Welcome to the Republicans’ Hypocrisy Hall of Fame and Shame

http://www.oneworldpi.org/images/oneworldlogo.jpg OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc., is a 501(C)3, 100 percent  volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996. Please visit our YouTube channel at: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6 See work samples.

Civic Engagement, Education and Health Literacy are our main areas of focus.  You can learn much more about OneWorld’s investment in each area by visiting the links:

America is going through extremely difficult times on many fronts; however, what is happening in politics and race seem to be the most difficult, disheartening and frightening.  Since the election of Donald Trump we seem to be a nation more divided than we have been for a long time.  Mr. Trump used harsh, racist and very divisive rhetoric during the election campaign in 2016.  He has surrounded himself with people are are known to have racist ties and a racist history.  One of the top advisors in the White House is the known Alt-right person and avowed Leninist, Steve Bannon.   “I’m a Leninist,” Bannon proudly proclaimed.

“Lenin,” he answered, “wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.” Bannon was employing Lenin’s strategy for Tea Party populist goals. He included in that group the Republican and Democratic Parties, as well as the traditional conservative press.” Trump also selected Jeff Beauregard Sessions to be his Attorney General. The late Coretta King, wife of MLK, in 1986 wrote a letter in opposition to the Mr. Sessions being elected as a federal judge. Read the letter linked below and also posted online by  The Washington Post.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/08/514085145/read-coretta-scott-kings-letter-that-got-sen-elizabeth-warren-silenced

In 1999, as a senator, Jeff Sessions  voted to remove President Bill Clinton from office for false statements made under oath. … “It goes to the heart of the judicial system.”  He also declared: “It is crucial to our system of justice that we demand the truth.” This is the same Jeff Sessions, who as Attorney General is sending shock waves through black communities across America as he abandons truth, justice, fairness and rolls back the clock of racism and promotes racial injustice against blacks.  He will not prosecute white police officers who kill blacks without justification.  He is returning to the dark, evil and oppressive days of maximum sentences for petty crimes.  Over the decades Mr. Sessions has a record of discriminating against black Americans.  He was placed at the Dept of Justice so that he could again put in place the old Jim Crow (racist) laws for which America was so infamous. Terrifyingly, we are headed there again.

This is only one on ten blatant examples provided by Nicholas Kristof, in the opinion below, of the gross hypocrisy on America’s 2017 GOP leaders. These people care nothing about laws, ethics, principles or anything else for which America stands.  It’s ALL about being in power and going back to the days of exclusive ‘white power.’  Many believe that is exactly what Donald Trump means when he talks about America First.  (Mr. Kristof’s original article did not include the numbers)

The Republican Hypocrisy Hall of Fame.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/11/01/opinion/kristof-circular/kristof-circular-thumbLarge-v7.jpg

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/05/18/opinion/18kristofWeb/18kristofWeb-master768.jpg

Senator John McCain last week when asked about his comment invoking Watergate in describing the controversy over ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russia. Credit Shawn Thew/European Press photo Agency

We certainly don’t want leading Republicans to tumble into hypocrisy, so let’s refresh their memories.

Patriots like Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan have eloquently warned of the importance of ferreting out the truth and holding politicians accountable, including for leaking classified information. Thank God for their insistence on truth-seeking!

As McConnell warned, for example: “The president did not value the sacred oath. He was interested in saving his hide, not truth and justice. I submit to my colleagues that if we have no truth and we have no justice, then we have no nation of laws. No public official, no president, no man or no woman is important enough to sacrifice the founding principles of our legal system.”

Such passion for justice and accountability (expressed in 1999, during the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton) inspires us all. And at this historic moment when timid or myopic politicians balk at congressional oversight and resist an independent commission to investigate President Trump and possible collusion with the Kremlin, it behooves us to cherish the wisdom of such honest souls.

1) “Extreme carelessness with classified material … is still totally disqualifying.” — Donald Trump, July 11, 2016

2) “It’s simple: Individuals who are ‘extremely careless’ w/ classified info should be denied further access to it.”  — House Speaker Paul Ryan, tweet, July 7, 2016

3) “The security clearance of any officer or employee of the federal government who has exercised extreme carelessness in the handling of classified information shall be revoked.” — Senate Bill 3135, co-sponsored last year (to shame Hillary Clinton) by 16 Republican senators: Cory Gardner, John Cornyn, Shelley Moore Capito, Tim Scott, James Risch, Pat Roberts, Dean Heller, Kelly Ayotte, John Barrasso, David Perdue, Johnny Isakson, Thom Tillis, John Thune, David Vitter, Mike Rounds and James Inhofe

4) “Those who mishandled classified info have had their sec clearances revoked, lost their jobs, faced fines, & even been sent to prison.”  — Reince Priebus, tweet, July 6, 2016

5)  “What do I say to the tens of thousands of people that live and work in my district who work for the federal government, including more than 47,000 Marines? What do I say [to them] when saying something that isn’t true and handling classified information in an extremely careless way has no criminal ramifications?”  Representative Darrell Issa, July 12, 2016

6)  “In my opinion, quite frankly, it’s treason.”  Representative Michael McCaul, Nov. 3, 2016, on Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server

7)   “Presidents are not ordinary citizens. They are extraordinary, in that they are vested with so much more authority and power than the rest of us. We have a right; indeed, we have an obligation, to hold them strictly accountable to the rule of law. … It is self-evident to us all, I hope, that we cannot overlook, dismiss or diminish the obstruction of justice by the very person we charge with taking care that the laws are faithfully executed.”  — Senator John McCain, Feb. 12, 1999, in voting to convict President Clinton in his impeachment trial

8) “By his words and deeds, he had done great harm to the notions of honesty and integrity that form the underpinnings of this great republic. … If we do not sustain the moral and legal foundation on which our system of government and our prosperity is based, both will surely and steadily diminish.”  Gov. Sam Brownback of Kansas, Feb. 12, 1999, as a senator

9) “The true tragedy in this case is the collapse of the president’s moral authority. … There was no better reason than that for the resignation of this president.” — Senator Charles Grassley, Feb. 12, 1999

10)  “Our freedom is assured by the rule of law. … Even the most powerful among us must be subject to those laws. Tampering with the truth-seeking functions of the law undermines our justice system and the foundations on which our freedoms lie.”  Senator Mike Crapo, Feb. 12, 1999

Such Ciceros! At a time when so many Americans have a narrow, partisan vision, I am grateful that we are blessed with patriots of such vision.

In all seriousness, let’s adhere to the spirit of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who as a senator during the 1999 Clinton trial declared:

“The chief law officer of the land, whose oath of office calls on him to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, crossed the line and failed to defend and protect the law and, in fact, attacked the law. … Under our Constitution, such acts are high crimes, and equal justice requires that he forfeit his office. … It is crucial to our system of justice that we demand the truth.”

I invite you to sign up for my free, twice-weekly email newsletter. Please also join me on Facebook and Google+, watch my YouTube videos and follow me on Twitter (@NickKristof).

During a OneWorld Teen Forum, several young people voiced their concerns about how police kill black men indiscriminately:  https://youtu.be/GcnUYVTAtvs Please watch.

