The Serious Side - part 8

PAN - Trump did pardon Flynn. Maybe that's why they haven't court-martialed him. At the very least he should lose his pension.

(Your links aren't working for me today. Honestly don't know why. Not your fault. Just that my computer hates me! )

Yep, I suspect that a pardon overrides anything else anyway, Lizzy.

  You'll really appreciate what the Supreme Court have done today! (sarc.)

   https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/30/us-supreme-court-ruling-restricts-federal-power-greenhouse-gas-emissions

In short, they are really not interested in the global threats of climate change....left again wondering what they have shares in.........

[size=48]Justice Sotomayor Expresses 'Growing Concern' for Separation of Church and State in Dissenting SCOTUS Opinion
In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court sided with parents in Maine who sued over a policy that prevented the state from funding religious schools through a tuition assistance program
By Aaron ParsleyJune 22, 2022 12:08 PM[/size]
FB[url=https://www.twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Justice Sotomayor Expresses %27Growing Concern%27 for Separation of Church and State in dissenting...https://people.com/politics/justice-sonia-sotomayor-expresses-growing-concern-separation-church-state/%3futm_source=twitter.com%26utm_medium=social%26utm_campaign=social-share-article]Tweet[/url]
More


Justice Sonia Sotomayor
 
| CREDIT: ERIN SCHAFF/AFP/ GETTY
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed her "growing concern" about the erosion of a foundational principle in American government.
"This Court continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the Framers fought to build," Sotomayor wrote in a dissenting opinion released Tuesday in a decision on the case of Carson v. Makin.
In a 6-3 vote along ideological lines, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of striking down a policy in Maine that blocked religious schools from receiving taxpayer funds.
Attorneys representing Maine argued that private religious schools should not be allowed to participate in a state-funded tuition assistance program based in part on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

RELATED: Justice Sonia Sotomayor Admits Potential for SCOTUS to Make 'Mistakes' but Explains Why She Still Has 'Faith'
"As a result," Sotomayor wrote, "the Court has upended constitutional doctrine, shifting from a rule that permits States to decline to fund religious organizations to one that requires States in many circumstances to subsidize religious indoctrination with taxpayer dollars."
Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan also voted in the minority, with Breyer writing his own dissenting opinion that Kagan joined him on.
[size]
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, siding with a group of parents in Maine who sued over the law which excludes religious schools from the tuition assistance program.

Roberts wrote for the majority that the state's non-religious requirement for participation violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.
"The program operates to identify and exclude otherwise eligible schools on the basis of their religious exercise," he wrote.
RELATED: Sonia Sotomayor on Wise Words That Helped When 'People Said I Wasn't Smart Enough' for Supreme Court
Sotomayor disagreed and called the majority opinion "especially perverse because the benefit at issue is the public education to which all of Maine's children are entitled under the State Constitution."
"Today, the Court leads us to a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation," Sotomayor wrote in closing. "If a State cannot offer subsidies to its citizens without being required to fund religious exercise, any State that values its historic antiestablishment interests more than this Court does will have to curtail the support it offers to its citizens. With growing concern for where this Court will lead us next, I respectfully dissent."[/size]

[size=48]Supreme Court Rules That Biden Can Nix Trump's 'Remain in Mexico' Immigration Policy
The controversial policy, which has been criticized as inhumane for putting migrants in harm's way, required asylum seekers to wait outside the U.S. for immigration courts to decide their cases
By Virginia ChamleeJune 30, 2022 10:24 AM
FB[url=https://www.twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Supreme Court Rules That Biden Can Nix Trump%27s %27Remain in Mexico%27 Immigration Policy https://people.com/politics/supreme-court-allows-biden-to-nix-trump-immigration-policy/%3futm_source=twitter.com%26utm_medium=social%26utm_campaign=social-share-article]Tweet[/url]
More


Migrants in Tijuana, Mexico
 
| CREDIT: DAVID GUZMÁN/EPA-EFE/REX/SHUTTERSTOCK
In a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed Joe Biden to strike down a controversial immigration policy that was put in place during Donald Trump's presidency, with justices John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh siding with the liberal-leaning justices.
On Thursday, the court ruled in Biden v. Texas that Biden's administration was not in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act to terminate the "Remain in Mexico" program, officially called the Migrant Protection Protocols, or MPP.
The rule — which requires asylum seekers to wait outside of the U.S. for immigration courts to decide their cases — was suspended by President Joe Biden when he took office, but later reinstated by the administration after a Trump-appointed U.S. District Court judge sided with officials in Texas and Missouri who wished to put the policy back in place.
After lower courts blocked the Biden administration from terminating the policy, it was up to the Supreme Court to consider where the program could continue.

RELATED: Trump's Controversial 'Remain in Mexico' Policy Reinstated by Biden Administration
More than 60,000 asylum seekers were returned to Mexico during the Trump administration and under the policy, which was launched in 2019.
Human rights advocates say the policy is inhumane because it leaves migrants who are stranded in Mexico vulnerable to violence — including sexual assault and kidnapping — and exposed to unsanitary conditions during long waiting periods while their immigration proceedings continue back in the U.S.
Last December, the Biden administration worked to address some of those concerns, with the Department of Homeland Security announcing that the U.S. and Mexico reached a deal that addresses humanitarian concerns, including a new six-month limit on court proceedings and improved access to counsel for those with cases pending.
Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE's free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from juicy celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.

