Title :
link :
Helen & Moe Lauzier’s
Issues of the Day
Write us at: mvl270@yahoo.com
Sun. May 7, 2017
Thanks Arthur...Good find...
NONSENSE
These are all real headlines from mainstream media outlets: New York Magazine, Huffington Post, The Independent (UK), CNN.
They’re also nonsense.
Under the American Health Care Act, states have the ability to opt-out of federal regulations requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions. Naturally, the left immediately conjured up images of people injured in the most horrifying possible way – rape – and then suggested that the bill would suddenly leave rape victims adrift. Here’s New York Magazine: “Under Obamacare, pre existing conditions were guaranteed to receive coverage – among them, sexual assault. The American Health Care Act is going to change that…In addition to rape, postpartum depression, cesarean sections, and surviving domestic violence are all considered pre existing conditions.”
So, let’s parse this. According to the leftist media, if you suffer an injury in a terrible situation, the situation itself is now a pre-existing condition. In other words, these headlines could just have easily read, “In Trump’s America, Car Crashes Are Pre-Existing Conditions,” or “Under The New Healthcare Bill, Soccer Accidents Could Be A Pre-Existing Condition.” The bill itself says that pre-existing conditions are pre-existing conditions. Nowhere does it give a list of pre-existing conditions including “rape” or “sexual assault,” because these are activities leading to injury, not actual injuries.
Court Rules Trump State Dept Must Release Clinton Emails of Obama Response to Benghazi
(Image: Familysecuritymatters.org)
(CNSNews.com) -- Despite legal pleadings from the Trump State Department, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the U.S. District Court for D.C., has ordered the department to release eight paragraphs from emails sent by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Sept. 12, 2012 "regarding phone calls made by President Barack Obama to Egyptian and Libyan leaders immediately following the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi," reported Judicial Watch.
In the Sept. 11, 2012 Benghazi attack by Islamic radicals, 4 American personnel were murdered, including our ambassador, Chris Stevens. In addition, for weeks following the attack, the Obama administration and Secretary Clinton falsely claimed the assault was caused by an anti-Muslim video posted on YouTube.
The eight paragraphs in question were redacted in previous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by Judicial Watch.
The 4 Americans killed in the radical Islamic attack in Benghazi, Libya,
The unredacted emails requested "had the subject line 'Quick Summary of POTUS Calls to Presidents of Libya and Egypt,' and were among emails stored on Clinton's unofficial email server," said Judicial Watch.
"Judge Jackson reviewed the documents directly and rejected the government's contention that the records had been properly withheld under" a FOIA "deliberative process" exemption.
The emails may reveal what Secretary Clinton and President Obama knew about the Benghazi attack the day after it happened.
Judicial Watch argues that there is a "deliberate effort by the State Department to protect Clinton and the agency by avoiding identifying emails on Clinton's unofficial, non-secure email server as classified."
“Does President Trump know his State and Justice Departments are still trying to provide cover for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
“An extraordinary court ruling that could result in key answers about the Benghazi outrage is being opposed by the Trump administration," said Fitton. "This may well be an example of the ‘deep state’ trying to get away with a cover up – if so then the Trump administration must put a stop to it.”
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson and Michael W.Chapman
Trump May Speak at Symbolic Jewish Fortress When Visiting Israel
Masada in Israel's Judean desert
President Trump’s first trip abroad as president may include a speech at the highly symbolic ancient Jewish fortress of Masada, Israeli media outlets reported Thursday, after the White House announced a visit later this month to Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Vatican, Italy and Belgium.
The White House said Trump has accepted invitations from Saudi King Salman to visit the kingdom for a summit with Muslim leaders; from Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and President Reuven Rivlin to visit Israel; and from Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas for a meeting – presumably in the Palestinian self-rule areas although no venue was given.
Trump would then travel to the Vatican for a meeting with Pope Francis, meet with Italian leaders, attend a NATO summit and meetings with European Union leaders in Brussels, and participate in a G7 summit in Sicily.
Israel’s Channel 2 television reported that a White House advance team has requested Masada as the venue for a presidential speech.
