Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts

Monday, January 18, 2021

Unraveling the insurrection

 Posted by Jamie Clarke Chavez

Seen on Twitter (The More You Know Edition):
Language warning
> How bad do things have to be inside Lauren Boebert's Congressional office—and how much do you have worry that your boss is now under federal investigation—to quit your job 14 days after all your hard work pays off and you become a communications director for a member of Congress? (Seth Abramson)
> "You're outnumbered," one of the terrorists says to a Capitol Police officer. "There's a fucking million of us out there and we are listening to Trump -- your boss." (The New Yorker)
> "I think Cruz would want us to do this so I think we're good," says one of the terrorists in this @NewYorker video. (Jake Tapper)
> News: A top official at FEMA, which has been assisting in preparations for the Inauguration next week, took personal leave to attend Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6. It alarmed some staff, who reported it to the IG and FBI. (Natasha Bertrand, Politico)
> Does anyone doubt this Trump mob would have killed Pence and Pelosi if it had reached them? The more we learn, the more it’s clear the president incited an attack on not just his own Vice President, not just on a co-equal branch of govt, but the Constitutional line of succession. (Garrett M. Graff, Wired, CNN)
> New affidavits this morning in Capitol insurrection investigation. This rioter, who was caught on camera flushing his eyes from pepper spray, allegedly threatened his [teenage] children if they turned him in. (Kyle Cheney, Politico)
[Note: they did anyway.]
> Chris Hayes: Trump, the Capitol mob, and Republicans in Congress all had the same goal. “All of those people were trying to install the defeated man as head of the government, against the will of the people, via any means necessary.” (All In with Chris Hayes)
> Tonight, in our beloved country: "Defense officials tell AP they fear possible inside attack at inauguration, will have National Guard troops vetted.” (Michael Beschloss, historian)
> What a mess, we need the military for a simple presidential inauguration. We aren't at war, we aren't in a global war - we are simply watching the torch be passed. Republicans need to take responsibility for this mess.

Monday, November 06, 2017

Thank you, Senator Chris Murphy

"The paralysis you feel right now — the impotent helplessness that washes over you as news of another mass slaughter scrolls across the television screen — isn’t real," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy.

"It's a fiction created and methodically cultivated by the gun lobby, designed to assure that no laws are passed to make America safer, because those laws would cut into their profits," the Connecticut Democrat continued.
Link from here.

Thursday, October 05, 2017

Las Vegas shooter was not alone....

"New theory suggests the Las Vegas gunman didn't act alone, but was assisted by 51 senators and 298 representatives."

Thursday, August 03, 2017

Now this is how good ads are made...

Congressional campaign announcement video for retired Marine Lt. Colonel Amy McGrath (D) in Kentucky's Sixth Congressional District

Monday, November 04, 2013

This and that

Because reasons.

Ted Rall for president ... of France!

What fracking does.

Who owns your food.

Transparency in corporate campaign cash.  And Congress sells out again for cash.

The Civil War was about slavery.  No matter how many times you try to revise history.

Speak to the hand... Dr. Hand.

Taking away women's right to vote.  Because women can't be trusted.

Hillary Clinton answers a question about abortion.  Anti-rape garments for women because US men can't control themselves?

How many days the Congress plans to 'work' next year.

How to disappear completely.



Monday, April 29, 2013

Saturday, March 09, 2013

Puzzled cats are puzzled.

Photobucket

North Korea prepares for war ... with somebody.  Anybody?

This is why Congress is broken, the Republicans want to stay ignorant about anything Obama offers.  They will refuse to do anything he suggests.  The teabaggery party has won.

How to deal with angry bees.  Killer bees or not.
Bees instinctually target the eyes, nose, ears and face. If you lack a helmet and veil, the bees will sting your repeatedly in the head and upper trunk, and at some point this will cause your eyes to swell shut and then you are in big trouble. If you are blind, escaping these insects is difficult or impossible, and the likelihood of you running into other objects or falling down in addition to being attacked--goes up. This is how people sometimes die in these confrontations. They get stung repeatedly in the face, the flesh swells around their eyes, they are still being stung repeatedly which hurts like hell and is scary, and they run into a wall or tree, or fall over items in their path and hurt themselves, or knock themselves out, meanwhile more bees appear, just to sting the person, while they are down and unable to get back up.
Saving Britain's heritage...by losing Shakespeare's house.

How does an anti-virus program work?

A chart that helps define the different conservative branches.

Creating a superbug one antibacterial soap at a time.

A testament to love.




Friday, July 13, 2012

But we're VIPs!

13 reasons why this is the worst Congress ever


Krugman: Who’s Very Important? (short answer: Not the super rich.)
What about the argument that we must keep taxes on the rich low lest we remove their incentive to create wealth? The answer is that we have a lot of historical evidence, going all the way back to the 1920s, on the effects of tax increases on the rich, and none of it supports the view that the kinds of tax-rate changes for the rich currently on the table — President Obama’s proposal for a modest rise, Mr. Romney’s call for further cuts — would have any major effect on incentives. Remember when all the usual suspects claimed that the economy would crash when Bill Clinton raised taxes in 1993? 
Furthermore, if you’re really concerned about the incentive effects of public policy, you should be focused not on the rich but on workers making $20,000 to $30,000 a year, who are often penalized for any gain in income because they end up losing means-tested benefits like Medicaid and food stamps. I’ll have more to say about that in another column. By the way, in 2010, the average annual wage of manicurists — “nails ladies,” in Romney-donor speak — was $21,760. 
So, are the very rich V.I.P.? No, they aren’t — at least no more so than other working Americans. And the “common person” will be hurt, not helped, if we end up with government of the 0.01 percent, by the 0.01 percent, for the 0.01 percent.