In an announcement, the DHS also reiterated concerns voiced by Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas that the program "has endemic flaws, imposed unjustifiable human costs, pulled resources and personnel away from other priority efforts, and failed to address the root causes of irregular migration."
The court's decision Thursday marked the final ruling of their term — and the last with Justice Stephen Breyer presiding, whose resignation will go into effect at noon ET. Known for siding with the liberal minority for most of his tenure on the SCOTUS bench, Breyer ended his career on a high note, joining the majority opinion.
[/size]

---

If the Supreme Court can't be brought into line with the Constitution we're screwed as a democracy. The religious beliefs of the justices are not supposed to drive their decisions. They are supposed to be impartial. This court is not.

"Justice" Thomas is voting his religious and political beliefs, judicial precedents be damned. Coming from someone whose wife is a seditionist, his opinions should all be re-examined for bias and he should be impeached and removed from the court. I recently saw somewhere (sorry, I didn't pay much attention at the time) that he said he's going to get even for what he was put through. I assume he meant the hearings re: Anita Hill. He should never have been appointed to the court.

Catching up on the serious side thread.  Have to agree with just about everything that’s been said here in the last couple of weeks.  I’ve been watching all of the J6 hearings.  They have been fascinating, well orchestrated and super revealing.  Especially the last hearing where Cassidy Hutchinson testified.  There was a really striking editorial cartoon in The Washington Post that showed a disgusting caricature of Trump throwing catsup at …
the Constitution of the US.  One of the things that makes these hearings so powerful is that it has been almost exclusively Republicans who have come forward to testify.  
Though I certainly appreciate their willingness to tell the truth some of these people would STILL vote for Trump again if he runs in 2024.  I was especially disappointed in finding out after his testimony that Rusty Bowers would vote for Trump again.  I initially was very taken by his testimony.  I found him so sincere in his conviction to not lie for Trump. He seemed driven by his faith to the Constitution and his religion.  Then he said he’d vote for Trump over Biden in 2024.  WTF?! I really don’t know where a supposed religious person such as Bowers draws the line between right and wrong.  Very disappointing.  

I’m also devastated by the Roe v Wade ruling.  Knew it was coming but it’s here and so many states will try to enact, if they haven’t already, sick, sick policies to take away the rights of girls and women.  Apologize for going on and on.
I hope everyone here is having a good summer and getting out and having some fun post pandemic - though I don’t think it’s done with us yet

[size=48]Unserved Arrest Warrant for Woman, Now In Her 80s, Who Accused Emmett Till in 1955 Is Found in Court Basement
Emmett Till's relatives are calling on officials to arrest Carolyn Bryant Donham as an accessory to murder

By Chris HarrisJune 30, 2022 03:03 PM[/size]



Emmett Till, Carolyn Bryant Donham
 
| CREDIT: AP; GENE HERRICK/AP
The unearthing of an unserved warrant has relatives of Emmett Till calling on authorities in Mississippi to arrest the woman who falsely accused the 14-year-old Black boy of lewd conduct in 1955, leading to his abduction and lynching.
An image of the newly-discovered arrest warrant, found in the basement of the Leflore County courthouse in Greenwood, was first obtained and published by The Amsterdam News.
Court officials in Leflore County also confirmed to the Associated Press and Reuters that the decades-old document was found last week by a team from the Emmett Till Legacy Foundation — a non-profit dedicated to preserving the slain teen's legacy and fighting for justice on his behalf.
The warrant was located in a file folder that had been stuffed inside an unmarked box.

Emmett, who was from Chicago, was visiting relatives in Mississippi during the summer of 1955 when a woman — Carolyn Bryant Donham, then 21 — accused him of whistling at her and attempting to grab her hand and waist inside a store.
Days later, Emmett was kidnapped from a relative's home, beaten severely, and mutilated before being shot. Afterwards, a large metal fan was tied to his neck with barbed wire and his body was thrown into the Tallahatchie River.
RELATED: How Emmett Till's Mother Turned Her Personal Tragedy into a National Movement: 'She Had a Job to Do'
Donham's husband at the time, Roy Bryant, and Bryant's half-brother, J.W. Milam, were tried for Emmett's murder, and an all-white jury acquitted them in September 1955 after an hour of deliberations.


In a magazine interview after the trial, both men admitted killing the boy.