If true, the plan will likely draw a mixed response in a region anxious to learn how Trump plans to tackle the Israeli-Palestinian peace puzzle. The desert hilltop overlooking the Dead Sea, where a group of Jewish Zealots besieged by the Romans in the 1st century AD took their lives rather than accept defeat and slavery, has for Israelis long symbolized the indomitable spirit of a people surrounded by enemies.
In a tradition attributed to Moshe Dayan, some Israeli soldiers take an oath of loyalty to the state, either atop Masada or at the Western Wall or another symbolic location, concluding with a famous phrase from a 1927 epic poem by Yitzhak Lamdan, “Masada shall not fall again.”
As a symbol of the Zionist dream and national pride, it is not a place generally embraced by the Palestinians.
The Palestinian news agency Ma’an, in a 2013 article suggested the story of Masada was “a myth created by the Jews in order to explain to their people that they have a history similar to the [Arab] peoples of the region and [that they] have been there since ancient times.”
Trump would not be the first U.S. president to visit Masada. President Clinton, First Lady Hillary Clinton and their daughter Chelsea visited in 1998, hosted by Netanyahu, as did President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush in 2008, on that occasion accompanied by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
Neither Clinton nor Bush delivered speeches at the site.
Despite its history and symbolism, Masada is not necessarily seen as a sanctified site. It is one of the country’s most visited locations for tourists, and a popular venue for weddings, bar and bat mitzvahs, operas and music concerts.
President Trump’s first trip abroad as president may include a speech at the highly symbolic ancient Jewish fortress of Masada, Israeli media outlets reported Thursday, after the White House announced a visit later this month to Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Vatican, Italy and Belgium.
President Trump’s first trip abroad as president may include a speech at the highly symbolic ancient Jewish fortress of Masada, Israeli media outlets reported Thursday, after the White House announced a visit later this month to Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Vatican, Italy and Belgium.
The White House said Trump has accepted invitations from Saudi King Salman to visit the kingdom for a summit with Muslim leaders; from Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and President Reuven Rivlin to visit Israel; and from Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas for a meeting – presumably in the Palestinian self-rule areas although no venue was given.
Trump would then travel to the Vatican for a meeting with Pope Francis, meet with Italian leaders, attend a NATO summit and meetings with European Union leaders in Brussels, and participate in a G7 summit in Sicily.
Israel’s Channel 2 television reported that a White House advance team has requested Masada as the venue for a presidential speech.
If true, the plan will likely draw a mixed response in a region anxious to learn how Trump plans to tackle the Israeli-Palestinian peace puzzle. The desert hilltop overlooking the Dead Sea, where a group of Jewish Zealots besieged by the Romans in the 1st century AD took their lives rather than accept defeat and slavery, has for Israelis long symbolized the indomitable spirit of a people surrounded by enemies.
In a tradition attributed to Moshe Dayan, some Israeli soldiers take an oath of loyalty to the state, either atop Masada or at the Western Wall or another symbolic location, concluding with a famous phrase from a 1927 epic poem by Yitzhak Lamdan, “Masada shall not fall again.”
As a symbol of the Zionist dream and national pride, it is not a place generally embraced by the Palestinians.
The Palestinian news agency Ma’an, in a 2013 article suggested the story of Masada was “a myth created by the Jews in order to explain to their people that they have a history similar to the [Arab] peoples of the region and [that they] have been there since ancient times.”
Trump would not be the first U.S. president to visit Masada. President Clinton, First Lady Hillary Clinton and their daughter Chelsea visited in 1998, hosted by Netanyahu, as did President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush in 2008, on that occasion accompanied by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
Neither Clinton nor Bush delivered speeches at the site.
Despite its history and symbolism, Masada is not necessarily seen as a sanctified site. It is one of the country’s most visited locations for tourists, and a popular venue for weddings, bar and bat mitzvahs, operas and music concerts.
Qatari Government Opens Mega-Mosque in Malmö, Sweden
The 1,791 square metre Umm Al-Mu’minin Khadijah Mosque will be able to accommodate around 2,000 devotees and cost the Qatari government around three million euros, according to the Qatar News Agency.
An absolute monarchy where the legal system is based largely on Sharia law, the Gulf state has been repeatedly accused of funding radical Islamic terrorism, not least by former U.S. Secretary of State and Democratic party presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
“We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to [Islamic State] and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” read a 2014 document released by Wikileaks in 2016.