We suggest that you also check out these other opinions by Nicholas Kristof:

 Opinions by Nicholas Kristof

  1. Is President Trump Obstructing Justice?

    2. Dangerous Times for Trump and the Nation

3.  ‘There’s a Smell of Treason in the Air’

OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc., invites visitors to visit our web home page: http://www.oneworldpi.org

  • OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc is a 501(C)3, 100 percent volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996.  We produce three categories of television programs: health literacy, education and civic engagement. We also engage the community, and particularly students, in critical-thinking forums, an oratory competition and radio discussions. What we do depends largely on what we can financially afford to do at any given time and on an ongoing basis.  We invite and appreciate technical and financial support.

We at OneWorld invite you to visit our YouTube channel at: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6   Face Book is here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB  If you like what you see, please “LIKE” our FB page and please SHARE us with others.  We are all about good information and building a POSITIVE community.  We welcome financial and technical support. Write to us at: OneWorld, Inc. P.O. Box 8662, New Haven, CT 06531

Read More      No Comments

Do We Trust Trump’s Judgement to Do What’s Best for America?

http://www.oneworldpi.org/images/oneworldlogo.jpgOneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc., is a 501(C)3, 100 percent  volunteer organization   serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996. Please visit our YouTube channel to see examples of our work: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6  Civic Engagement, Education and Health Literacy are our main areas of focus.  Visitors can learn much more about OneWorld’s investment in each area by visiting the following links: Education Agenda: http://www.oneworldpi.org/education/  See our Civic Engagement programs and forums at: http://www.oneworldpi.org/civic_engagement/ Health Literacy is found at: http://www.oneworldpi.org/health/ This blog comes under Civic Engagement

  Our FaceBook page is here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB  We ask you to please visit and  “LIKE” our FB page, and please SHARE us with others. We are working to contribute positively to the broader Connecticut community. 

Do We Trust Trump’s Judgement to Do What’s Best  for America? In a Democracy People Are Expected to Ask this Question.

To Trump-devoted Bullies:  In a democracy people are allowed to ask pertinent questions.  In fact, it is not about being allowed; it is expected.  The people we elect to represent us at various levels of government are not supposed to be blind followers of Democrats and Republicans, or any other entity.  They are expected to be thinkers and doers; they are supposed to be committed to doing what is best for the people who elected them.  Yes, most are under the umbrella of the Democratic and the Republican Party, but they are supposed to work together for the betterment of the people they represent and for the country on the national level.

They are NOT supposed to put the interest of political cronies, corporate elites, lobbyists, family financial gains, and certainly not foreign governments first.  According to an article in The Guardian, April 23, 2017, about 96 percent of Trump supporters (from the election) still support him. This means there is a serious disconnect in our country. It is important that our political leaders try to get to the bottom of that. While we know, from reading some of the diatribe from social media and the ultra-right-wing, that racism is a major part of his support it is not all of it.  At least we hope not. It does seem that his election has opened up some of America’s festering racial bigotries; they have exploded all around us.

In the Washington Post published May 24, 2017, there is this very informative article titled:

“Republicans in Congress struggle with this question: Do you trust Trump’s judgment?”

The entire article is linked below.  OneWorld has written a short summary posted to our FaceBook page.  Recently, there have been some vicious  postings attacking those who are not fans of Mr. Trump’s conduct since his active presidency took effect on January 20, 2017.  What is amazing is how easily people can turn on each other because there are political disagreements. It is truly disturbing.  We can and should disagree; in fact, that might be quite healthy.  Done constructively, disagreements might help us to learn and develop broader more informed perspectives.   That will not happen if we spread malicious, racist tales intended to undermine some political leaders and boost others.

OneWorld’s Summary of the Washington Post Article:Do You Trust Trump’s Judgment?”

  • It’s a simple question, but for Republicans in Congress, it’s not an easy one.
  • Do you Trust President Trump’s Judgment on Major Decisions?
  • “I’m not answering questions like that,” said Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) after hopping off an underground tram shuttling him from the Capitol to his Senate office building. “That’s ah . . . ” he trailed off as he walked toward an elevator.
  • Four seconds later, the easygoing Arizonan picked back up: “The president is overseas. I don’t think we’re allowed to ask any questions while the president’s overseas.”
  • Flake was one of a dozen Republicans from across the ideological spectrum asked this week to reflect on Trump’s judgment. Most of them weren’t eager to address the subject head-on.
  • They diverted and demurred. They paused contemplatively before answering. Some grew visibly uncomfortable. Others declared their conviction in Trump — but then qualified their words or expressed confidence in the people around him. Only one of those interviewed — Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) — offered an unqualified yes regarding Trump himself.

This wavering confidence, and perhaps loyalty, comes after a torrent of controversial decisions by the president and explosive revelations regarding the ongoing investigations into possible coordination between Trump associates and Russia. It also comes amid signs that members of Trump’s own administration don’t fully trust the president’s decisions.

When Trump revealed highly classified information to two Russian officials in the Oval Office earlier this month, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency, according to a Washington Post report earlier this month.

  • And when Trump asked the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election, both refused — deeming the appeal inappropriate, according to another Post report this week.

TO THE BULLIES ON SOCIAL MEDIA:  Attacking others who hold a different point-of-view from yours is not beneficial to anyone.  Blind allegiance is detrimental.  We should be Americans first, but we should also understand the CORE Principles of our democracy.  Responsible Republicans are just as concerned as responsible Democrats about the direction of our country.

Many of those saying “no” to Mr. Trump’s dictatorial conduct are life-long Republicans.  They put love of country and our democratic values first and certainly before party loyalty, and before loyalty to any president who might put personal interest above that of country.   

When any president asks public officials to avow personal loyalty above ethics, principles, legality and country, that should be reason for all Americans to be concerned; furthermore, the judgement of such a president should be questioned.

The Washington Post Article in its entirety starts below.

“It’s a simple question, but for Republicans in Congress, it’s not an easy one.  Do you trust President Trump’s judgement on major decisions?
“I am not answering questions like that,” said Sen Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) after hopping off an underground tram shuttling him from the Capitol to his Senator office building.  “That’s ah . . . ” he trailed off as he walked toward an elevator.  Four seconds later, the easygoing Arizonan picked back up: “The president is overseas. I don’t think we’re allowed to ask any questions while the president’s overseas.”

Flake was one of a dozen Republicans from across the ideological spectrum asked this week to reflect on Trump’s judgment. Most of them weren’t eager to address the subject head-on. They diverted and demurred. They paused contemplatively before answering. Some grew visibly uncomfortable. Others declared their conviction in Trump — but then qualified their words or expressed confidence in the people around him. Only one of those interviewed — Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) — offered an unqualified yes regarding Trump himself.

This wavering confidence, and perhaps loyalty, comes after a torrent of controversial decisions by the president and explosive revelations regarding the ongoing investigations into possible coordination between Trump associates and Russia. It also comes amid signs that members of Trump’s own administration don’t fully trust the president’s decisions.

When Trump revealed highly classified information to two Russian officials in the Oval Office earlier this month, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency, according to a Washington Post report earlier this month.

And when Trump asked the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election, both refused — deeming the appeal inappropriate, according to another Post report this week.

GOP lawmakers, meanwhile, have labored to project at least some semblance of unity with the White House over the first four months of Trump’s presidency, in hopes of salvaging their legislative agenda.