Emmett's death served as a catalyst for the civil rights movement.
In 2007, Donham recanted part of her story, telling Timothy B. Wilson for his book The Blood of Emmett Till the teen never touched her or harassed her verbally.
RELATED: Memorial Set Up to Mark Where Emmett Till's Body Was Found Vandalized with Bullet Holes
In March, the Senate unanimously passed a bill named after Emmett, making lynching a federal hate crime. 
According to the Associated Press, part of the team that discovered the unserved warrant included Emmett's cousin, Deborah Watts, who heads the Emmett Till Legacy Foundation, and her daughter, Teri Watts. 
Want to keep up with the latest crime coverage? Sign up for PEOPLE's free True Crime newsletter for breaking crime news, ongoing trial coverage and details of intriguing unsolved cases.
The warrant indicates Donham relayed the false allegations to Emmett's eventual killers, and that she was a possible accessory to Emmett's murder. Teri Watts believes the warrant amounts to new evidence.
RELATED: Emmett Till's Family Reacts to Accuser Recanting Part of Her Story: 'It's a Great Relief'
Teri Watts told the AP she expects the newly-discovered warrant — which was publicized at the time — will be served.
"Serve it and charge her," Teri Watts said to the AP. "This is what the state of Mississippi needs to go ahead."
According to the AP, after the warrant was first filed, the sheriff in Leflore County told reporters he didn't want to "bother" Donham, noting she had two young children to care for.
Donham is now nearing 90, and the AP reports that she currently resides in North Carolina.
She has made no comment on the family's calls for justice, and PEOPLE was unable to locate her for comment on Thursday.

Donnamarie - Like you, I've been watching the hearings and I've had the same reactions as you - especially to Rusty Bowers. I do not, for the life of me, understand how he could say what he did and still vote for Trump. Maybe you have to be schizophrenic to be a Republican.

You're right about covid not being done with us yet. My friend's daughter-in-law came down with it last week, and her son-in-law got sent home from work a couple of weeks ago because a couple of his co-workers tested positive. I think this virus will be with us forever, like the flu.

Hope you're enjoying your summer.

PS: Does anyone think the Emmett Till case will ever come to trial?

and yesterday.....https://www.cbsnews.com/news/emmett-till-accuser-carolyn-bryant-donham-arrest-warrant-found-1955-kidnapping/  Several articles here about this...

And also this...

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2022/06/24/new-jan-6-witness-trump-had-mystery-call-with-putin-00042210


Cannot wait for documentary maker Alex Holder's testimony..........

PAN - Re: Emmett Till - My doubts about the case ever being tried come from the fact that the woman involved is now 90 years old. Should it be tried? Yes. Will it be tried? I'm not so sure.

Re: Holder - I can't wait to watch the full documentary, but it looks like I'll have to subscribe to another streaming service to see it. As far as the call to Putin is concerned, he already testified to what he knew about it - which is just that he thinks it took place. I'm sure drumpf can find a lackey or two to deny it.

Don't worry, Lizzy. I will post everything I see - and if you can get The Guardian online, brilliant on this stuff and raised awareness of Facebook's antics with Cambridge Analytica reported by a great journalist called Carol Cadwalladr - and George describes it as stellar!

   https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy?language=en

PAN - Thanks for that link. I just watched her TED talk and found it fascinating. I had no idea that Brexit was decided by such a small margin, or that Zuckerberg has been so uncooperative in Parliament's attempts to investigate. I'm not surprised, though.

I don't have a Facebook account and probably never will. Partly it's because I'm a confirmed Luddite, and partly because I want as little to do with anything Zuckerberg as possible. He's a little too fond of power for my liking and I don't want to give him any more than I have to.

I hope either your government or ours finds a way to force him to cooperate. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google and all the rest need to clean up their acts and find a way to end all the misinformation and manipulation.

Ha, me too, Lizzy! Prefer to pick up the phone. 

There is untold damage that Zuckerberg has done to society and I suspect I know a little too much - he's not the least interested in people. 

After all he only wanted to create it because he couldn't talk to girls - so somewhere along the spectrum maybe.............

Really relish Katie Porter's interaction with him in Congress

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ciuK_-4_gE








































After all he invented Facebook becos he had to have a screen to communicate with girls! Definitely on some sort of spectrum in my opinion but I may be doing him an injustice. Really











 relished the times Katie Porter and friends interviewed him in Congress tho - but again the Russian links are there........

PAN - I love Katie Porter! She is brilliant, fearless and relentless. I only wish she had been on the J6 committee. Half the Republicans in Congress would be in jail by now and the other half would be praying to not be called to testify.

She made Zuckerberg look like a fool. He's either a very bad liar or totally incompetent. How do you not know what's going on in your own company?

[size=48]Cassidy Hutchinson, Now Facing Security Threats, Knew Life Would Change If She Testified Against Donald Trump
The former White House aide, 25, stunned the nation with a testimony she gave before the House committee investigating the 2021 Capitol riots
By Diane Herbst and Eileen FinanJuly 06, 2022 09:00 AM[/size]



Cassidy Hutchinson
 
| CREDIT: STEFANI REYNOLDS/GETTY
Since Cassidy Hutchinson's shocking testimony that Donald Trump was aware his supporters were armed in D.C. on Jan. 6, and that he lunged at his Secret Service detail in the car in an attempt to reach the Capitol that day, her life has taken a dramatic turn.
"Safety precautions are being taken," a friend tells PEOPLE in this week's issue, on newsstands nationwide Friday. "She went into this knowing her life would change."
Due to her appearance last week before the House committee investigating the insurrection at the Capitol, Hutchinson has received threats. She's also faced attacks from anonymous sources disputing some of her testimony, but at least two anonymous Secret Service agents have corroborated it. 