An investigation by The Telegraph newspaper, also in 2014, further accused the Qataris of funding Islamists in Libya, Iraq, and Somalia via middlemen in Turkey.
Carl Schiøtz Wibye, Norway’s former ambassador to neighbouring Saudi Arabia, has suggested that European governments must “weed out local influence wherever it comes from, be it through financial support, literature or videos by preachers who say terrible things online”, in part by banning the foreign funding of religious institutions, such as the Malmö mega-mosque.
“In addition, we [should] require that all imams should speak Norwegian, so we can better understand what is happening in the Muslim community,” Wibye added.
Malmö, which is Sweden’s third-largest city, has become a hotbed of drug crime, gun crime and extremism following large-scale Muslim immigration. Regular grenade attacks are a particularly worrying feature of life in the city, given the potential for terror attacks on the wider population.
“Malmö is infamous for explosions,” retired police chief superintendent Torsten Elofsson told Breitbart London in late 2015.
“I live in Malmo and I love this city. But of course it has changed – now we have the bridge from Copenhagen, this is a border town. Most of the drugs going to the rest of Scandinavia comes through here – this is a key route for smuggling drugs, weapons, people, and so on.”
“The bridge brought good to the city, but from a police perspective it has brought more crime. Now since we are in the [European Union] Schengen area we’re not allowed to have border controls, which makes it difficult to supervise what is happening”.
Elofsson believes it is accurate to describe parts of Malmö and other areas of Sweden as having become “no-go zones”, and claimed that the number of these is “expanding”.
“Police can go to these places,” he said, “but you have to take precautions.”
Trey Gowdy Made A Big Announcement That Could Blow Open The Russia Spying Scandal
Congress’ investigation into Russia and the 2016 election is focusing on the Obama administration’s spying and illegal leaks of classified intelligence.
Former National Security Advisor Susan Rice is refusing to testify after it was revealed she requested the unmasking of Trump officials caught up in surveillance.
Trey Gowdy responded, and his announcement could unravel Rice’s and Obama’s role in this conspiracy.
The Senate Judiciary Committee requested Rice testify after journalist Mike Cernovich broke the story that she requested the unmasking of multiple Trump officials caught up in surveillance.
Rice – through her lawyer – claimed it was because the invitation wasn’t “bipartisan.”
Fox News reports:
SUSAN RICE, BARACK OBAMA’S LONGTIME NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, DECLINED WEDNESDAY TO TESTIFY BEFORE A SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ABOUT RUSSIAN ACTIVITIES DURING THE 2016 ELECTION CAMPAIGN.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C. HAD REQUESTED THAT RICE APPEAR BEFORE THE SENATE JUDICIARY SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND TERRORISM ON MONDAY.
RICE’S REFUSAL TO TESTIFY WAS FIRST REPORTED BY CNN.
IN A LETTER ADDRESSED TO GRAHAM AND RANKING MEMBER SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, D-R.I., RICE’S ATTORNEY KATHRYN RUEMMLER SAID THAT HER CLIENT OPTED NOT TO APPEAR BECAUSE WHITEHOUSE HAD SAID HE DID NOT AGREE WITH GRAHAM THAT RICE SHOULD TESTIFY.
RUEMMLER CALLED GRAHAM’S UNILATERAL INVITATION “A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM THE BIPARTISAN INVITATIONS EXTENDED TO OTHER WITNESSES.”
Trey Gowdy – who has stepped up his role on the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation into Russia’s conduct during the 2016 election – immediately fired back.
He responded that Congress should make Rice’s cooperation mandatory by issuing a subpoena.
The Daily Caller reports:
TREY GOWDY MANAGED TO TAKE SHOTS AT BOTH SUSAN RICE AND HILLARY CLINTON IN JUST ONE FOX NEWS INTERVIEW THURSDAY MORNING.
HOST BILL HEMMER ASKED THE SOUTH CAROLINA REPUBLICAN WHAT HE THOUGHT ABOUT RICE REFUSING AN INVITATION TO TESTIFY ABOUT RUSSIAN HACKING AND THE UNMASKING OF TRUMP CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS.
“THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO INVITE PEOPLE OTHER THAN VIA A LETTER,” GOWDY ASSERTED. “THERE ARE THINGS CALLED SUBPOENAS. YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE TO USE THEM WITH A FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR, BUT IF YOU DO, YOU DO.”
THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM SOUTH CAROLINA SAID THAT RICE IS A “VERY IMPORTANT WITNESS.”
Rice testifying could be dangerous for both her and Obama.
The former National Security Advisor has a history of lying.
She appeared on five different Sunday shows during the 2012 election and claimed the Benghazi terrorist attack was caused by a YouTube video.
Rice also declared Bowe Bergdahl served with honor and distinction before the army charged him with desertion.
And in a February interview on PBS, she claimed she knew nothing about surveillance and the Trump campaign despite the fact she was the one who requested the unmasking of Trump officials.
Testifying under oath isn’t like appearing as a guest on a Sunday show.
You can’t lie.
If you fail to tell the truth, you face jail time.
Forcing Rice to testify under oath could be the best chance to get to the bottom of the Obama administration’s spying scandal.
FARAGE OFFICIALLY ENDORSES LE PEN: ‘IF SHE FAILS, SHE WILL WIN IN 2022’
'I'm supporting Marine Le Pen' announces Brexit mastermind
Dan Lyman | Infowars.com
Brexit architect Nigel Farage has officially thrown his support behind French presidential candidate, Marine Le Pen, as Sunday’s final round of voting approaches.
“I’m supporting Marine Le Pen, and if she fails this year, she will win in 2022,” wrote Farage in an editorial penned for the Daily Telegraph, assuming that if the French are not quite ready to embrace nationalism in the interest of self-preservation, they will be after five more years of globalist strip-mining and open borders.
Farage admits that he never favored an alliance between Le Pen’s party, Front National, and his own, UKIP, due to some of the more extreme views of Marine’s father, but that she has brought about a transformation of Front National that has earned his enthusiastic support.
“At no point in time did I want Ukip to do a deal with the French National Front,” Farage said. “The party’s roots were deep in Vichy and I believed anti-Semitism was embedded in its DNA. All this made it the wrong place for Ukip to be.”
“Then, in January 2011, an overwhelming vote of FN members saw Marine Le Pen become leader – beating Holocaust-denying Bruno Gollnisch.”
“From the start, she wanted the FN to be more like Ukip than the [British National Party.] I was told that this would be a nightmare for me,” he went on. “It was always monstrous that she should be judged in the image of her father – an accusation many still make today.”
Farage went on to refute the smears of the mainstream media, who never fail to tag Le Pen with the ‘far-right extremist’ slur – one they often slap on the likes of Farage and Donald Trump, for simply being opposed to globalism and tidal waves of Third World migrants pouring into the West.
“There is nothing she has said in this entire election campaign that I find unreasonable or extreme,” said Farage. “Indeed, she has a more rational line on Islam than many Eurosceptic parties across the Continent.”
“She is a sincere Eurosceptic, and under her the FN is about sovereignty, not race.”
“Marine has met virtually all of my previous conditions,” he concluded.
Farage has worked tirelessly for many years to battle the European establishment, and his own endorsement of Le Pen should stand as a clear indicator of what is truly at stake in this election, as the champion of the status quo has been openly identified.
Emmanuel Macron, former Rothschild banker and protege of current president, François Hollande, is the establishment candidate – one who will work in concert with Angela Merkel to continue to destroy Europe and degrade French economy, security, and identity.
“I would be pleased should Emmanuel Macron win, because he stands for a consistent, pro-European policy,” said Merkel earlier this week.
In a heated debate on Wednesday, Le Pen demolished Macron with a single proclamation: “Either way, France will be led by a woman; either me or Madame Merkel.”
Le Pen has trailed in the polls, but continues to gain ground, and if failed predictions about the U.S. presidential election are any indicator, then Le Pen’s chances are promising.
“The divide is no longer between the left and right but between patriots and globalists.” – Marine Le Pen
Farage admits that he never favored an alliance between Le Pen’s party, Front National, and his own, UKIP, due to some of the more extreme views of Marine’s father, but that she has brought about a transformation of Front National that has earned his enthusiastic support.
“At no point in time did I want Ukip to do a deal with the French National Front,” Farage said. “The party’s roots were deep in Vichy and I believed anti-Semitism was embedded in its DNA. All this made it the wrong place for Ukip to be.”