But now, amid a Russian meddling probe that has reached a current White House official and questions about whether Trump tried to stifle that investigation, that unity appears to be faltering.

“I thought the president gave a great speech in Saudi Arabia,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said, deflecting a direct question about the president’s judgment. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman wasn’t willing to comment more broadly.

“Those kind of questions are not . . . ” he said, going silent for a five seconds before concluding that he was facing a “gotcha” question.

The shift in the way Republicans talk about Trump has been incremental. They have mostly embraced the Justice Department’s appointment of a special prosecutor to take over the Russia investigation, even though many spent weeks saying it wasn’t necessary.

Many are still erring on the side of trying to give Trump the benefit of the doubt — and are trying to move past his controversies. But with multiple investigations into his associates and new revelations popping up faster than most lawmakers can keep up, some privately worry about how long they can sustain that posture.

One popular approach: List some facts about whether Trump can do what he is doing, rather than opine on whether he should do what he is doing.

After chewing over the question of whether he trusted Trump’s judgment on big domestic and national security decisions as he descended an escalator, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) used this strategy.

“He has the responsibility and so therefore, ah, I respect the result of the election. I respect the constitutional authority that he has.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) took a similar approach in a conversation with reporters a few steps from the Senate chamber.

“Do you trust the president’s judgment right now on big national security decisions, big domestic policy decisions, in light of all of these revelations?” one asked.

“Well, he’s president of the United States,” the second-ranking Republican replied.  “He’s won the election and he’s entitled to make those decisions. Ah, we need to try to work with him — and I am — to try to help him be successful.”
Does Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) trusts Trump’s judgement?  Not clear, but like Cornyn, he also confirmed that Trump is indeed the commander-in-chief.

“He is the president,” Lankford said. “And so he makes decisions and that’s the way the American people do it.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the whether the president’s reputation with lawmakers is deteriorating.

For some Republicans, the preferred way to discuss Trump is to talk about the people around him, rather than the president himself.

“Well, he’s going to have a lot of good advice over there,” said Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.), before naming some of his top national security advisers.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) who ran against Trump and was disparagingly dubbed “Little Marco” by the real estate developer during the campaign, said the president has a “really good team of people around.”

The Floridian said he does trust Trump’s judgment. Rubio said he was “impressed” with the decision that Trump and his team made to launch a military strike in Syria.

But as Rubio moved toward a Capitol subway tram, he turned back over his shoulder and added: “I don’t think national security is the issue.”  What is?

“Well, I think just all of these things that are going on in the press and so forth, I think are slowing down part of their agenda,” he replied. “But hopefully, we can overcome that.”

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) also said she trusts Trump’s judgment. And she also explained her position by crediting the advisers he has assembled.

“I think President Trump has a good team around him. And I have no reason not to trust his national security decisions,” she said.

Some Republicans remain staunch defenders of the president — particularly in the House, where many GOP members come from safe conservative districts.

“I do trust the president on national security,” Cole said without hesi­ta­tion. He added that Trump is having a “brilliant” international trip.

Others answer the question by comparing Trump to former president Barack Obama.

“I trust him much more than I did the previous president,” said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), who praised some of Trump’s foreign-policy decisions.

The question led some GOP lawmakers to fall back on familiar talking points: He’s different. His presidency is different.  but it’s starting to sound more like disavowal and less like a defense.
“Is he an unconventional politician? Yes, he is; that’s why people chose him.  they didn’t want traditional politicians to get elected,” said Cornyn, the Senate Republican whip.

He added: “So they got what they voted for.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/republicans-in-congress-struggle-with-this-question-do-you-trust-trumps-judgment/2017/05/24/d9a7cdd0-402a-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?

Other Related Coverage:

1) Poll: Majority of Americans do not trust Trump to keep his promises

2)   All the Terrifying Things That Donald Trump Did Lately

  • It’s been 99 days since Donald Trump became commander-in-chief. But for the president’s detractors, it’s felt like centuries — long medieval centuries chock-full of plague, illiteracy, and barbarians running roughshod through the ruins of the old republic. But we aren’t actually living in the dark ages (yet). So we might as well shed some light on what the barbarians have been up to.
  • Trump has given progressives so many causes for fear and outrage, it can be difficult — both practically and psychologically — to keep on top of them all as they happen.
  • To help you stay informed despite this challenge, Daily Intelligencer will provide regular inventories of Trump’s assaults on civic norms, common decency, and/or liberal democracy. Here is a rundown of everything the president has done on that front in the period between March 28 (the date of our last edition of “Terrifying Things”) and April 28, arranged in rough order of each affront’s apparent significance and severity.
  • http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/every-terrifying-thing-that-donald-trump-has-done.html

3)  Most Trump Supporters Don’t Trust the Media AnymoreMathew Ingram Feb 01, 2017

  • One of the themes that ran throughout Donald Trump’s presidential campaign—and has continued to manifest itself since Election Day—is the untrustworthiness of the mainstream media, which he has described repeatedly as “dishonest scum,” among other things.
  • Was Trump’s repudiation of the mainstream press a response to the lack of trust that many of his supporters already had in the traditional media, or did his attacks on them help fuel this mistrust? The answer to that remains unknown. But what is abundantly clear is that the vast majority of Trump voters don’t trust the media at all.
  •  Research released recently by Edelman, a global communications and public relations firm, shows that trust in the media among all Americans is at an all-time low, falling to just 35%. But it is even lower still among those who described themselves as Trump supporters.   http://fortune.com/2017/02/01/trump-voters-media-trust/

4)   Trump’s Supporters Still Support Trump—So What? (The other side)  Of what value is it to just retain one’s base?  By Seth Masket

https://psmag.com/.image/c_limit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cq_80%2Cw_960/MTQ2NTk2MjQ0NjYwNzU4Mzk1/73750-1cnxh_qwzvu5eku8pypnoda.jpg

Donald Trump addresses supporters during a political rally at the Phoenix Convention Center on July 11th, 2015, in Phoenix, Arizona. (Photo: Charlie Leight/Getty Images)

In June of 1974, with the Watergate scandal exploding and President Richard Nixon’s approval ratings in the high 20s, the New York Times ran an article that interviewed rural, conservative whites in Holdrege, Nebraska, about their feelings toward the president. These respondents were fierce supporters of Nixon and did not like the way the political system was treating him. The quotes may sound familiar today:

  • “I can’t believe there’s one dirty thing wrong with Richard Nixon…. Some people did some awful wrong things at Watergate, but you’ll never convince me that Nixon knew of them. Now you talk about dishonesty. What about all those votes the Democrats always steal in Chicago?”
  • “I’m just not going to believe the president is wrong until he’s convicted. I don’t have that much faith in the news media any more.”
  • “You can see the gleam in those TV reporters’ eyes when they have bad news.”
  • “I can’t understand why some people suddenly expect politics to be conducted in a church-like atmosphere. It never has been before.”

For some Trump voters in Northampton County, Pennsylvania, their new president has already done more than Obama – but others have had enough

  • Reportedly (April 23, 2017), 96 percent of Trump supporters would still vote for him today:  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/25/trump-supporters-elect-again-100-days
  • OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc is a 501(C)3, 100 percent volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996.  We produce three categories of television programs: health literacy, education and civic engagement. We also engage the community, and particularly students, in critical-thinking forums, an oratory competition and radio discussions. What we do depends largely on what we can financially afford to do at any given time and on an ongoing basis.  We invite and appreciate technical and financial support.

