9th Circuit Court hands Donald Trump a victory in fight over Planned Parenthood funding
Back in February Donald Trump announced a rule change to the Title X program which would cut a rather small portion of Planned Parenthood’s funding. Of course the lawsuits began to line up and shortly before the rule change took effect a judge in Oregon blocked it.
It is now being reported here that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has handed Donald Trump a victory by allowing the rule to go into effect. Here is more:
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that the Trump administration’s restrictions on family planning funds could go into effect, a move that would cut off millions of dollars from organizations like Planned Parenthood that provide abortions.
The Trump administration’s rules had been temporarily blocked nationwide by federal judges in Oregon and Washington, and statewide in California. On Thursday, a panel of judges in the 9th Circuit granted the request 3-0 from the Trump administration to block the preliminary injunctions, saying the different lawsuits underway needed to play out.
This is far from over, the lawsuits will continue and here is what Planned Parenthood had to say about this decision:
“We will be immediately seeking emergency relief from the Court of Appeals … We will continue to fight the Trump administration in the courts and alongside champions in Congress to protect everyone’s fundamental right to healthcare,” she said in a statement.
But just as importantly, this is the second victory the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has handed Donald Trump recently because back in May the appeals court ruled in his favor on immigration. Donald Trump has been quietly trying to remake the lower courts and this could be an indication of the how successful he has been at it.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
The Democrats have maintained that Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign slogan–Make America Great Again–is racist because America has never been great, but Donald Trump longs for the day when he thought the country was great because there was slavery, interracial marriage was illegal, when we had segregation, and wait a minute. While we are on the subject of segregation, Joe Biden is feeling a little bit of heat for admitting he was able to work with segregationists in the 1970’s.
Here is what the former Vice President had to say:
“At least there was some civility. We got things done. We didn’t agree on much of anything. We got things done. We got it finished,” Biden said, according to a pool report distributed by his campaign. “But today, you look at the other side and you’re the enemy. Not the opposition, the enemy. We don’t talk to each other anymore.”
I know what Joe Biden was trying to say and what he was trying to do: He was trying to blame Donald Trump for the dysfunction in Washington by saying at least in his day a person could talk to the people he disagreed with while being civil, but is that not akin to Donald Trump saying there were good people on both sides in Charlottesville? And we know how the media and the Democrats have twisted, and continue to twist, that statement. Could this be Joe Biden’s there were could people on both sides moment?
Although the media will not cover this story there are Democrats who have been offended by this comment and here is some of the backlash:
U.S. Senator Cory Booker, who is also seeking the Democratic nomination, called on Biden to apologize.
“Frankly, I’m disappointed that he hasn’t issued an immediate apology for the pain his words are dredging up for many Americans. He should,” Booker, who is black, said in a statement.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, who is also seeking the Democratic nomination, criticized Biden’s remarks.
“It’s past time for apologies or evolution from @JoeBiden,” de Blasio wrote on Twitter. “He repeatedly demonstrates that he is out of step with the values of the modern Democratic Party.”
De Blasio called out Biden for invoking Eastland, posting a photo of himself on Twitter with his wife, who is black, and his two multi-racial children.
“It’s 2019 & @JoeBiden is longing for the good old days of ‘civility’ typified by James Eastland. Eastland thought my multiracial family should be illegal & that whites were entitled to ‘the pursuit of dead n*ggers,’” de Blasio wrote on Twitter.
I would like to cut good ole Joe a break, I really would, however in today’s hypersensitive country there is no room for somebody awkwardly trying to make a point.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
The State Department has found 23 ‘violations’ and 7 ‘infractions’ in the handling of Hillary Clinton’s emails
It is now being reported here that the State Department has found 23 “violations” and 7 “infractions” in the handling of Hillary Clinton’s emails, including “multiple security incidents.” Here is more:
The State Department revealed Monday that it has identified “multiple security incidents” involving current or former employees’ handling of Hillary Clinton’s emails, and that 23 “violations” and seven “infractions” have been issued as part of the department’s ongoing investigation.
“To this point, the Department has assessed culpability to 15 individuals, some of whom were culpable in multiple security incidents,” Mary Elizabeth Taylor, the State Department’s Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Legislative Affairs, wrote to Grassley. “DS has issued 23 violations and 7 infractions incidents. … This number will likely change as the review progresses.”
The State Department, calling the matter “serious,” said it expected to conclude the investigation by Sept. 1. The department acknowledged that the probe was unusually time-consuming.