“Then, in January 2011, an overwhelming vote of FN members saw Marine Le Pen become leader – beating Holocaust-denying Bruno Gollnisch.”
“From the start, she wanted the FN to be more like Ukip than the [British National Party.] I was told that this would be a nightmare for me,” he went on. “It was always monstrous that she should be judged in the image of her father – an accusation many still make today.”
Farage went on to refute the smears of the mainstream media, who never fail to tag Le Pen with the ‘far-right extremist’ slur – one they often slap on the likes of Farage and Donald Trump, for simply being opposed to globalism and tidal waves of Third World migrants pouring into the West.
“There is nothing she has said in this entire election campaign that I find unreasonable or extreme,” said Farage. “Indeed, she has a more rational line on Islam than many Eurosceptic parties across the Continent.”
“She is a sincere Eurosceptic, and under her the FN is about sovereignty, not race.”
“Marine has met virtually all of my previous conditions,” he concluded.
Farage has worked tirelessly for many years to battle the European establishment, and his own endorsement of Le Pen should stand as a clear indicator of what is truly at stake in this election, as the champion of the status quo has been openly identified.
Emmanuel Macron, former Rothschild banker and protege of current president, François Hollande, is the establishment candidate – one who will work in concert with Angela Merkel to continue to destroy Europe and degrade French economy, security, and identity.
“I would be pleased should Emmanuel Macron win, because he stands for a consistent, pro-European policy,” said Merkel earlier this week.
In a heated debate on Wednesday, Le Pen demolished Macron with a single proclamation: “Either way, France will be led by a woman; either me or Madame Merkel.”
Le Pen has trailed in the polls, but continues to gain ground, and if failed predictions about the U.S. presidential election are any indicator, then Le Pen’s chances are promising.
“The divide is no longer between the left and right but between patriots and globalists.” – Marine Le Pen
After Homophobic Slur Against Trump, Lawyer Says Colbert Could be in Legal Trouble
A Dallas-area lawyer claims that comedian Stephen Colbert’s vile rant against President Trump isn’t just offensive – one lawyer says it may have been illegal.
Colbert, star of the Late Show, lambasted the President in an opening monologue segment that featured the comic hurling insults he thinks media members would genuinely like to say to Trump, but can’t.
In the segment, Colbert ridiculed Trump for being a disgrace, equated his supporters to skinheads, suggested he was mentally handicapped, and claimed his policies were in line with those of Hitler.
What really drew the ire of viewers was the former Daily Show correspondents homophobic slur to close out the piece.
“The only thing [Trump’s] mouth is good for,” Colbert said, “is being Vladimir Putin’s…” We won’t continue the rest.
Now the comedian is facing trouble on two fronts.
First, a social media campaign to #FireColbert started springing up and spreading like wildfire.
Second, and perhaps even worse, a Texas lawyer, Cameron Kinvig, has laid out a case against Colbert that suggests his comments may have been illegal. He claims that Colbert’s comments were “knowingly false,” and exhibited signs of “actual malice,” something past court cases have addressed.
When involving public officials, the Court held that “neither factual error nor defamatory content suffices to remove the constitutional shield from criticism of official conduct,” and that “the combination of the two elements is no less inadequate.”
While the Court gave great latitude to the New York Times, it didn’t give the newspaper a blank check to defame at will. Instead, the Court carved out from First Amendment protection statements “made with ‘actual malice’—that is, with knowledge that [the statement] was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”
There can be no denying that Colbert’s monologue contained knowingly false accusations. Most of his statements—while made from a seeming locus of fact—were both hugely offensive and ludicrous in their factual absurdity. But equally telling from the video itself was Colbert’s admission of “actual malice,” as he stated that he would be happy to “trade insults with the president of the United States to his face.”
While the Court gave great latitude to the New York Times, it didn’t give the newspaper a blank check to defame at will. Instead, the Court carved out from First Amendment protection statements “made with ‘actual malice’—that is, with knowledge that [the statement] was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”
There can be no denying that Colbert’s monologue contained knowingly false accusations. Most of his statements—while made from a seeming locus of fact—were both hugely offensive and ludicrous in their factual absurdity. But equally telling from the video itself was Colbert’s admission of “actual malice,” as he stated that he would be happy to “trade insults with the president of the United States to his face.”