We at OneWorld invite you to visit our YouTube channel at: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6   Face Book is here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB  If you like what you see, please “LIKE” our FB page and please SHARE us with others.  We are all about good information and building a POSITIVE community.  We welcome financial and technical support. Write to us at: OneWorld, Inc. P.O. Box 8662, New Haven, CT 06531

Read More      No Comments

Trump & Republicans Betraying The Poor: Securing the Wealthy

http://www.oneworldpi.org/images/oneworldlogo.jpg OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc., is a 501(C)3, 100 percent  volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996. Please visit our YouTube channel to see examples of our work: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6 

Please ‘like’ our FaceBook page here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB   Please SHARE us with others. We are working to contribute positively to the broader American community. 

Mr. Trump and the Republicans plan to unveil on May 23, 2017 a $4.1 trillion budget for 2018 that will cut deeply into programs for the poor, from health care and food stamps to student loans and disability payments, laying out an austere vision for reordering the nation’s priorities.  His cuts will deeply affect many of the very people who helped to put him in the White House.  Trump is betraying the poor and the already disenfranchised as he showers tax cuts on the wealthy.  It is imperative that Americans take this seriously and NOT rely on the congressional representatives to do anything. Democrats have little power.

When one party controls all three branches of government by wide margins, and when we have a Republican Party that is emboldened and could care less what Democrats say, we the people MUST TAKE MATTERS INTO OUR OWN HANDS.  We must let the Republican Party know that we will not stand for this.   We are not sheep to be led to the slaughter.  America is supposed to be a Democracy!  We Must RESIST this callous, cruel and unconscionable behavior by Trump and his lieutenants.  The entire NY Times article is listed below.  This bulletted section is a OneWorld summary of key points.

  • Titled “A New Foundation for American Greatness,” with a 10 percent increase in military spending, the proposed Budget Viciously Slashes Safety Net Programs.
  • HUGE TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY.   Deep cuts in entitlement programs.
  • More than $2.6B for border security, including $1.6 billion to begin work on the Mexican Border Wall that he declared would be at Mexico’s expense.
  • Over 10 years it will slash more than $800 billion from Medicaid, the federal health program for the poor;
  • It will slice $192 billion from nutritional assistance and $272 billion over all from welfare programs.
  • Domestic programs outside of military and homeland security (whose budgets are determined annually by Congress) would also take a hit, their funding falling by $57 billion, or 10.6 percent.
  • The plan will cut Disability Benefits by more than $72 billion; millions of Americans rely this.
  • It would eliminate loan programs that subsidize college education for the poor and those who take jobs in government or nonprofit organizations.
  • The proposal makes no changes to Social Security’s retirement program or Medicare, the two largest drivers of the nation’s debt. (That might be down the road, but remember, elderly people vote! AARP is an active organization and they mobilize their members) Voting is important!
  • Read the details to see the innovations including $19B to fund Ivanka Trump’s idea;
  • $40B saved by barring undocumented immigrants from collecting the child care tax credit or the earned-income; savings from defunding Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics.

 “Trump’s Budget Cuts Deeply Into Medicaid and Anti-Poverty Efforts.”

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, MAY 22, 2017

Workers at the Government Publishing Office preparing the 2018 budget to be bound last week in Washington. Credit Jim Lo Scalzo/European Press Photo Agency

 WASHINGTON — President Trump plans to unveil on Tuesday a $4.1 trillion budget for 2018 that would cut deeply into programs for the poor, from health care and food stamps to student loans and disability payments, laying out an austere vision for reordering the nation’s priorities.

The document, grandly titled “A New Foundation for American Greatness,” encapsulates much of the “America First” message that powered Mr. Trump’s campaign. It calls for an increase in military spending of 10 percent, spending more than $2.6 billion for border security — including $1.6 billion to begin work on a wall on the border with Mexico — as well as huge tax reductions and an improbable promise of 3 percent economic growth.

The wildly optimistic projections balance Mr. Trump’s budget, at least on paper, even though the proposal makes no changes to Social Security’s retirement program or Medicare, the two largest drivers of the nation’s debt.

To compensate, the package contains deep cuts in entitlement programs that would hit hardest many of the economically strained voters whose backing propelled the president into office. Over the next decade, it calls for slashing more than $800 billion from Medicaid, the federal health program for the poor, while slicing $192 billion from nutritional assistance and $272 billion over all from welfare programs. And domestic programs outside of military and homeland security whose budgets are determined annually by Congress would also take a hit, their funding falling by $57 billion, or 10.6 percent.

It would also cut by more than $72 billion the disability benefits upon which millions of Americans rely. Student loan programs that subsidize college educations for the poor and those who take jobs in government or nonprofit organizations would be eliminated.

Mr. Trump’s advisers portrayed the steep reductions as necessary to balance the nation’s budget while sparing taxpayers from shouldering the burden of programs that do not work well.

“This is, I think, the first time in a long time that an administration has written a budget through the eyes of the people who are actually paying the taxes,” said Mick Mulvaney, Mr. Trump’s budget director.

“We’re not going to measure our success by how much money we spend, but by how many people we actually help,” Mr. Mulvaney said as he outlined the proposal at the White House on Monday before its formal presentation on Tuesday to Congress.

Among its innovations: Mr. Trump proposes saving $40 billion over a decade by barring undocumented immigrants from collecting the child care tax credit or the earned-income tax credit, a subsidy for low- and middle-income families, particularly those with children. He has also requested $19 billion for a new program, spearheaded by his daughter and senior adviser Ivanka Trump, to provide six weeks of paid leave to new parents.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/05/23/us/23budget-web2/23budget-web2-master675.jpg

Workers prepared copies of the 2018 budget after publishing last week in Washington. Credit Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press

 The release of the document, an annual ritual in Washington that usually constitutes a marquee event for a newly inaugurated president working to promote his vision, unfolded under unusual circumstances. Mr. Trump is out of the country for his first foreign trip and his administration is enduring a near-daily drumbeat of revelations about the investigation into his campaign’s possible links with Russia.

The president’s absence, which his aides dismissed as a mere coincidence of the calendar, seemed to highlight the haphazard way in which his White House has approached its dealings with Congress. It is just as much a sign of Mr. Trump’s lack of enthusiasm for the policy detail and message discipline that is required to marshal support to enact politically challenging changes.

“If the president is distancing himself from the budget, why on earth would Republicans rally around tough choices that would have to be made?” said Robert L. Bixby, the executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan organization that promotes deficit reduction. “If you want to make the political case for the budget — and the budget is ultimately a political document — you really need the president to do it. So, it does seem bizarre that the president is out of the country.”

The president’s annual budget — more a message document than a practical set of marching orders even in the best of times — routinely faces challenges on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers jealously guard their prerogative to control federal spending and shape government programs. But Mr. Trump’s wish list, in particular, faces long odds, with Democrats uniformly opposed and Republicans already showing themselves to be squeamish about some of the president’s plans.

“It probably is the most conservative budget that we’ve had under Republican or Democrat administrations in decades,” said Representative Mark Meadows, Republican of North Carolina and the chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus.