RELATED: Reagan's Secret Service Supervisor Says a President Lunging at Security Detail Is Unheard Of: 'Mind Boggling'
Still, "she's doing remarkably well," former White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin, now a CNN commentator, tells PEOPLE. "I think she went into it with open eyes."
It has been a head-spinning several years for the 25-year-old Hutchinson. As a senior at Virginia's Christopher Newport University in 2018, Hutchinson, a first-generation college student from New Jersey, told her school paper: "I have set a personal goal to pursue a path of civic significance."
RELATED: Who Is Cassidy Hutchinson, the Former White House Aide Expected to Testify at Tuesday's Jan. 6 Hearing?


Soon after graduation, she was clearly on that path, joining the White House in 2019 and immediately becoming a standout as an advisor to Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.

"She was a workhorse," says Farah Griffin. "Everyone in the West Wing liked her. Everyone knew her. She was regularly in by 7:00 AM and very often staying past midnight."
According to a friend, Hutchinson "believed in the Trump agenda but was devastated by what she saw once she was there."
"It was a mix of everything," the friend continues, "from the lack of structure to the infighting to the backstabbing and witnessing the character of the president that many went in admiring and realizing he is mean-spirited." 
RELATED: Assaulting Secret Service, Throwing Ketchup on Walls: The Biggest Bombshells from Tuesday's Jan. 6 Hearing
Still in her early 20s at the time, Hutchinson had a maturity that belied her years, recalls Farah Griffin.
"We'd go out for drinks, and Kayleigh (McEnany, a former Trump White House press secretary) would join us," says the 33-year-old Farah Griffin. "And it never felt like we were with someone younger than us."


The "very outgoing" Hutchinson "loved being in the White House," she says. "It was a dream come true."
"There were a couple of times that Cassidy and I, throughout traveling together, we had a lot of trips together, we'd say like, 'Can you believe this is our lives?' in a way that was grateful," Farah Griffin recalls, "but also acknowledging the magnitude of the moments we were in."
Hutchinson's decision to speak, her former political science professor, Rachel Bitecofer, tells PEOPLE, "was at great personal expense. To break a tribal identity is exceedingly difficult."
As for the future, Hutchinson, who is single, is going to "explore a number of options, but also probably going to give herself a little bit of time to decompress," says Farah Griffin. "I know she's going to have opportunities."
"I've prepped the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to give congressional testimony," she continues, "and they couldn't do it with the same level of poise and just sophistication and knowledge and calm that she did."
Hutchinson's decision to speak has also already inspired others to come forward, according to committee member Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who tells CNN, "She's going to go down in history."

I’m giving Hutchinson the benefit of the doubt.  She came across as honest, genuine and projected poise during her testimony.  But I am bewildered that she didn’t realize that Trump was “mean spirited“, not to mention that he had no character or integrity, before she took the job at the White House.  Really?  Trump has always shown his true self to the public.  That’s a head scratcher to me.

A lot of people who voted for Trump also knew nothing about him. They saw some of his interviews and simply went with that.
They bleived the hype instead of investigating him fully.

[size=48]Brett Kavanaugh Had to Leave Out the Back of a D.C. Morton's Steakhouse After Protestors Showed Up
Organizing group Shutdown DC said protestors confronted Kavanaugh at the restaurant
By Tommy McArdleJuly 08, 2022 02:11 PM
[/size]
Noah Cyrus Says Her Xanax Addiction Was a 'Bottomless Pit,' but She's 'Figuring It Out' in Recovery
Watched
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh had to leave Morton's Steakhouse in Washington, D.C. through the back door after protesters arrived to confront him.
On Wednesday, an organizing group called Shutdown DC posted to Twitter that it had received a tip that Kavanaugh was out to dinner in the city and encouraged people to message them in order to receive the location and confront the justice. About one hour later, the group posted again and said they were told Kavanaugh "snuck out the back with his security detail."
RELATED: Supreme Court Asks Maryland, Virginia Governors to End Picketing Outside Justices' Homes


"@mortons should be ashamed for welcoming a man who so clearly hates women," the group wrote, in reference to Kavanaugh's part in the Supreme Court's June 24 overturning of the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which enabled individual states to make its own laws regarding abortion procedures.


On Friday, Politico confirmed the group's account of confronting Kavanaugh at Morton's Washington, D.C. location. Protestors arrived in front of the restaurant and called its manager to tell the restaurant to kick Kavanaugh out before the Supreme Court justice ultimately left, according to Politico.
"Honorable Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and all of our other patrons at the restaurant were unduly harassed by unruly protestors while eating dinner at our Morton's restaurant," a Morton's spokesperson said in a statement obtained by Politico.
"Politics, regardless of your side or views, should not trample the freedom at play of the right to congregate and eat dinner," the statement continued. "There is a time and place for everything. Disturbing the dinner of all of our customers was an act of selfishness and void of decency."