It is not difficult to establish actual malice in a defamation context when the speaker admits to the same in front of tens-of-millions of people. Different from the offensive caricature of the Rev. Jerry Falwell depicted in a clearly-noted ad parody upheld by the Court in Hustler v. Falwell (1988), Colbert’s speech was meant to be taken as fact, was knowingly false, and was delivered in a malicious and purposeful manner.
The argument is perhaps specious.
It’d be difficult to prove Colbert’s speech was “meant to be taken as fact,” as Kinvig suggests. Most comedians fall back on their profession and could easily argue that none of their act is to be taken as factual.
Despite any issues – whether it be a social media campaign, advertiser boycott, or legal matter – Colbert seemingly has no regrets about the segment in question.
“I had a few choice insults for the president in return. I don’t regret that,” Colbert said on his show. “I would do it again.”
Kinvig meanwhile, insists “Mr. Colbert went past the protections the First Amendment provides to comedians and other satirists, and should be taken to task for his actions.”
What’s clear here is the incredible double standard for liberals and conservatives. Liberals were apoplectic any time President Obama was criticized, claiming that only a racist could possibly oppose anything Obama did.
Now, liberals defend Colbert’s disgusting anti-gay insults, just because they hate President Trump.
Here are the House Republicans who Voted to Save Obamacare
By Onan Coca
Below are the names of the House Republicans who voted to save Obamacare on Thursday. Please write, call, email, and visit these GOP turncoats who spent the last 7 years promising us repeal and then voting against it as soon as they got the chance:
Below are the names of the House Republicans who voted to save Obamacare on Thursday. Please write, call, email, and visit these GOP turncoats who spent the last 7 years promising us repeal and then voting against it as soon as they got the chance:
Andy Biggs, Arizona
Mike Coffman, Colorado
Barbara Comstock, Virginia
Ryan Costello, Pennsylvania
Charlie Dent, Pennsylvania
Dan Donovan, New York
Brian Fitzpatrick, Pennsylvania
Jaime Herrera Beutler, Washington
Will Hurd, Texas
Walter Jones, North Carolina
David Joyce, Ohio
John Katko, New York
Leonard Lance, New Jersey
Frank LoBiondo, New Jersey
Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania
Dave Reichert, Washington
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Florida
Chris Smith, New Jersey
Mike Turner, Ohio
Mike Coffman, Colorado
Barbara Comstock, Virginia
Ryan Costello, Pennsylvania
Charlie Dent, Pennsylvania
Dan Donovan, New York
Brian Fitzpatrick, Pennsylvania
Jaime Herrera Beutler, Washington
Will Hurd, Texas
Walter Jones, North Carolina
David Joyce, Ohio
John Katko, New York
Leonard Lance, New Jersey
Frank LoBiondo, New Jersey
Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania
Dave Reichert, Washington
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Florida
Chris Smith, New Jersey
Mike Turner, Ohio
Some of these Republicans voted against the bill for ideological reasons – Massie is a libertarian conservative who believes the entire Obamacare law should be repealed. Dent is a liberal Republican who loves big government, and while he might be against Obamacare is a fan of much of what Obamacare does.
For the most part (other than Massie) these legislators are moderate-liberals who embrace large swaths of Obamacare and are loathe to see the health care monstrosity repealed.
Call these legislators and demand that they begin supporting GOP efforts to repeal Obamacare, or else. If they don’t want to abide by their promises then we won’t be voting for them.
PROSECUTORS DROP RAPE CHARGES AGAINST TWO ILLEGALS ACCUSED OF SODOMIZING 14-YEAR-OLD GIRL IN SCHOOL
Snejana Farberov
Defense attorneys have maintained the bathroom encounter on March 16 was consensual
-
Maryland prosecutors dropped charges of rape and sexual offense against Henry Sanchez-Milian, 18, and Jose Montano, 17
-
Pair were arrested in mid-March for allegedly taking turns raping and sodomizing 14-year-old girl at Rockville High School
-
Sanchez-Milian and Montano now face new charges of child pornography possession stemming from explicit images the girl sent to the younger suspect
-
Defense attorneys have maintained the bathroom encounter on March 16 was consensual
-
They pointed to texts in which the girl agreed to a sexual encounter and explicit video she sent one of the teens
-
CCTV footage also captured the girl running to meet one of the teens and willingly entering the restroom with him, lawyers said
Maryland prosecutors have dropped charges against two immigrant teens accused of Cleared: Henry Sanchez-Milian, 18 (pictured), and his co-defendant Jose Montano, 17, had rape charges against them dropped due to lack of evidence Friday raping and sodomizing a classmate in a high school bathroom.
