connecticut 2nd
Henry Cuellar	Texas 28th
John Delaney	Maryland 6th
Lloyd Doggett	Texas 35th
Tulsi Gabbard	Hawaii 2nd
John Garamendi	California 3rd
Gwen Graham	Florida 2nd
Gene Green	Texas 29th
Janice Hahn	California 44th
Jim Himes	Connecticut 4th
Steve Israel	New York 3rd
Marcy Kaptur	Ohio 9th
Bill Keating	Massachusetts 9th
Ron Kind	Wisconsin 3rd
Ann McLane Kuster	New Hampshire 2nd
Jim Langevin	Rhode Island 2nd
Dan Lipinski	Illinois 3rd
Dave Loebsack	Iowa 2nd
Stephen Lynch	Massachusetts 8th
Sean Patrick Maloney	New York 18th
Patrick Murphy	Florida 18th
Rick Nolan	Minnesota 8th
Donald Norcross	New Jersey 1st
Scott Peters	California 52nd
Collin Peterson	Minnesota 7th
Jared Polis	Colorado 2nd
Kathleen Rice	New York 4th
Raul Ruiz	California 36th
Tim Ryan	Ohio 13th
Kurt Schrader	Oregon 5th
David Scott	Georgia 13th
Terri Sewell	Alabama 7th
Kyrsten Sinema	Arizona 9th
Louise Slaughter	New York 25th
Marc Veasey	Texas 33rd
Filemon Vela	Texas 34th
Tim Walz	Minnesota 1st

When I say that these 47 Democratic traitors sided with ISIS, I mean that they are effectively fueling ISIS propaganda by refusing to take in the very people who have been oppressed by ISIS and the Syrian dictatorship of Bashir al-Assad. When I say that this legislation is straight out of a Nazi Germany mindset, I’m referring to public opposition here in the U.S. to accepting Jewish refugees who were fleeing the Holocaust and the Nazi Germany regime of Adolf Hitler in the late 1930’s.

It’s not just moderate and conservative “Democrats” who are effectively siding with ISIS and repeating the history of the Nazis by opposing Syrian refugees. Republican presidential candidates Donald Trump and Ben Carson have used racist, Nazi-like language to stir up fear of Syrian refugees among white racist Americans.

Here’s what Trump recently said, courtesy of Yahoo! News:

“We’re going to have to do things that we never did before. And some people are going to be upset about it, but I think that now everybody is feeling that security is going to rule,” Trump said. “And certain things will be done that we never thought would happen in this country in terms of information and learning about the enemy. And so we’re going to have to do certain things that were frankly unthinkable a year ago.”

Yahoo News asked Trump whether this level of tracking might require registering Muslims in a database or giving them a form of special identification that noted their religion. He wouldn’t rule it out.

“We’re going to have to — we’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely,” Trump said when presented with the idea. “We’re going to have to look at the mosques. We’re going to have to look very, very carefully.”

Here’s what Carson recently said, courtesy of NBC News:

Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson on Thursday suggested that concerns about Syrian refugees in the United States are akin to a parent’s concerns about “mad dogs.”

“If there’s a rabid dog running around in your neighborhood, you’re probably not going to assume something good about that dog, and you’re probably going to put your children out of the way,” he said during remarks in Mobile, Alabama. “[It] doesn’t mean that you hate all dogs, by any stretch of the imagination, but you’re putting your intellect into motion and you’re thinking ‘How do I protect my children? At the same time, I love dogs and I’m gonna call the humane society and hopefully they can come take this dog away and create a safe environment once again.'”

Any Democrat who voted for the anti-Syrian refugee legislation has effectively sided with right-wing racists like Donald Trump and Ben Carson, who are using Nazi Germany-like language in opposition to allowing Syrian refugees to enter the United States. Supporting requiring that Muslims have special identification is eerily reminiscent of the Nazis forcibly tattooing identification numbers onto Jewish people in concentration camps, and comparing Syrian refugees fleeing war and terrorism to mad dogs is eerily reminiscent of Nazi propaganda comparing Jewish people to rats (in fact, at least one British newspaper, the Daily Mail, actually compared Syrian refugees to rats). Normally, I’m not a fan of Nazi comparisons, but, if there’s actual historical context behind a Nazi comparison, then I’m all for it.

One last thing, I find it ironic that the number of House Democrats who voted for the anti-Syrian refugee bill (47) equals the number of Senate Republicans who signed a letter to Iranian leaders in an attempt to undermine diplomacy in efforts to stop a nuclear deal designed to keep Iran from producing nuclear weapons (47), as well as the percentage of Americans that 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney claimed were dependent on the government (47).

Alabama Republicans deliberately trying to keep black people from voting

In 2011, Alabama Republicans used their complete control of the state government to enact a voter ID law, which required Alabama voters to present a driver’s license or some other form of photo identification to election officials in order to be able to vote.

Yesterday, Alabama closed 31 driver’s license offices in 30 different Alabama counties, and many of the offices that were closed were in predominantly-black counties. Here are the facts about how the closures disproportionately affect black Alabamans:

• The ten Alabama counties with the highest percentage of registered non-white voters are Macon, Greene, Sumter, Lowndes, Bullock, Perry, Wilcox, Dallas, Hale, and Montgomery. Alabama has closed driver’s license offices in eight, or 80%, of those ten counties, with only Dallas and Montgomery counties not affected by the closures. In the other 57 Alabama counties, Alabama has closed driver’s license offices in 24, or 42%, of those counties.
• All Alabama counties where more than 75% of registered voters are black have seen driver’s license offices in those counties closed.
• In the 2012 presidential election, 15 of Alabama’s 67 counties voted for the Democratic ticket of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Alabama has closed driver’s license offices in eight of those counties, or 53% of the counties that voted for Obama. Conversely, 52 of Alabama’s 67 counties voted for the Republican ticket of presidential candidate Mitt Romney and vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan. In those 52 counties, Alabama has closed driver’s license offices in 22, or 42%, of those counties.
• In the five Alabama counties that gave Obama/Biden the highest percentages of the vote (Macon, Greene, Sumter, Lowndes, and Bullock), Alabama has closed driver’s license offices in all five of those counties. In the five counties that gave Romney/Ryan the highest percentages of the vote (Blount, Winston, Cullman, Cleburne, and St. Clair), Alabama has closed driver’s license offices in only three of those counties (Winston, Cleburne, and St. Clair).