A source told Politico that Kavanaugh did not actually see or hear the protestors in question during his dinner at Morton's, though he did reportedly leave the restaurant before dessert.
The Supreme Court did not immediately respond to PEOPLE's request for comment on the incident. The court had no statement to make on Kavanaugh's behalf, according to Politico's reporting.
Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE's free weekly newsletter to get the biggest news of the week delivered to your inbox every Friday.
On Friday, Shutdown DC made light of Morton's comments on the incident on Twitter, asking internet users to upload "a dramatic reading" of the restaurant's statement on TikTok.
"Best costume/setting wins," the group wrote.
RELATED: Mississippi's Last Abortion Clinic Closes Following Trigger Law — Owner Vows to Continue Services
The incident happened just days after SCOTUS Marshal Gail Curley sent letters to officials in Maryland and Virginia over the weekend calling on them to "enforce" state and local laws that "prohibit picketing outside of the homes of Supreme Court Justices," according to NPR.
In a letter to Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, Curley referred to one instance "earlier this week" where "at least 30 protesters gathered outside one Justice's Fairfax County home chanting expletives, and dozens appeared outside another's Fairfax County home chanting 'no privacy for us, no peace for you,'" Bloomberg reported.

Morton's response to the picketers was tone deaf. I do have some sympathy for their other diners, but not for Kavanaugh. He's got a security detail to protect him. If he doesn't want people protesting his rulings, maybe he should make better decisions. What a chickenshit! I really hope he gets impeached for lying to Congress.

It would've been nice if the SC had cared as much about protecting  abortion clinics all these years as they do about protecting their own behinds.

Folks, if you have ten minutes to look on here, take a look at the world of Joe Manchin,  EcoKing, - holding the entire world to ransom.......

https://twitter.com/kelly2277/status/1403313491725926403 at least the first four entries and no need to have a twitter a/c Please note the insulin bit......


And this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBVJov_eoMg 

PAN - Manchin has been a Republican in everything but name for ages. It's galling that there's no legitimate way - so far - to remove him from Congress. Maybe his nepotism will bring consequences. There's already talk of removing his committee chairmanship.

I'm not sure what the YouTube post was supposed to be. Your link didn't open for me, so I logged in to YT but I'm not sure I got to the right site. What was the video about?

It was what is going on in Colorado when a Trump guy is trying to force a legislator to do something illegal. Why am I not surprised!? If nothing happens when you click on it you may be able to copy the link out into your browser - unless of course they charge for Youtube over there.

Here's something for all the Facebook fans - Zuckerberg is going to court because of Russian/Trump interception into millions of accounts

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jul/20/mark-zuckerberg-deposition-cambridge-analytica-facebook

PAN - Opening the site wasn't a problem (I practically live on YouTube!) I just didn't know what I was looking for. Thanks for the help.

I've never been a fan of Facebook. I stopped using it early on because I thought (and still think) that even though it's a platform for sharing information it limits personal interaction. The last straw came when my cousin's daughter had a child and didn't send out announcements or call or anything - and then got angry because  she wasn't getting gifts for the baby. Most of the family didn't even know she'd given birth! Some didn't even know she'd been pregnant.

The assumption that everyone has time to constantly check your page is what I dislike. If I checked the pages of all the people who think I should, I'd never have time for anything else.

PS - Mark Zuckerberg is a jerk.

Joe Manchin suddenly decides that the climate bill is a good idea!!!

    Knowing what we know about him, I'm wondering what's in it for him!? Or maybe he was just getting too much heat and couldn't take it any more. Ironic

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62328875

[size=36]Senator Joe Manchin suddenly backs Biden climate and tax bill[/size]

• Published
  4 hours ago
  
  

[size=15]Share
Related Topics
[/size]

• Climate change
  

[size=10][size=10]IMAGE SOURCE,REUTERS[/size]
Image caption,
It is not clear why Joe Manchin changed his mind
[/size]
A US Democratic senator who has proved a political thorn in the White House's side has stunned Washington by announcing sudden support for President Joe Biden's top agenda item.
Joe Manchin says he now backs a bill to raise corporate taxes, fight climate change and lower medicine costs.
The West Virginian previously objected to the proposal, citing fears more spending could worsen inflation.
Passage of the bill would be a major legislative victory for Mr Biden.
Salvaging a key plank of his domestic agenda could also grant a much-needed electoral boost for his fellow Democrats, who are battling to retain control of Congress as midterm elections loom in November.
"If enacted, this legislation will be historic," said the president.

It is not clear what prompted the senator's dramatic reversal to support the new bill. He is something of a political anomaly, representing a conservative state that voted overwhelmingly for former President Donald Trump.
Earlier this week, the 74-year-old tested positive for Covid. He is fully vaccinated and wrote on Twitter that he was experiencing mild symptoms.
In a joint statement on Wednesday evening with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, Mr Manchin provided few specifics about his change in position on the bill which:

• Is said to be much more modest than the $3.5tn (£2.9tn) version Democrats originally put forward
  

• Would arguably help the US lower its carbon emissions by about 40% by the year 2030
  

• Would devote $369bn to climate policies such as tax credits for solar panels, wind turbines and electric vehicles, and to tackling the impact of pollution on low-income communities.
  