Montgomery County State's Attorney John McCarthy told a judge Friday that after an investigation, authorities are dropping rape and sex offense counts against 17-year-old Jose Montano, who was charged as an adult.
He and 18-year-old Henry Sanchez-Milian were charged in the alleged assault on the girl at Rockville High School in March.
Defense attorneys said the sex was consensual. They pointed to text messages in which the girl agreed to a sexual encounter; an explicit video the girl sent one of the teens; and security camera footage, which they said shows the girl running to meet one of the teens and willingly entering the restroom with him.
McCarthy said at a news conference this morning that the same charges against Sanchez-Milian also are being dropped due to lack of evidence.
'We have concluded that the facts in this case do not support the original charges filed in this matter,' he told reporters. 'Due to the lack of corroboration and substantial inconsistencies from the facts that we have obtained from multiple sources since the filing of the original charging document, the original charges cannot be sustained, and prosecution on those charges is untenable.'
The pair were accused of sexually assaulting and sodomizing a 14-year-old girl inside a men's room at Rockville High School in MarchCecile Richards Comes Unglued After House Defunds Planned Parenthood: Republicans STEVEN ERTELT -- WASHINGTON, DC
Planned Parenthood abortion business president Cecile Richards it’s not happy that the House of Representatives voted yesterday to defund Planned Parenthood.
The main response of the CEO of the nation’s biggest abortion conglomerate can be summed up in three words: Republicans hate women.
Even though the legislation has nothing to do with women’s health care or its access and even though Planned Parenthood is predominately an abortion business that provides no legitimate medical care or health services to pregnant women, that didn’t stop Cecile Richards from falsely characterizing the vote as one denying women appropriate health care.
Richards’ tone of desperation in the fundraising email is palpable.
We’re dangerously close to one of the most alarming moments we’ve seen in our long fight for access to health care and reproductive rights.
Just yesterday, we saw same-day attacks on access to health care and birth control. In the House, out-of-touch lawmakers passed their dangerous repeal of the Affordable Care Act, which includes “defunding” Planned Parenthood, stripping health care from millions, eliminating protections for people with pre-existing conditions, and more.
We’re deep in the fight of our lives to protect access to health care for 2.5 million people who depend on Planned Parenthood health centers, and defend birth control coverage for those who need it. It’s impossible to overstate the significance of this moment, or how much we need your help right now.
Richards also admitted she is angry at Republicans who voted to deny text bear funding to the nation’s biggest abortion company.
What you and millions of others felt in the aftermath of the House vote — that spontaneous outpouring of anger, fear, and grief — I felt it, too. Anger at politicians like Paul Ryan who would willingly take away insurance coverage and block patients from critical care. Fear for those who stand to be harmed the most. Grief that spans from a sense of helplessness as you watch the world shift.
We are angry about the disastrous health care bill being forced through Congress. In fact, we are furious. We are disgusted by the effort to take health care away from people, and fearful of the impact this bill would have on our health, our lives, and our communities.
By a narrow vote of 217 to 213, Paul Ryan and his out-of-touch allies forced through their bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act and “defund” Planned Parenthood health centers. Now this dangerous legislation will move on to the Senate — and this may be our last chance to stop it.
A recent survey found that community health centers not only provide more comprehensive health care than Planned Parenthood, excluding abortions, they also outnumber the abortion group’s facilities by 20 to one.
Recent polls also indicate Americans support the defunding efforts. New polling found 56 percent of Americans in battleground states want Planned Parenthood defunded.
G’ day…Ciao…….
Helen & Moe Lauzier
Thus articles
that is all articles
This time, hopefully can provide benefits to you all. Okay, see you in another article post.
You are now reading the article the link address https://fairyforreference.blogspot.com/2017/05/helen-moe-lauziers-issues-of-day-write_6.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment