Category: current events

Another new Speaker

Not that there is ever a good time for the United States House of Representatives to be without a Speaker – and thus unable to consider any legislation – but now seems like a particularly unfortunate time to be in that situation, with no House-passed budget bills that could clear the Senate; ongoing wars in Ukraine, Israel, and elsewhere; and important work needed domestically and internationally around climate action and disaster relief.

The two leading candidates for Speaker, Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio and Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana, probably don’t have the votes to be elected by the majority Republican conference because they are too far to the right to work with the Senate to get legislation through both chambers.

I think the more moderate Republicans should look among their ranks for a nominee for Speaker who can work with Democrats to craft bipartisan legislation that can pass the House and the Democratic-majority Senate. The Senate has managed to pass all twelve fiscal year 2024 appropriation bills out of committee with large bipartisan majorities, which are in line with the spring debt ceiling legislation. If a new Speaker were to put these bills on the House floor, they could pass with Democratic and Republican votes from members who actually want to govern, as opposed to the Freedom Caucus and other similarly inclined Republican House members who seem intent on just not having a functioning government at all. (The Constitution stipulates that government funding bills must originate in the House, so the Senate can’t pass their version of the bills until the House acts.)

I believe that this Republican nominee should not be someone, though, who voted against certifying the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election after the mob had attacked the Capitol and sent members fleeing for their safety.

My hope is that, if a reasonable candidate comes forward and speaks with the Democratic leadership, the House Democrats will supply enough votes to elect a Speaker quickly so that needed legislation can be put in place, showing our citizens and the international community that our democracy can function in a civil way for the common good. If the new Speaker keeps their promise to preside in a bipartisan way, following the lead of the Senate, they would be insulated from threats by the far right Republicans to “vacate the Chair,” i.e. throw the Speaker out of their job as we just witnessed for the first time with the ousting of Kevin McCarthy.

House Republicans, it’s time for you to step up and put our country first. You were elected to govern, not obstruct. The Senators and President Biden have shown that bipartisanship is still possible.

Follow their lead.

Photo credit: Photo by Lucas Sankey on Unsplash

New Poem: On August 24, 2023

For some reason I cannot ascertain, I’ve been having poetic responses spring to mind from current events lately. After having them rejected by the venues that I know that concentrate on current event poems, I am publishing them here at Top of JC’s Mind, as I did last week with my Georgia RICO indictment poem.

This one is much shorter, almost but not quite a haiku. (Syllable counting is difficult when you use numbers.) It is a response to Donald Trump surrendering to authorities at the Fulton County, Georgia jail and then raising money using his scowling mug shot, which I’ve already seen more times than I care to.

As always, comments are welcome.

On August 24, 2023

Inmate P01135809 
says “NEVER SURRENDER!” 
but he does.

GA RICO poem

No, really.

While reading the indictment from the Fulton County, Georgia grand jury last week, I found a poem.

No, really.

A found poem is one that is constructed from a preexisting, usually non-poetic text. As I was reading the 161 acts that are listed as evidence of racketeering, I was struck by the repetition of “an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.” Repetition is a common feature of poetry, so the rhythm of this mantra resonated with me. I took the last line from each of the 161 acts to construct this poem.

Most poems are meant to be heard, as well as read. This one is probably better experienced as a visual piece, allowing the repetition with its variations to weigh on you. As always, comments. are welcome

from The Acts of Violation of the Georgia RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act – a found poem by Joanne Corey

  1. The speech was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  2. This telephone call was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  3. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  4. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  5. This meeting was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  6. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  7. The false statements and solicitations were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  8. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  9. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  10. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  11. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  12. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  13. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  14. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  15. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  16. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  17. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  18. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  19. The request was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  20. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  21. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  22. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  23. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  24. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  25. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  26. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  27. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  28. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  29. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  30. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  31. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  32. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  33. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  34. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  35. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  36. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  37. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  38. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  39. This email was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  40. This request was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  41. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  42. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  43. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  44. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  45. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  46. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  47. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  48. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  49. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  50. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  51. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  52. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  53. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  54. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  55. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  56. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  57. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  58. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  59. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  60. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  61. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  62. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  63. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  64. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  65. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  66. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  67. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  68. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  69. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  70. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  71. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  72. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  73. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  74. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  75. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  76. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  77. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  78. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  79. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxiii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  80. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xvi) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  81. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  82. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  83. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xvi) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  84. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  85. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  86. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  87. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxvii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  88. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxvii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  89. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  90. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  91. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  92. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  93. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  94. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  95. This telephone call was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  96. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  97. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  98. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  99. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  100. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  101. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  102. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  103. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  104. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  105. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  106. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  107. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  108. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  109. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  110. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  111. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  112. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  113. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  114. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  115. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  116. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  117. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  118. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  119. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  120. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  121. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxvii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  122. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  123. This request was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  124. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  125. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  126. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  127. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  128. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  129. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  130. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  131. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  132. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  133. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  134. These were overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  135. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  136. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  137. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  138. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  139. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  140. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  141. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  142. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(B) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  143. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(B) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  144. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  145. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  146. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xix) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  147. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xix) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  148. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xix) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  149. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(B) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  150. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(B) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  151. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(B) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  152. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(B) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  153. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(B) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  154. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  155. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(B) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  156. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  157. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  158. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxii) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  159. This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  160. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxv) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
  161. This was an act of racketeering activity under O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3(5)(A)(xxv) and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

One-Liner Wednesday: another indictment

Sadly continuing with a recent practice, here is a link to the most recent, devastating, sprawling indictment of Donald Trump, this time under the state of Georgia’s RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization) law around interference in the 2020 election.
*****
Please join us for Linda’s One-Liner Wednesdays. Find out more here: https://lindaghill.com/2023/08/16/one-liner-wednesday-that-feeling-when/

One-Liner Wednesday: another indictment

“The purpose of the conspiracy was to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election by using knowingly false claims of election fraud to obstruct the federal government function by which those results are collected, counted, and certified.”

~ Paragraph 7 of the extremely sobering conspiracy and obstruction indictment of Donald Trump regarding the 2020 election results, which you can read in its entirety here.
*****
This way to refer to 45 pages in one sentence is part of Linda’s One-Liner Wednesday series. Learn more about the series here: https://lindaghill.com/2023/08/02/one-liner-wednesday-am-i-jinxing-it/. I promise that most of the entries will be more fun than mine…

Really?

I try to follow governmental/political news in the US and often write about it here, but, there has been such an avalanche of stories lately that I have been too overwhelmed to write about it. Yesterday, though, was such an odd conglomeration of things that I thought I’d try to post about it.

Speaker McCarthy and his slim majority in the House of Representatives seem incapable of actual governance, even after resolving the debt ceiling crisis. Instead of working on budget bills that put that legislation into practice, the majority-Republican committees are drafting proposals that make cuts in human needs programs that were slated to stay flat. They are also having a lot of investigations, even when they can’t produce evidence to support their allegations. They don’t seem interested in actually governing for the good of the people.

For example, yesterday they held a hearing with John Durham, who led a four-year investigation centered on the origin of the Federal Bureau of Investigations’ inquiry into possible ties between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia. You may recall that the investigation headed by Robert Mueller into Russian interference in the 2016 election resulted in multiple indictments and plea deals, including Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, Konstantin Kilimnik, and over two dozen Russians, including military intelligence officers and companies and employees related to a Russian troll farm that hacked into the campaign- and election-related computers in the US. While not charging him as a sitting president, the Mueller report also detailed instances of potential obstruction of justice by Trump. By contrast, the Durham investigation only resulted in one minor plea deal and two acquittals at trial, hardly the revelation of a “deep-state conspiracy” that some Republicans had suspected.

Curiously, during the hearing, Durham seemed ignorant of much of the Mueller report and contemporaneous news accounts from the 2016 election cycle. He did, however, praise Mueller as “a patriot” and state unequivocally that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election. A number of the Republican members of the Judiciary Committee, which has invited Durham to testify, seemed frustrated that he wasn’t engaging in their more conspiratorial ideas.

Then, in a bizarre counterpoint, the House Republicans voted to censure Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) because of his work on investigating Trump, including the issue of Russian election interference. (A similar measure which had included a possible $16 million fine in addition to censure had failed last week.) Six Republicans, including five on the House Ethics Committee voted present; all other Republicans voted for censure while all Democrats voted against. Rep. Schiff, who was then chair of the Intelligence Committee and became one of the impeachment managers in the first Trump impeachment, appears to have been censured for fulfilling his Congressional duties. It’s expected that this is a first salvo in what may be a long siege of Republican efforts to impeach members of the Biden administration, including the President himself. It doesn’t seem, though, that the Republicans have evidence of actual wrongdoing that would warrant impeachments. They have been doing a lot of investigating of allegations but don’t have the actual evidence needed to prove their case.

Meanwhile, last night, Special Counsel Jack Smith turned over mounds of evidence, including grand jury testimony, to Donald Trump’s lawyers in the documents case that is being litigated in the Southern District of Florida. This is part of a process called discovery, in which the prosecutors give the defendant’s lawyers the information underlying their case, including any possibly exculpatory evidence. The indictment in the case is quite detailed but it seems that many Congressional Republicans have yet to read it. It’s sad that they seem convinced by conspiracy theories while ignoring actual evidence and that they spread this malady to voters.

It makes me very nervous for the future of our democracy, both short-term and long-term.

the first Trump federal indictment

Last Thursday evening, former President Donald Trump announced that he had been indicted by the federal court in South Florida. The indictment was unsealed the next day and Trump’s first appearance in court is scheduled for Tuesday afternoon.

