On November 22nd a new Trump administration rule was set to go into effect which would have protected clinicians who refused to perform abortions for moral or religious reasons, but a Federal judge in New York has thrown the rule out. Here is more:
A federal judge in New York on Wednesday struck down a new Trump administration rule that would have allowed health care clinicians to refuse to provide abortions for moral or religious reasons.
U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York rejected the federal rule after women’s groups, health organizations and multiple states sued the Department of Health and Human Services, arguing the exemptions were unconstitutional.
Engelmayer ruled that the so-called conscience rule was too coercive, allowing HHS to withhold billions in federal funding unless health care providers complied.
“The refusal of care rule was an unlawful attempt to allow health care providers to openly discriminate and refuse to provide necessary health care to patients based on providers’ ‘religious beliefs or moral objections,’” New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led the lawsuit for the states, said. “We will continue to use every tool at our disposal to protect access to health care and protect the rights of all individuals.”
First of all, how did we allow the left to change the term “abortion” into “healthcare?” That certainly downplays what the actual procedure is and makes it sound like pro-choice people are anti-healthcare.
And second, when they are talking about protecting the healthcare and rights of individuals they are forgetting about the baby in the whom who will never have either of the two.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Earlier today we learned that a key witness in the impeachment inquiry, Gordon Sondland, modified his previous statement to say there was a quid pro quo with Ukraine which made military funding contingent on corruption investigations. Here is more:
A critical witness in the impeachment inquiry offered Congress substantial new testimony this week, revealing that he told a top Ukrainian official that the country likely would not receive American military aid unless it publicly committed to investigations President Trump wanted.
Mr. Sondland’s testimony offered several major new details beyond the account he gave the inquiry in a 10-hour interview last month. He provided a more robust description of his own role in alerting the Ukrainians that they needed to go along with investigative requests being demanded by the president’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani. By early September, Mr. Sondland said, he had become convinced that military aid and a White House meeting were conditioned on Ukraine committing to those investigations.
The additions Mr. Sondland made to his testimony were significant because they were the first admission by a senior figure who had direct contact with Mr. Trump that the military aid for Ukraine was being held hostage to the president’s demands for investigations into his political rivals.
At least that is what the media is telling us and when you read the reports it sounds pretty damning, in fact I was prepared to write a post tonight speculating that this could be the beginning of the end of the Trump administration.
But we know that not everything is as it seems when it comes to what the mainstream media reports and it turns out they might not be giving us the full story. Mark Meadows is claiming the reporting is misleading because it leaves out a key aspect in Sondland’s testimony, here is what he tweeted earlier today:
Gordon Sondland was never told by the President the military funding was contingent on a corruption investigation into the corrupt Biden family, he just assumed on his own that it was and when he met with Ukrainian officials he acted as if he was told it was. I fail to see how this implicates Donald Trump, other than the fact that maybe he should have been more clear, but yet the media will continue push this as the smoking gun.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Elizabeth Warren claims laid off healthcare workers can sell life and auto insurance instead
Elizabeth Warren supports a Medicare for all plan and would like to see private healthcare insurance fall by the wayside. During the last Democratic primary debate Elizabeth Warren was asked what the price tag for her plan would be. You would thing that she would have been prepared for such an obvious question, but alas she was not and it took her several weeks before she came out with the cost.
Something many people might not have thought about who support Elizabeth Warren’s Medicare for all plan is the impact on people and their families who are going to lose their jobs when private healthcare insurance is eliminated. Elizabeth Warren was asked about this over the weekend and–much like when she was asked about the cost during the debate–she did not really have an answer. Here is what she came up with on the spur of the moment:
“No one gets left behind.”
She then added, “Some of the people currently working in health insurance will work in other parts of insurance. In life insurance, in auto insurance, in car insurance.”
They can just sell different types of insurance because, you know, insurance is insurance, what’s the dif? Also what makes her think all these jobs are suddenly going to open up in the life and car insurance industry to support the sudden influx of displaced healthcare insurance workers?
You would think that if somebody was going to propose a major overhaul like this they would have done enough research to at least answer a couple of basic questions but she probably thought nobody would question her on it.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Sunday, November 3rd open thread: ‘Take Me In’
“This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.” (Psalm 118:24 KJV)
Here is this week’s open thread. Please feel free to post links to interesting articles and to discuss whatever issues arise during the course of the day. Nothing is off-topic here.
You can subscribe to America’s Watchtower to receive email updates and you can also follow America’s Watchtower on Facebook and Twitter by clicking the links on the right.
Here is Kutless performing “Take Me In” live:
Whistleblower will not testify at the impeachment inquiry
If there is one person you would think should be compelled to speak before the impeachment inquiry it would be the whistleblower who’s blowing is being used as justification for the inquiry in the first place, but apparently that is not going to happen because talks broke down without an agreement.
Here is more:
The whistleblower whose complaint launched impeachment proceedings against President Trump is unlikely to testify to Congress, as talks have ceased between his legal team and committee leaders.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who has overseen depositions in Democrats’ impeachment proceeding, was initially eager for the whistleblower to testify before citing concern about the person being identified.
A source familiar with the discussions told the Washington Examiner that talks halted over potential testimony from the whistleblower and there is no discussion of testimony from a second whistleblower, who supported the first’s claims.
“There is no indication that either of the original whistleblowers will be called to testify or appear before the Senate or House Intelligence committees. There is no further discussion ongoing between the legal team and the committees,” the person said.
First of all it does not seem like there should be any discussion taking place, the people who made the claims that lead to this whole fiasco should be testifying at the inquiry one way or the other so they can be cross examined.
Secondly, it makes one wonder what they are hiding and lends credence to the new claim that this whistleblower was a CIA spy who was planted in the White House.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
House approves resolution formalizing impeachment inquiry
Today the House voted to formalize the impeachment inquiry. Considering the Democrats have been trying to impeach Donald Trump since he won the election this comes as no surprise, although there was speculation there would be push back from some red state Democrats. That was not the case as only two Democrats opposed the measure.
Republicans wanted this vote to take place because of some of the shady, secret meetings which are reported to have taken place, but if this story is true there are still a couple of concerning issues on the table. It is being reported that the Democrats can basically veto any witness or evidence the White House want to include in the hearing. Here is more:
House Democrats are playing hardball with President Donald Trump. They released procedures Tuesday to allow him and his counsel to participate in the eventual Judiciary Committee portion of the impeachment inquiry, but tucked in a provision that would allow them to take away all the rights they’re granting him.
Under the House Judiciary procedures, Trump and his counsel will be invited to attend all panel proceedings and ask questions. They can also request additional evidence or witness testimony, but the “committee shall determine whether the suggested evidence is necessary or desirable.”
This is supposedly a way to make sure Donald Trump does not stonewall the investigation but the term “desirable” is very concerning because Jerry Nadler has the sole discretion to determine who he desires to hear from. I am sure the Democrats would never abuse their discretion…
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Steny Hoyer won’t commit to Thursday impeachment vote
Yesterday Nancy Pelosi succumbed to Republican pressure and announced the House would vote to formalize an impeachment inquiry on Thursday. Putting party ahead of doing what they claim is best for the country, the Democrats have been reluctant to hold an official vote on impeachment proceedings because they are afraid of hurting vulnerable Democrats in states Donald Trump won.
Since the announcement these Democrats have voiced their frustration with having to go on the record instead of keeping their mouths shut and continuing the investigation as is, and now it is being reported that Steny Hoyer will not commit to holding the vote on Thursday.
House Majority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) has signaled he will not commit to House Democrats voting this week to formalize their secret impeachment inquiry, even after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said a vote is expected to take place on Thursday.
“We’re going to have to consider whether or not it’s ready to go on Thursday. I hope that’s the case,” Hoyer told reporters on Tuesday when asked about the planned vote.
Some Democrats (I.E. Maxine Waters) have been trying to impeach the President since before he was inaugurated and Steny Hoyer would have us believe that after three plus years they cannot have an impeachment resolution ready to go by Thursday?
Yeah, I am not buying that line either, I would be willing to bet the Democrats do not have the votes yet and when he says “ready to go” he is not talking about the language of the resolution but rather the support it needs.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
House to hold vote on impeachment inquiry on Thursday
About a month or so ago the House Democrats announced they had begun an official impeachment inquiry, but this came as news to most members of the Congress because there was never a vote to do so. Nancy Pelosi did not want to hold an impeachment inquiry vote because there are vulnerable Democrats in red states who cowardly do not want to go on record, so since that time Adam Schiff and the Democrats have been holding a secret kangaroo court.
Needless to say this did not make the Republicans happy and they have been pressuring Democrats to take the investigation out of the shadows and make it official by holding a vote. And now it looks like the Nancy Pelosi has succumbed to the pressure and will hold an official impeachment inquiry vote on Thursday. Here is more:
The House will vote this week on a resolution to formalize the next steps of the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, signaling Democratic leaders have reached a critical point in their investigation and are preparing to take the probe public.
The resolution — which Democrats are still finalizing and is expected to introduce Tuesday — will set procedural guidelines and move closer to potentially drafting articles of impeachment. The House is expected to vote on the resolution Thursday.
The vote will lay out procedures for public hearings, subpoenas and “due process” for Trump, which Democratic leaders hope will neutralize future GOP attacks against the impeachment process.
And those timid Democrats in red states I mentioned before are not happy because they are more worried about their political futures than anything else.
Shortly after the vote on the resolution was announced Monday, several senior Democratic aides were struggling to explain the rationale, having been given little notice of it themselves and expressing concern about the long-term political impact it could have on the caucus’ most vulnerable members.
Some moderate Democrats are already anxious about the plan, after making clear to leadership that they wanted to avoid any unnecessary floor votes on impeachment.
If the Democrats really thought Donald Trump was guilty and needed to be removed from office they should not be worried about the “long-term political impact” this vote will have on them but rather the long-term impact leaving Donald Trump in office would have on the country.
This is about to get very interesting very quickly and it is just in time for an election, what a coincidence…
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Sunday, October 27th open thread: ‘Mama Said Knock You Out’
“This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.” (Psalm 118:24 KJV)
Here is this week’s open thread. Please feel free to post links to interesting articles and to discuss whatever issues arise during the course of the day. Nothing is off-topic here.
You can subscribe to America’s Watchtower to receive email updates and you can also follow America’s Watchtower on Facebook and Twitter by clicking the links on the right.
America's Watchtower 