"By a wide margin, this legislation will be the greatest pro-climate legislation that has ever been passed by Congress," Mr Schumer said.
Mr Manchin and Mr Schumer also maintained the measure would pay for itself by raising $739bn (£608bn) over the decade through hiking the corporate minimum tax on big companies to 15%, beefing up Internal Revenue Service tax enforcement and allowing the government to negotiate prescription drug prices.
President Biden needs the support of all 50 Democratic senators, along with Vice President Kamala Harris's tiebreaking vote, to get the bill through the Senate and send it to the House of Representatives - where Democrats hold a razor-thin majority.

If passed, the legislation would mark a major breakthrough for the president, enshrining a number of his major policy goals into law and offering to salvage a domestic economic agenda that has in recent months stalled under failed negotiations.
The bill still amounts to significantly less than what the White House had hoped to achieve in its original $1.9tn Build Back Better agenda - an ambitious plan to comprehensively rewrite the US's health, education, climate and tax laws.
That earlier plan, which for months has floundered in the Senate with an uncertain future, is now "dead", Mr Manchin said on Wednesday.
Barely a fortnight ago, the senator exasperated the White House by saying he could only back the portions of the proposal relating to pharmaceutical prices and healthcare subsidies.
"I have worked diligently to get input from all sides," Mr Manchin said on Wednesday evening.
He had previously expressed concern that policies boosting the development of clean energy without also increasing fossil fuel production could hurt the US by making it more dependent on foreign imports.

Oil and gas companies employ tens of thousands of people in West Virginia and Mr Manchin received $875,000 (£718,000) in campaign donations from the industry over the past five years.
Mr Schumer hopes to pass the bill with 51 votes through a budgetary manoeuvre that would allow him to circumvent rules requiring support from 60 out of 100 senators. If every Democrat backs the measure in the evenly split chamber, it would go through.
Mr Schumer said the Senate would take the bill up next week. The House of Representatives could then take it up later in August.
However, Senator Kyrsten Sinema, a moderate Arizona Democrat who has in the past acted as a roadblock to President Biden's agenda, could still scupper the plan. She declined to comment on news of the agreement on Wednesday night.
In April, US media reported that Ms Sinema had told Arizona business leaders she remained "opposed to raising the corporate minimum tax rate".
Republicans, who have previously tried to woo Mr Manchin to join their party, slammed him.
"I can't believe that Senator Manchin is agreeing to a massive tax increase in the name of climate change when our economy is in a recession," Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said.
Ahead of the Glasgow climate conference last year, Mr Biden promised the US would provide $11.4 billion (£9.35 billion) a year in climate finance by 2024 - to help developing countries tackle and prepare for climate change.
But in March he managed to secure just $1 billion of that from Congress - only a third more than the Trump-era spending.


[size=11]Media caption,
Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry says world economies can benefit from renewables
[/size]

Related Topics

• Climate change
  
• US politics
  
• United States
  
• Joe Biden
  

It must be intoxicating for Manchin and Synema to wield so much power over an agenda that would affect the entire country. I don't know what Shumer had to promise Manchin to get him to get on board, but I wouldn't depend on him keeping his word. He represents a red state, and is a fossil-fuel millionaire in one of the poorest, least educated, most drug-infested states in the Union - just the constituency drumpf counts on - and maybe why he votes more Republican than Democrat.

[size=48]Florida Teens, Families Sue School Boards Over 'Don't Say Gay' Law: 'Forces Us to Self-Censor'
The lawsuit, which names several school districts, argues that Florida's recently-enacted "Don't Say Gay" bill "effectively silences and erases LGBTQ+ students and families"
By Glenn Garner and Amanda TaylorJuly 31, 2022 08:18 PM[/size]





CREDIT: OCTAVIO JONES/GETTY
Florida's LGBTQ teens and parents are going after their school districts over the recently-enacted H.B. 1557, widely known as the "Don't Say Gay" bill.
The complaint argues that the legislation "effectively silences and erases LGBTQ+ students and families" by banning discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in grades K-3 and restricts those topics for students through 12th grade based on vague standards of what's appropriate.
"The law demands that school districts implement its terms, and it empowers any parent to directly sue the school district if they are dissatisfied with its implementation of the law," reads the lawsuit, which was filed by Lambda Legal, Southern Poverty Law Center, Southern Legal Counsel and private counsel Baker McKenzie.
RELATED: What to Know About Florida's Controversial New Bill Banning LGBTQ Topics in Schools

The lawsuit represents two Florida couples and their children, rising high school senior Will Larkins and the organization CenterLink, an international network of LGBTQ centers. It names school districts in the counties of Orange, Indian River, Duval and Palm Beach, which did not immediately respond to PEOPLE's request for comment.
"I am concerned that this law will eviscerate any hope of healthy and important discussions about LGBTQ+ issues or historical events, which are already lacking in our schools," Larkins said in a statement. "Because of the vague language of the law, closed-minded parents are emboldened to become vigilantes to force their beliefs upon other people's children by suing the school district over anything they disagree with."