But in a signal that some of the proposed cuts to domestic programs are likely to face resistance even from hard-line conservatives, Mr. Meadows said he could not stomach the idea of doing away with food assistance for older Americans.

“Meals on Wheels, even for some of us who are considered to be fiscal hawks, may be a bridge too far,” Mr. Meadows said.

Republicans balked at Mr. Trump’s demand for money for the border wall in negotiations over a spending package enacted last month. Many were deeply conflicted over voting for a health care overhaul measure that included the Medicaid cuts contained in the budget to be presented on Tuesday. Now the president is proposing still deeper reductions to the federal health program for the poor, as well as drastically scaling back a broad array of social safety net programs that are certain to be unpopular with lawmakers.

“The politics of this make no sense to me whatsoever, in the sense that the population that brought them to the dance are the populists out there in the Midwest and South who rely on these programs that he’s talking about reducing,” said G. William Hoagland, a former senior Republican congressional budget aide. “I don’t see how Speaker Ryan gets anywhere close to 218 votes in the House of Representatives if this is the model. It’s an exercise in futility.”

Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said on Monday that the Medicaid reductions would “carry a staggering human cost” and would violate Mr. Trump’s campaign promise to address the opioid epidemic.

“Based on what we know about this budget, the good news — the only good news — is that it was likely to be roundly rejected by members of both parties here in the Senate, just as the last budget was,” Mr. Schumer said on the Senate floor.

The budget itself avoids some of the tough choices that would be required to enact Mr. Trump’s fiscal vision. The huge tax cut was presented but without any detail about its elements or cost. Mr. Mulvaney said the tax plan would not add to the deficit, implying that its cost would be made up with other changes, such as eliminating deductions.

To balance the budget, Mr. Trump’s budget relies on growth he argues will be generated from the as-yet-unformed tax cut.

The blueprint also steers clear of changing Social Security or Medicare, steps that Mr. Mulvaney, a former South Carolina congressman who has championed entitlement cuts, said he had tried to persuade Mr. Trump to consider.

“He said, ‘I promised people on the campaign trail I would not touch their retirement and I would not touch Medicare,’ and we don’t do it,” Mr. Mulvaney said of the president. “I honestly was surprised that we could balance the budget without changing those programs, but we managed to do that.”

But budget experts argued that was little more than fiction, and the plan could never deliver the results it claims to.

“The central inconsistency is promoting a massive tax cut and spending increases in some areas and leaving the major entitlement programs alone,” Mr. Bixby said. “You don’t have to be an economist to know that that doesn’t add up, and that’s why there’s a great deal of concern about the negative fiscal impact that this budget will have.”

While past presidents have often launched a road show with stops around the country to promote the components of their inaugural budgets, Mr. Trump is spending the rest of the week overseas, leaving his staff to explain his plan while Republicans craft their own response.

“This budget is dead before arrival, so he might as well be out of town,” said David Stockman, a former budget director under President Ronald Reagan.

Mr. Stockman said both political parties had grown comfortable with running large annual budget deficits. “There’s not a snowball’s chance that most of this deep deficit reduction will even be considered in a serious way.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/us/politics/trump-budget-cuts.html?

More Related Coverage Regarding Trump’s Budget & Senate Health Care Bill: 

  • ATTENTION PEOPLE: LET’S SEND A LOUD MESSAGE TO REPUBLICANS
  • It’s Time to Worry about Health Care in the Senate
  • Republican senators need to know that they work for the people of America.
  • A small group of Senate Republicans has shown signs of being persuadable, and only three are likely needed to stop a bill. The group includes Lamar Alexander, Shelley Moore Capito, Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins, Dean Heller, Lisa Murkowski and Rob Portman.
  • They should hear a loud message that Americans aren’t in favor of taking health insurance from their fellow citizens. The senators work for those citizens, not for Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan and Donald Trump.
  • https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/opinion/health-care-bill-senate.html?
  • The Despicable Budget Mr. Trump Submitted today 5/23/17:
  • Spending cuts: $4.3 trillion over 10 years
  • Nondefense discretionary spending: $1.4 trillion
  • Claimed savings from  economic growth  $2, 062B
  • Claimed savings from reductions in war funding: $593 billion
  • Savings on interest payments on the debt: $311 billion
  • Other: $339 billion:  The budget includes new limits on medical malpractice lawsuits, expected to reduce the practice of “defensive medicine,” saving Medicare $31 billion over 10 years.
  • It also proposes raising about $36 billion in new federal revenue by selling off major American energy resources and infrastructure, opening up vast new areas of public land for oil and gas drilling, and redirecting state revenues that flow from oil and gas royalties back to Washington.
  • The Postal Service would see $46 billion in cuts.
  • Repeal and replace Obamacare: $250 billion:  Undoing the Affordable Care Act would save $250 billion over 10 years, according to the Trump administration, which promises “a smooth transition away from Obamacare.” (These savings are in addition to those proposed for Medicaid.)
  • Student loans: $143 billion:  The Trump administration is proposing large cuts to the federal student loan program for low-income college students. The proposal eliminates federally subsidized loans, which pay students’ loan interest while they are in school, saving $39 billion.
  • Government payments: $142 billion: The budget promises savings from reducing unspecified government payments through “actions to improve payment accuracy and tighten administrative controls.”
  • https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/us/politics/trump-budget-winners-losers.html?
  •  OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc., invites visitors to visit our web home page: http://www.oneworldpi.org
  • OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc is a 501(C)3, 100 percent volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996.  We produce three categories of television programs: health literacy, education and civic engagement. We also engage the community, and particularly students, in critical-thinking forums, an oratory competition and radio discussions. What we do depends largely on what we can financially afford to do at any given time and on an ongoing basis.  We invite and appreciate technical and financial support.

We at OneWorld invite you to visit our YouTube channel at: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6   Face Book is here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB  If you like what you see, please “LIKE” our FB page and please SHARE us with others.  We are all about good information and building a POSITIVE community.  We welcome financial and technical support. Write to us at: OneWorld, Inc. P.O. Box 8662, New Haven, CT 06531

Read More      No Comments

Supreme Court Allows 4th District Ruling: N.C. Targets AAs

http://www.oneworldpi.org/images/oneworldlogo.jpg

OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc., is a 501(C)3, 100 percent  volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996. Please visit our YouTube channel to see examples of our work: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6  Civic Engagement, Education and Health Literacy are our main areas of focus.  Visitors can learn much more about OneWorld’s investment in each area by visiting the following links: Education Agenda: http://www.oneworldpi.org/education/  See our Civic Engagement programs and forums at: http://www.oneworldpi.org/civic_engagement/ Health Literacy is found at: http://www.oneworldpi.org/health/

  Our FaceBook page is here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB  We ask you to please visit and  “LIKE” our FB page, and please SHARE us with others. We are working to contribute positively to the broader Connecticut community. 