The case involves the documents that were found at Trump’s Florida home but that should have been at the National Archives. It’s a very long saga, so I won’t try to summarize it, but you can read a timeline here.

The cases are under the auspices of Special Counsel Jack Smith. Because of the structure of being a special counsel, Smith did not have to get permission from Attorney General Merrick Garland or Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco to indict. (Special counsels are meant to be independent; if AG Garland were to overrule any of Smith’s decisions, he would have to report the reasons to Congress.) This is important because Garland and Monaco were appointed by President Biden and approved by the Senate, but Jack Smith is a career official in the Justice Department, not a political appointee. For five years, Smith headed the public integrity unit of the Justice Department, so he is experienced in investigations and prosecutions involving political corruption. Just prior to being named special counsel, he had been working on war crimes prosecution at a special court in The Hague.

The indictment document is what is termed a “speaking indictment,” which means there is quite a lot of detail about what led to the charges. For example, it lists each of the 31 documents that are the cause of the charges of Willful Retention of National Defense Information, a violation of the Espionage Act. Trump and his valet Walt Nauta also face charges of Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice, making false statements, and withholding/concealing documents. The indictment contains photographs, verbatim conversations, and contemporaneous notes from one of Trump’s lawyers.

I’m glad that the indictment was unsealed so that everyone can read the charges and some of the evidence behind them. Even though it is a legal document, it’s fairly straightforward. There are many resources available with legal experts offering additional information.

Unfortunately, some people, including some Republican politicians, have been reacting negatively, seemingly without even reading the indictment. Some are even blaming President Biden, who had nothing to do with the investigation or indictment. Most upsetting, some are even espousing political violence. This is even more alarming knowing that Florida has relatively lax gun laws.

The judge who has been initially assigned to the case is Aileen Cannon, who, last year, ruled that a special master was needed to review the documents that had been found by the FBI when they carried out a search warrant at Trump’s home. Her ruling was overruled on appeal. It’s not clear if she will remain on the case or if she will recuse due to her prior involvement. She was nominated to the federal bench by Trump and confirmed by the Senate on November 12, 2020, after he had lost the election.

The Justice Department has asked for a speedy trial but Trump is re-shuffling his legal team again, which might slow things down. Scheduling could also get tricky if there are additional indictments, most likely state charges in Georgia over election interference and/or federal charges related to the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol.

Trump is considered innocent until proven guilty at trial, but his behavior has been upsetting. His rhetoric has become more vengeful and his lack of respect for individuals and groups of people who are not his supporters has become even more pronounced. Unfortunately, this vitriol has spread to a large swath of Republican officials and Trump’s MAGA supporters. It’s frightening.

I’m hoping for the best but keeping an eye out for possible trouble. I’m also hoping that people will read the indictment before trying to comment on it. Primary source material is generally the best way to understand a situation rather than relying on someone else’s interpreration.

Discharge Petition

I am calling on my Congressional Representative, Marc Molinaro of New York’s 19th district, to sign the discharge petition to bring a clean debt ceiling raise to the House floor and to vote in favor of it there. I urge him to encourage his Republican colleagues to join him in this, which honors the 14th Amendment of the Constitution they have sworn to uphold.

After that is accomplished, all members of Congress should work on budget bills that prioritize human needs, such as programs for affordable housing, nutrition, and health care. These programs should be expanded, not cut, with additional revenue raised through making sure the wealthiest individuals and corporations pay a fairer share in taxes.

Please join me in this effort by contacting your own House member and sharing your opinions about the debt ceiling and about your budget priorities for the coming fiscal year.

One-Liner Wednesday: hope?

To my Republican friends, if we could work together in the last Congress, there is no reason we can’t work together in this new Congress. The people sent us a clear message. Fighting for the sake of fighting, power for the sake of power, conflict for the sake of conflict, gets us nowhere.

US President Joe Biden in the State of the Union address before Congress last night

Join us for Linda’s One-Liner Wednesday! Find out more here: https://lindaghill.com/2023/02/08/one-liner-wednesday-a-cool-million/

Monterey Park

I’m sad to say that I woke up this morning to news of another mass shooting, this time in Monterey Park, California, near Los Angeles. Ten people are dead with ten more wounded and hospitalized.

The shooting occurred at a ballroom dance club, after an evening Lunar New Year celebration. Monterey Park is a predominantly Chinese-American suburb which hosts one of the largest Lunar New Year celebrations in the area. Today’s activities have been cancelled in the wake of the shooting.

As I write this, there is no suspect in custody and no idea if this attack was motivated by racial hatred.

It certainly casts a sorrowful shadow over the start of the Year of the Rabbit. May the year bring healing to all who mourn.
*****
Join us for Linda’s Just Jot It January! Find out more here: https://lindaghill.com/2023/01/22/daily-prompt-jusjojan-the-22nd-2023/