Fellow plaintiffs David Dinan and Vikranth Gongidi added: "We are deeply concerned about the negative effect that HB 1557 has upon our family. The law limits our speech and our expression. The law forces us to self-censor for fear of prompting responses from our children's teachers and classmates that would isolate our children and make them feel ashamed of their own family. It also causes irreparable harm to our children and to their development."

RELATED: Florida's First Openly Gay State Senator Speaks Out on 'Don't Say Gay' Bill
The suit argues: "This vigilante enforcement mechanism, combined with the law's intentionally vague and sweeping scope, invites parents who oppose any acknowledgment whatsoever of the existence of LGBTQ+ people to sue, resulting in schools acting aggressively to silence students, parents, and school personnel.
"The law, by design, chills speech and expression that have any connection, however remote, to sexual orientation or gender identity."


The National Center for Lesbian Rights previously filed another lawsuit against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis shortly after he signed the bill into law in March. 
RELATED: White House Describes Scene in Florida as 'Don't Say Gay' Bill Takes Effect: 'More Fearful and Less Free'
At the time of the signing, DeSantis, 43, said, "We will continue to recognize that in the state of Florida, parents have a fundamental role in the education, health care, and well-being of their children. We will not move from that," according to CNN.
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, the first openly gay person in the position, previously denounced the bill after it took effect earlier this month.
RELATED VIDEO: In Concurring Opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas Writes Court 'Should Reconsider' Rulings Legalizing Gay Marriage and Birth Control








"This is not an issue of 'parents' rights.' This is discrimination, plain and simple," said Jean-Pierre, 47. "It's part of a disturbing and dangerous nationwide trend of right-wing politicians cynically targeting LGBTQI+ students, educators, and individuals to score political points."
President Joe Biden has also been urging Congress to pass the Equality Act, which will ensure "long overdue" civil rights protections for LGBTQ people.

I wish them luck with their lawsuit. De Santis' Florida - outside the Miami area - is redneck territory and Miami is conservative Hispanic and rich people looking to hold onto their money. The snowbirds and retirees don't give a damn about any of this. Their only hope is that the courts are actually impartial.

With the latest news from Merrick Garland, here are a couple of very interesting links ome of you might like to see...

    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/8/11/2115419/-The-reason-Trump-has-appropriated-US-classified-documents-is-far-different-than-you-might-think?pm_source=story_sidebar&pm_medium=web&pm_campaign=recommended

    https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1557172686358335489?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1557172686358335489%7Ctwgr%5E3ad0b1497d8ed4cb154f506e604a978dd0058f1b%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailykos.com%2Fstory%2F2022%2F8%2F10%2F2115792%2F-Who-is-the-mole-in-Mar-A-Lago-The-Lincoln-Project-needles-trump

PAN - The Daily Kos theory's been kicking around on Twitter since the raid. It's totally plausible that if he feels cornered drumof will run - although now he might not have anything to sell to his possible hosts and not enough money to live in the style he'd like. If he does run, I wonder if Melania and Barron would go with him. And what about the rest of his kids? Honestly, I wish he would leave and take them all with him.

The Lincoln Project ad is vicious. I've seen it a couple of times and although I agree with the aim of the ad, it seems somehow over-the-line mean spirited. It's not that I think drumpf doesn't deserve it - he does - but it creeps me out.

As a Brit, I still find the phrase mean-spirited confusing. 

If it means nasty, then I would say that most of Fox News delivery to its followers is that. 

None of it or the Daily Kos piece has been denied.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmSM9WKBP_w

It is tragic that an American President, who was leader of the free world, could possibly have thought it was a good idea to take away and all these documents in his home.



The big question is why.





The question is why.

I think it unlikely that Merrick Garland would have acted the way he has without good cause - and obviously what has happened is illegal and unfortunately none of the rumours would surprise me

Well, at the moment nothing is certain. The Daily Kos piece speculates on what drumpf might do if trapped. As of now it appears that although drumpf took highly classified documents we won't be told the contents. They may have related to nuclear issues, which info could have been sold. We don't know. Garland wouldn't have agreed to the FBI's request for a warrant, and the judge wouldn't have approved it if there wasn't good cause to believe a crime had been committed. At the very least, holding on to these documents after they were requested by the National Archives is a crime, whose penalties were escalated by drumpf himself in 2018.

There is speculation that drumpf has already shared classified information with foreign nationals, chief culprits being the Russians and the Saudis. (Remember Jared Kushner's $2 billion deal? And the Saudi's golf tournament at drumpf's golf course? Payoffs?)

Re: "mean-spirited", to me it means meaning to inflict harm, mostly emotional - deliberately saying or doing something you know will hurt someone's feelings. Fox "news" is just propaganda for the GOP. It's unprincipled, unethical, untruthful and treasonous.

Lizzy we both know that Trump would do the same ads if he thought of them scratch that if his minions did. At this point we
have nothing to lose . We play nice and get nothing.
Creepy, is him burying his ex on his golf course so he doesn't have to pay taxes.