While the investigation is still expected to last a few more months the State Department is already calling this a serious problem and you would think somebody is going to take a fall for this, but then again no reasonable prosecutor (who wants to stay alive) would bring such a case…
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
House Democrats had mixed results in trying to sue Donald Trump to stop him from using defense funds to build the border wall but then a Federal Judge ruled the House did not have legal standing to sue the President over this. So now the Democrats are looking at “Plan B”: Senate Democrats are trying the old fashioned way of actually trying to pass legislation. Here is more:
Senate Democrats are trying to prevent President Trump from being able to redirect Defense Department funding to construction of his border wall.
Democrats filed an amendment, spearheaded by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would prohibit Trump from using national defense funds authorized by the mammoth policy bill toward the U.S.-Mexico border wall.
The amendment would also prohibit Trump from using national defense funds authorized between fiscal years 2015 and 2019 as part of the NDAA, an annual measure that outlines broad policy and spending guidelines for the Pentagon.
At least the Democrats are trying to do something legislatively for a change but I believe the whole NDAA should be thrown out anyway. Of course that is not going to happen however because both sides love to have the power so it will he a case of who blinks first.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Sunday, June 16th open thread: ‘Heartache’
“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 Gene Loves Jezebel performing “Heartache” live on The Late Show in 1986:
Donald Trump introduces new rule to help expand healthcare coverage options for small businesses
Yesterday the Trump administration issued a new rule which, according to this story, is designed to help small businesses provide healthcare coverage options to their employees. Here is more:
The Trump administration on Thursday unveiled a rule aimed at expanding health insurance options for small businesses and others, the latest action stemming from President Trump’s health care executive order in 2017.
The White House framed the move as part of its efforts to expand health care choices for people now that efforts to repeal ObamaCare have come up short.
“This new rule gives businesses a better way to offer health insurance to employees and allows workers to select coverage that best fits their and their families’ needs,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said in a statement.
The rule allows employers to use tax-exempted funds, known as health reimbursement arrangements, to give to workers for purchasing coverage in the individual market.
Brian Blase, a White House health care adviser, told reporters the move would “particularly benefit smaller employers … by creating another option for financing worker health insurance coverage.”
It sounds to me like expanding healthcare options is a good idea so I find it interesting that the Obama administration levied fines against these health reimbursement arrangements which basically made them null and void…unless of course the goal of Obamacare was actually limiting options in an attempt to eventually usher in single payer…
It does not matter if this is going to help the people or not because since Donald Trump proposed this idea the Democrats are going to oppose it sight unseen and we can expect the lawsuits to follow.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Last week the Democrats tried to give the Congress a $4,500 pay raise but were forced to pull the legislation amid a tremendous backlash they somehow neglected to predict. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who has been in office for all of about 5 months or so and has yet to do anything along with her other Democratic buddies, is one who thinks she deserves a pay increase already.
The freshman Representative from New York had this to say in defense of the pay raise after she learned the legislation was pulled:
“What this does is punish members who rely on a straight salary, and reward those who rely on money loopholes and other forms of self-dealing. For example, it incentivizes the horrible kinds of legislative looting we saw in the GOP tax scam bill,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted on Tuesday.
“Voting against cost of living increases for members of Congress may sound nice, but doing so only increases pressure on them to keep dark money loopholes open. This makes campaign finance reform *harder.* ALL workers deserve cost of living increases, incl min wage,” she added.
Wow, she managed to get several talking points in while defending her need for more money: the GOP tax “scam”, dark money, tax loopholes, and increasing the minimum wage. I have to say that was pretty impressive! I also find it interesting she thinks it is more important for her to take care of her own house before seeing if she can do something about minimum wage workers.
But seriously, did she just not say we should give the Congress a raise because they are corrupt and this would mean they could afford to be less corrupt with a pay raise? That is what it sounded like to me…
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
Last week the do-nothing Democrats in the House had the audacity to declare that the House members deserved a pay raise and were set to introduce legislation giving themselves a $4,500 raise.
This was met with quite a bit of backlash, and I would be willing to bet the backlash was from both sides of the aisle, and it is just breaking right now that the Democrats have decided to pull the pay raise legislation off the table. Here is what we know:
House Democrats are postponing consideration of a bill that would include a pay raise for members of Congress, after facing a major backlash from the party’s most vulnerable members.
The bill was part of a roughly $1 trillion funding package scheduled to be voted on by the House this week.
I think what was even more offensive to many of the American people besides the fact they actually thought they deserved a raise was the way the Democrats described the $4,500 raise as a “modest” pay increase.
I do not know too many people, and I do no think you do either, who would describe a $4,500 pay raise in that manner and I think it shows just how out of touch these people really are despite their claims they understand the Middle Class and want to help them.
malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium
America's Watchtower 