This blog comes under Civic Engagement

Under the leaderships of Donald Trump, Michael Pence, Jeff Sessions, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, Republicans are leading America backwards into the dark and violent days of overt racism, discrimination, and violent oppression against African Americans, people of color and poor immigrants.  It is a frightening time!   States that are controlled by Republicans are trying to implement Restrictive Voting Laws that will deny voting rights and opportunities to Blacks, Hispanics, the poor, those who have served time in prison and anyone they believe will vote Democratic.    They are putting in place restrictions that will make it impossible for such people to ever vote. In this recent Supreme Court ruling which allows the findings of the 4th District Court to stand, Chief Justice Roberts also opens a back door to a future over-ruling that will keep some of these restrictions in place.  Allowing the 4th District Ruling to stand is not an outright victory for voting rights; nor is it a victory against the discriminatory practices in North Carolina or elsewhere.  A confluence of  good fortune has allowed this to happen and for that various advocacy groups are pleased.

The fact that Republicans would not allow Judge Merrick Garland to be seated for a year, left the Supreme Court with eight members rather than the usual nine.  It seemed there would have been a 4 to 4 deadlock; therefore, the Court decided not to hear the case and to allow the 4th district ruling (that found the restrictions prejudicial against blacks) to stand.

“In the voting rights case, Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote for the 4th District panel in July that the state law’s provisions “target African Americans with almost surgical precision” and “impose cures for problems that did not exist.”  “Thus the asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the State’s (of North Carolina) true motivation,” she wrote.

ARE YOU REGISTERED TO VOTE?  IF YOU ARE NOT A US CITIZEN, AND YOU HAVE A GREEN CARD FOR AT LEAST 5 YEARS, YOU CAN APPLY FOR UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP NOW.   America NEEDS the vote of every citizen to prevent Republicans from implementing oppressive racist laws.  America NEEDS to move forward, not backwards.  We cannot, as a nation, claim to promote democracy as we oppress black and poor Americans.  Donald Trump and the leadership of the Republican party are taking America backwards. We cannot let that happen.  Get registered to vote.  Be sure to vote in every election at every level: local, state, national.  If you have a prison record many states, including Connecticut, allow reinstatement of your voting rights; you must go to the Registrar of Voters to get your rights reinstated immediately. Please inquire in your state.  Your vote is your voice in our democracy.  You have a right and the responsibility to vote in all elections.

Supreme Court won’t review decision that found N.C. voting law discriminates against African Americans

https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/05/15/National-Politics/Images/2017-05-15T145149Z_709257594_RC1F19C21DF0_RTRMADP_3_USA-COURT-ELECTION.jpg?uuid=RUZGNDmgEeegWN27I8ddgg  Citizens in Greenville, N.C., vote in the 2016 U.S. general election. (Jonathan Drake/Reuters)  May 15, 2017

“The Supreme Court will not consider reinstating the 2013 North Carolina voting law that a lower court ruled discriminated against African American voters, the justices said Monday.

“A unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit had found in 2016 that North Carolina legislators had acted “with almost surgical precision” to blunt the influence of African American voters.

“Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. took pains to note that the high court’s decision did not reach the merits of the case, but Democrats, civil rights groups and minority groups celebrated the demise of the law.

“It was one of numerous voting rights changes passed by Republican-led legislatures after the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision striking down a key section of the Voting Rights Act. That decision effectively removed federal oversight of states with a history of discrimination.

“This is a huge victory for voters and a massive blow to Republicans trying to restrict access to the ballot, especially in communities of color,” said Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez.

https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1024w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2017/05/15/National-Politics/Images/Senate_Supreme_Burp_Arrest_37947-3eff4-4327.jpg?uuid=qUXG6Dl2EeegWN27I8ddgg

“The 4th Circuit on July 29 agreed with allegations from the Justice Department and civil rights groups that North Carolina’s bill selectively chose voter-identification requirements, reduced the number of early-voting days and changed registration procedures in ways meant to harm African Americans, who overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic Party.

The appeals court did not allow the law to be used in the 2016 election, and voters replaced the state’s Republican governor, Pat McCrory, with Democrat Roy Cooper.

[Supreme Court won’t let North Carolina use voting-law changes]

Cooper and the state’s new Democratic attorney general, Josh Stein, told the Supreme Court they did not want to appeal the lower court’s decision that the law violated the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act.

“We need to be making it easier to vote, not harder — and the court found this law sought to discriminate against African-American voters with ‘surgical precision,’ ” Cooper said in a statement after the Supreme Court acted. “I will continue to work to protect the right of every legal, registered North Carolinian to participate in our democratic process.”

As is its custom, the justices did not give a reason for declining to review the lower court’s decision. But in an accompanying statement, Roberts noted the particular circumstances of the appeal, in which the Republican legislative leadership attempted to continue the appeal and the Democratic governor and attorney general sought to abandon it.

“Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this Court under North Carolina law, it is important to recall our frequent admonition that ‘[t]he denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case,’ ” Roberts wrote.

 Last summer, Roberts and the court’s other conservatives — Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. — said they would have allowed the law to be used in the 2016 elections while the appeals continued.

The Supreme Court has upheld a version of voter-ID laws. But the issue seems likely to return to the high court, perhaps in high-profile challenges to laws in Texas and Wisconsin.

The battle against the North Carolina law, considered one of the nation’s most far-reaching, consumed years of litigation by the Obama administration and a wide coalition of civil rights organizations.

“An ugly chapter in voter suppression is finally closing,” said Dale Ho, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Voting Rights Project.

The Rev. William J. Barber II, president of the North Carolina NAACP, the lead organizational plaintiff in the case, said, “Today we experience a victory for justice that is unimaginably important for African Americans, Latinos, all North Carolinians, and the nation.”

The state legislature’s top Republicans, House Speaker Tim Moore and Senate leader Phil Berger, said in a statement that they would enact a new voter-ID law.

“It is unconscionable that Roy Cooper and Josh Stein — who ignored state law and flouted their conflicts of interest to kill voter ID in North Carolina — have now caused the vast majority of voters who support voter ID to be denied their day in court,” Moore and Berger said in a statement. “In light of Chief Justice Roberts’ statement that the ruling was not based on the merits of voter ID, all North Carolinians can rest assured that Republican legislators will continue fighting to protect the integrity of our elections by implementing the commonsense requirement to show a photo ID when we vote.”

Politics newsletter – The big stories and commentary shaping the day.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-wont-review-decision-that-found-nc-voting-law-discriminates-against-african-americans/2017/05/15/59425b1c-2368-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?

Strict North Carolina Voter ID Law Thwarted After Supreme Court Rejects Case  (New York Times version of the No. Carolina Voting Rights story)

“The court found that all five restrictions “disproportionately affected African-Americans.” The law’s voter identification provision, for instance, “retained only those types of photo ID disproportionately held by whites and excluded those disproportionately held by African-Americans.”

That was the case, the court said, even though the state had “failed to identify even a single individual who has ever been charged with committing in-person voter fraud in North Carolina.” But it did find that there was evidence of fraud in absentee voting by mail, a method used disproportionately by white voters. The Legislature, however, exempted absentee voting from the photo ID requirement.

The court also found that the early voting restrictions had a much larger effect on black voters, who “disproportionately used the first seven days of early voting.” The law, the court said, eliminated one of two “souls to the polls” Sundays, when black churches provided rides to polling places.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/05/16/us/16scotus1/merlin-to-scoop-122116175-821055-superJumbo.jpg

People celebrated at a church in Raleigh on Monday after the Supreme Court declined to hear a case over North Carolina’s voter ID law, leaving in place a lower-court ruling that struck down key parts of the law as an unconstitutional effort to target African-Americans. Credit Robert Willett/The News & Observer

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday refused to revive a restrictive North Carolina voting law that a federal appeals court had struck down as an unconstitutional effort to “target African-Americans with almost surgical precision.”