Annemarie -My problem with the Lincoln Project ads is that they're too extreme to do much good. They don't change people's minds - they just make them angry. Yes, the progressive and Democratic base finds them clever, but the drumpf voters just dig in deeper. Would drumpf use the same type of ads? Sure. The Republicans use them all the time. I don't think they change anyone's minds, either.

What I want to know is did they cremate Ivana? If they did - what's buried in her coffin? And why did drumpf get to make the decisions about her funeral? They were divorced for years and she was married again after him, so what about her other husbands and their families? Did they have a say? The whole thing stinks.

Hard to rise above the possible mean-spirited when That Man does that - and decides to publicly name the FBI agents who legally entered his home.

    If that isn't mean-spirited I don't know what is! Why on earth would anyone want to vote for a man who behaves like that?


By the way, brilliant speech by Liz Cheney last night. Worth listening to all of it - a good use of anyone's time

As much as I disagree with her politics, I have enormous respect for her as a person. Luckily for us she'll still be on the J6 Committee. If Biden wins again maybe he can appoint her to a cabinet post - even if she runs against him!

Lizzy them getting angry is their problem we need to get angry  democrats being nice has gotten us nothing. Her last husband died a couple of years ago they were divorced. Maybe, Ivana made Trump excutive over her estate .That would
explain why he has all the control. Let's remember she was as nasty as Donald. He married women who are just as vile
as he is.

Annemarie -I agree that the MAGA crowd getting angry shouldn't be a concern - although some of them may end up trying another coup. I just don't think ads that rile them up are going to change anything. They might even convince more drumpf supporters to vote.

Re: Ivana - I'm just curious. The rumor on twitter is that she was cremated. If that's true, what's buried in a coffin that took 8 men to carry?

Well, I put nothing past trump, so I'd bet he buried her there. The rumor is probably his or his people's way of covering for him.

Annemarie - What do you think they were covering up? There are tons of theories floating around. Some people even think he buried some of the files he took from the White House.

Usually when someone is cremated, if their ashes aren't scattered somewhere, they're kept in an urn on the mantel or in a family crypt or something. It just occurred to me that something like that wouldn't be gaudy enough for drumpf. Maybe he did have her cremated, but then buried her ashes in that gold-plated coffin to impress people.

I doubt he spent the money to cremate her he is cheap we all know this. He probably did bury her there.
the one thing I know is that if I were one of his kids I would be ashamed of this. This is simply an attention
seeking move using their dead mother not nice at all. He knew the press would find out.

TBH I don't think it was for attention (although he loves it) as much as it was for the tax break he gets for the golf course now that he can call it a cemetery. I wonder if that's going to be the family plot. There's certainly plenty of room for all of them, and the golfers can just play around the graves. Maybe they'll incorporate them into the course - like a sand trap or a water feature.

Here's something for all to be concerned about, given that this channel is available in hotels around the world:

   https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/aug/24/the-changes-at-cnn-look-politically-motivated-that-should-concern-us-all

Hope they let you read it...........!

PAN - The link won't open for me, but what's happening at CNN is getting coverage on line here. They say they're moving away from "left-leaning" coverage and more twards "neutral" coverage. Bull! They're going to become Fox-lite and cut the Republicans a break. It's impossible for a news outlet to be impartial when one party is actively trying to overthrow the government. It's likely they'll lose a lot of viewers over this. I'd like to see some kind of protest from the on-air personnel, but they probably won't risk their jobs.

Maybe if the story gets enough coverage people who watch CNN will be more critical and perhaps more skeptical of the content.

Just heard the sad news of Queen Elizabeth II passing. Heartfelt condolences to all our friends in the U.K.. I can't begin to understand what it must feel like to lose someone who has been such a huge part of the national identity for so long. So many things are changing in the world it's hard to wrap your mind around it all.

I'm so sorry, it's a loss for all of us.

Most people don't remember a life without the Queen. I've just talked with friends in the UK, and they are all shocked.

Rest in peace, your majesty!

Good to hear from you. Carol - and you're right. An amazing lady who never missed one day of government work (the red boxes) in her lifetime having never expected to be on the throne. 

Most of us have never known anybody else on the throne. And it's astonishing to think that only two days ago she formally met her 15th prime minister...and not so long ago meeting Paddington during her Jubilee celebrations - and a few years back James Bond in a helicopter heading to the London Olympics...

I simply loved these little films  with James Bond and especially with Paddington and where they both kept their marmelade sandwiches.

Such a great humour...

In amongst the millions of bouquets of flowers left at Buckingham Palace, there was a marmalade sandwich..............for later

      https://metro.co.uk/2022/09/10/sandwiches-and-jars-of-marmalade-among-paddington-tributes-to-queen-17345722/

That's really a sweet gesture.
Nevertheless - I would prefere people to either give sandwiches to homeless people and Paddington bears to poor kids or orphans or donate money.

After the funeral, nobody will pick teddy bears out of these mountains of flowers, especially if it has rained and rats have started to look for the sandwiches...