(sources here and here)

In case you’re wondering which Alabama county had two driver’s license offices closed, that would be Tallapoosa County, which gave Romney/Ryan nearly 66% of the vote in the 2012 presidential election.

It’s 100% clear to me that the driver’s license office closures in Alabama disproportionately affect black Alabamans, and that the Republicans who run Alabama’s state government are deliberately trying to prevent black people from voting. Jim Crow is, sadly, alive and well in Alabama.

Ending workplace discrimination against LGBT people should be the next fight in the LGBT rights movement

Thanks to a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision issued earlier today, same-sex couples across the entire United States of America can now enjoy the same legal right to marry that heterosexual couples have long enjoyed. To put it mildly, this is a huge victory for love and equality in America.

However, in 32 states, some, if not all, LGBT workers, can legally be fired simply because of their sexual orientation and/or gender identity:

• In 21 states (Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming), all workers can be fired on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity.
• In 3 states (Arizona, Missouri, and Montana), state employees cannot be fired on the basis of sexual orientation, but state employees can be fired on the basis of gender identity, and private-sector workers can be fired on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity.
• In 5 states (Idaho, Kentucky, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio), state employees cannot be fired on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity, but private-sector workers can be fired on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity.
• In 2 states (New Hampshire and Wisconsin), all workers cannot be fired on the basis of sexual orientation, but all workers can be fired on the basis of gender identity.
• In 1 state (New York), state employees cannot be fired on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity, and private-sector workers cannot be fired on the basis of sexual orientation, but private-sector workers can be fired on the basis of gender identity.

If the source I linked to above has inaccurate and/or outdated information, please leave a comment on this blog post with accurate information for a particular state.

While it is a huge victory for the LGBT movement to secure marriage equality in all 50 states, the fight for full equality for gays, lesbians, bisexual people, and transgender people is far from over. The next big fight in the LGBT rights movement should be to push for laws prohibiting public and private employers from firing people based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity.

My thoughts about the 47 Republican Senators who signed the traitorous letter in an attempt to undermine U.S. diplomacy with Iran

I find it highly outrageous that 47 members of the United States Senate, all Republicans, signed a letter in a blatant attempt to undermine attempts at negotiating a deal with Iran to prevent them from developing nuclear weapons, apparently violating the federal Logan Act in signing the letter.

The 47 Senators who signed the Cotton Letter are as follows:

• Richard Shelby of Alabama
• Jeff Sessions of Alabama
• Dan Sullivan of Alaska
• John McCain of Arizona
• John Boozman of Arkansas
• Tom Cotton of Arkansas, the ringleader of the effort to undermine diplomacy with Iran
• Cory Gardner of Colorado
• Marco Rubio of Florida
• Johnny Isakson of Georgia
• David Perdue of Georgia
• Mike Crapo of Idaho
• Jim Risch of Idaho
• Mark Kirk of Illinois
• Chuck Grassley of Iowa
• Joni Ernst of Iowa
• Pat Roberts of Kansas
• Jerry Moran of Kansas
• Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate Majority Leader
• Rand Paul of Kentucky
• David Vitter of Louisiana
• Bill Cassidy of Louisiana
• Roger Wicker of Mississippi
• Roy Blunt of Missouri
• Steve Daines of Montana
• Deb Fischer of Nebraska
• Ben Sasse of Nebraska
• Dean Heller of Nevada
• Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire
• Richard Burr of North Carolina
• Thom Tillis of North Carolina
• John Hoeven of North Dakota
• Rob Portman of Ohio
• Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma
• James Lankford of Oklahoma
• Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania
• Lindsey Graham of South Carolina
• Tim Scott of South Carolina
• John Thune of South Dakota
• Mike Rounds of South Dakota
• John Cornyn of Texas
• Ted Cruz of Texas
• Orrin Hatch of Utah, the Senate President Pro Tempore
• Mike Lee of Utah
• Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia
• Ron Johnson of Wisconsin
• Mike Enzi of Wyoming
• John Barrasso of Wyoming

All 47 of those individuals who I named are traitors to this country who are more interested in starting World War III by undermining the sitting President of the United States and allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons that they could use to bomb the United States and our allies than doing anything that would actually be productive, such as fixing crumbling roads and bridges, making it easier for Americans to go to college, helping the private sector create more good-paying jobs, and so on.

Also, regarding the so-called “pro-Israel” lobby’s support for the Cotton Letter, the Cotton Letter puts Israel, as well as other U.S. allies and the U.S. itself, of even greater danger of an attack by Iranian forces, since the Cotton Letter is designed to undermine efforts to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons that could be used by Iran in an attack on the United States and its allies.

I’m calling for the U.S. Justice Department to bring up all 47 of the senators who signed the Cotton Letter on federal criminal charges for violating the Logan Act, which legally prohibits U.S. citizens who are not authorized diplomats from negotiating with a foreign government.