The court’s decision not to hear an appeal in the case effectively overturned one of the most far-reaching attempts by Republicans to counter what they contended, without evidence, was widespread voter fraud in North Carolina. The law rejected the forms of identification used disproportionately by blacks, including IDs issued to government employees, students and people receiving public assistance.

Democrats and civil rights groups, wary of the Supreme Court now that it has regained a conservative majority with the appointment of Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, welcomed the announcement that it would not hear the case.

“An ugly chapter in voter suppression is finally closing,” said Dale Ho, director of the A.C.L.U.’s Voting Rights Project.

The leaders of North Carolina’s Republican-controlled Legislature vowed that they would seek to enact new voting restrictions after their defeat.

“All North Carolinians can rest assured that Republican legislators will continue fighting to protect the integrity of our elections by implementing the common sense requirement to show a photo ID when we vote,” House Speaker Tim Moore and Phil Berger, the president pro tempore of the North Carolina Senate, said in a statement.

But their options will be limited by the appeals court decision and will most likely face opposition from Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat who welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the appeal.

“Today’s announcement is good news for North Carolina voters,” Mr. Cooper said in a statement. “We need to be making it easier to vote, not harder.”

The divisions in the state’s leadership, which led to a dispute about who represented the state in the case, figured in the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear it, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in a statement that accompanied the court’s one-sentence order. He added that nothing should be read into the court’s decision to decline to hear the case.

The Supreme Court’s action set no precedent and will have no impact in most of the country. But it let stand the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit’s sweeping rejection of an array of voting restrictions by North Carolina.

The law, enacted by the state legislature in 2013, imposed a range of voting restrictions, including the new voter identification requirements. It was part of a wave of voting restrictions enacted after a 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision that effectively struck down a central part of the federal Voting Rights Act, weakening federal oversight of voting rights.

The case challenging the North Carolina law was brought by civil rights groups and the Obama administration. A trial judge rejected arguments that the law violated the Constitution and what remained of the Voting Rights Act. But a three-judge panel of the appeals court disagreed.

The appeals court ruling struck down five parts of the law: its voter ID requirements, a rollback of early voting to 10 days from 17, an elimination of same-day registration and of preregistration of some teenagers, and its ban on counting votes cast in the wrong precinct.

Voting rights advocates had been watching the North Carolina case for signs of how a closely divided Supreme Court would rule on similar lawsuits now that Justice Gorsuch is on the court.

In September, a deadlocked Supreme Court turned down an emergency pre-election request from state officials to block the appeals court’s ruling. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan voted to reject the state’s arguments. Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. would have temporarily reinstated parts of the law.

The decision on Monday not to hear the case turned on procedural issues, not on the substance of the suit, so the court’s current leanings remain unknown.

State officials asked the Supreme Court in December to hear their appeal in the case, North Carolina v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, No. 16-833.

Two months later, in an unusual last-minute procedural maneuver, two newly elected Democratic officials — Mr. Cooper and Attorney General Josh Stein — asked the court to dismiss the state’s petition seeking review. Lawyers for the General Assembly opposed the motion.

In his statement on Monday, Chief Justice Roberts said the Supreme Court’s decision to decline to grant the petition seeking review, or petition for certiorari, turned on that dispute.

“Given the blizzard of filings over who is and who is not authorized to seek review in this Court under North Carolina law,” the chief justice wrote, quoting an earlier decision, “it is important to recall our frequent admonition that ‘the denial of a writ of certiorari imports no expression of opinion upon the merits of the case.’”

Civil liberties advocates, nevertheless, called it a victory for voting rights and — for now, at least — a precedent with broad application.

“This is the law of the land in the Fourth Circuit,” said Daniel T. Donovan, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.

The justices are likely to take a more definitive position on voting rights issues when and if they hear one of several cases that appear bound for the court. The most likely candidate is a lawsuit challenging Texas’ 2011 voter identification law.

A federal district judge ruled in April that the Texas Legislature had intentionally discriminated against black and Hispanic voters when it enacted the law.    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/us/politics/voter-id-laws-supreme-court-north-carolina.html

  OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc., invites visitors to visit our web home page: http://www.oneworldpi.org
  • OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc is a 501(C)3, 100 percent volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996.  We produce three categories of television programs: health literacy, education and civic engagement. We also engage the community, and particularly students, in critical-thinking forums, an oratory competition and radio discussions. What we do depends largely on what we can financially afford to do at any given time and on an ongoing basis.  We invite and appreciate technical and financial support.

We at OneWorld invite you to visit our YouTube channel at: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6   Face Book is here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB  If you like what you see, please “LIKE” our FB page and please SHARE us with others.  We are all about good information and building a POSITIVE community.  We welcome financial and technical support. Write to us at: OneWorld, Inc. P.O. Box 8662, New Haven, CT 06531

Read More      No Comments

For Democracy To Be Powerful The Populace Must Be Engaged

http://www.oneworldpi.org/images/oneworldlogo.jpg OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc., is a 501(C)3, 100 percent  volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996. Please visit our YouTube channel to see examples of our work: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6  Civic Engagement, Education and Health Literacy are our main areas of focus.  Visitors can learn much more about OneWorld’s investment in each area by visiting the following links: Education Agenda: http://www.oneworldpi.org/education/  See our Civic Engagement programs and forums at: http://www.oneworldpi.org/civic_engagement/ Health Literacy is found at: http://www.oneworldpi.org/health/ This blog comes under Civic Engagement

  Our FaceBook page is here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB  We ask you to please visit and  “LIKE” our FB page, and please SHARE us with others. We are working to contribute positively to the broader Connecticut community. 

The Pulsating Hypocrisy of GOP Leaders (as the people in-charge) Makes it a Dangerous Time for America. Nicholas Kristof has written a thought-provoking editorial in the 5/17/17 New York Times. It deserves to be read slowly in its entirety.  Of particular interest is this excerpt:  “House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy declared last June that he believed that Putin finances Trump. Talking with House Speaker Paul Ryan and other leaders, McCarthy said, “I think Putin pays” Trump. When people laughed, McCarthy quickly added, “Swear to God!” Ryan swore those present to secrecy.  “No leaks,” Ryan said. “This is how we know we’re a real family here.” When The Post asked Ryan and McCarthy about the statements, their offices flatly denied them. Informed that The Post had a recording, they backtracked and suggested it was a joke. If it’s not humor, this is extraordinary: The Republican House leadership suggested that Putin was keeping Trump on his payroll and that this must be kept secret — even as they thundered about Hillary Clinton’s emails!”  Read it again!

We the people CAN and SHOULD hold our elected officials accountable and responsive to our needs and to the ethical and legal standards of the country.  Because they control all branches of government does not give the Republicans (or anyone else) the right to break the law and to practice or cover up corruption.

  • Our elected officials at every level of our society need to know what our expectations are; they should not assume to know and they should not be dictating to us. We have the right to know what they are doing and what they plan to do on our behalf. They are elected by us, not by the lobbyists from whom they get so much money and gifts.
  • This is why we, the people, need to be informed. Our representatives, senators, governors, mayors and First Select Persons work for us.
  • They, plus our state and federal attorney generals, cabinet members and other public leaders (including those who attend the president) need to HEAR from us by whatever means are effective in getting our concerns to their attention.
  • America is not an autocracy, nor is it a dictatorship. Many of our elected reps are behaving as dictators because we allow them to.  Some states seem to be autocracies.
  • Many of us complain to each other; we post our anguished thoughts without any effective demands.  As individuals, we can plan and take action in our communities by level starting with streets, sections, neighborhoods and towns.
  • We accept our reps misconduct because we believe we are powerless. We Are Not Powerless. There is greater power in numbers; we need to build local coalitions.
  • Many of us oppose what has been going in Washington for some time, and especially since January 20, 2017. We need to take action. As with health care reform, we can and must speak out; reject proposals that are wrong and that do not serve our agenda or the best interest of our families, communities, state and the nation!

Dangerous Times for Trump and the Nation

Nicholas Kristof

The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Columnist

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/05/18/opinion/18kristofSub/18kristofSub-master768.jpg

“The Trump presidency may now be disintegrating, tumbling toward entropy.

By firing James Comey as F.B.I. director, President Trump set in motion the appointment Wednesday evening of Robert Mueller as special counsel. Mueller is a Trump nightmare: a pro who ran the F.B.I. for 12 years and is broadly respected by both parties in Washington for his competence and integrity. If Trump thought he was removing a thorn by firing Comey, he now faces a grove of thistles.

One crucial lesson here: Pressure matters. It was public opinion that stalled the Republican effort to repeal Obamacare, and it is public opinion in part that will ensure the integrity of this investigation.

While the Justice Department didn’t precisely cave to polls, it truly does matter that a majority of Americans want this cloud over our presidency investigated and removed; legal decisions unfold in a political context. Keep up that pressure, for the coming months may be particularly dangerous.

We don’t, of course, know what Mueller will find, and Trump has reiterated his denial of collusion with the Kremlin. Some Democrats seem to assume an investigation will prove a secret deal between Trump and Vladimir Putin, but many smart people I speak to wonder if it will end up more gray. They foresee evidence of collusion by Trump’s aides, and of financial pathways linking Moscow to Trump and his campaign, but perhaps no proof of a quid pro quo involving Trump himself.

The aides most at risk may be Paul Manafort and Mike Flynn, and NBC is reporting that multiple subpoenas have been issued for records involving them.

In addition, The Washington Post reported Wednesday on a remarkable recording in which House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy declared last June that he believed that Putin finances Trump. Talking with House Speaker Paul Ryan and other leaders, McCarthy said, “I think Putin pays” Trump. When people laughed, McCarthy quickly added, “Swear to God!”

Ryan swore those present to secrecy. “No leaks,” Ryan said. “This is how we know we’re a real family here.”

When The Post asked Ryan and McCarthy about the statements, their offices flatly denied them. Informed that The Post had a recording, they backtracked and suggested it was a joke.

If it’s not humor, this is extraordinary: The Republican House leadership suggested that Putin was keeping Trump on his payroll and that this must be kept secret — even as they thundered about Hillary Clinton’s emails!

(An aside: Thank God for the battle unfolding between The Washington Post and The New York Times. This is the best kind of newspaper war, keeping America straight. I’ve been very critical of media coverage of the presidential campaign, but the rigorous coverage of Trump since he took office has made me proud to be a journalist. And thanks to all those citizens who have subscribed to news outlets in recent months, recognizing that subscriptions are the price for a democracy.)

Yet there are dangers ahead. One is that America will be incapacitated and paralyzed by Mueller’s investigation and the suspicions — this partly explains the stock market’s big fall on Wednesday — and foreign powers may take advantage of this to undertake their own mischief. I would worry about Russia in both Ukraine and the Baltic countries, and we must make clear that we will work with allies to respond in kind.

Another danger is the risk of an erratic, embattled, paranoid leader at home who feels that he may be going down the tubes anyway. In domestic policy, presidents are constrained by Congress and the courts about what damage they can cause, but in foreign policy a president has a largely free hand — and the ability to launch nuclear strikes that would pretty much destroy the world.

In 1974, as Richard Nixon’s presidency was collapsing, he was drinking heavily and aides worried that he was becoming unstable. Fearing what might go wrong, Nixon’s defense secretary, James Schlesinger, secretly instructed the military not to carry out any White House order to use nuclear weapons unless confirmed by him or Henry Kissinger.

This was unconstitutional. And wise.

Schlesinger also prepared secret plans to deploy troops in Washington in the event of problems with the presidential succession.

We don’t know how Trump will respond in the coming months, and let’s all hope for smooth sailing. But as with Schlesinger’s steps, it’s wise to be prepared.

There have been calls for Trump aides to resign rather than ruin their reputations, but I hope the grown-ups — H. R. McMaster, Jim Mattis, Dina Powell, John Kelly, Rex Tillerson — grit their teeth and stick it out. The White House has never needed more adult supervision.

The cabinet has the constitutional power to remove a president by majority vote under the 25th Amendment (if the president protests, this must be confirmed by two-thirds of each chamber of Congress). Such a vote is unlikely, but in the event of a crisis like the one Schlesinger envisioned, it would be essential.

I hope that cabinet members are keeping one another’s cellphone numbers handy in case an emergency meeting becomes necessary for our nation.”

Other Related Coverage / Articles you might find informative and interesting

Trump Denies Any Collusion Between His Campaign and Russia

 Opinion Nicholas Kristof

     1.   Is President Trump Obstructing Justice?

    2.  ‘There’s a Smell of Treason in the Air, ’ 

    3.   Connecting Trump’s Dots to Russia,

1. President Trump and his aides have repeatedly and falsely denied ties to Russia. USA Today counted at least 20 denials. In fact, we now know that there were contacts by at least a half-dozen people in the Trump circle with senior Russian officials.

2. There’s no obvious reason for all these contacts. When Vice President Mike Pence was asked on Jan. 15 if there had been contacts between the Trump campaign and Kremlin officials, he answered: “Of course not. Why would there be?” We don’t know either, Mr. Vice President.

3.  3. There were unexplained communications between a Trump Organization computer server and Russia’s Alfa Bank, which has ties to President Vladimir Putin. These included 2,700 “look-up” messages to initiate communications, and some investigators found all this deeply suspicious. Others thought there might be an innocent explanation, such as spam. We still don’t know.”

    OneWorld Progressive Institute, Inc is a 501(C)3, 100 percent volunteer organization serving Greater New Haven and the broader CT community since 1996.  We produce three categories of television programs: health literacy, education and civic engagement. We also engage the community, and particularly students, in critical-thinking forums, an oratory competition and radio discussions. What we do depends largely on what we can financially afford to do at any given time and on an ongoing basis.  We invite and appreciate technical and financial support.

We at OneWorld invite you to visit our YouTube channel at: https://goo.gl/q3YhD6   Face Book is here: http://goo.gl/8v19VB  If you like what you see, please “LIKE” our FB page and please SHARE us with others.  We are all about good information and building a POSITIVE community.  We welcome financial and technical support. Write to us at: OneWorld, Inc. P.O. Box 8662, New Haven, CT 06531

Read More      No Comments