Starbucks bathrooms in at least 25 markets will be fitted with new needle-disposal units, as thousands of workers express concern about drug use in their bathrooms.
In May of last year, Starbucks announced that their bathrooms would be open to everyone after a viral outrage mob came after them over an employee calling the police on loitering customers.
“We don’t want to become a public bathroom, but we’re going to make the right decision 100% of the time and give people the key, because we don’t want anyone at Starbucks to feel as if we are not giving access to you to the bathroom because you are less than,” Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz said at the time. “We want you to be more than.”
Late last year, two Starbucks employees in Oregon were both struck by dirty needles while cleaning bathrooms in the same month, leading to a government investigation.
“The manager confirmed two employees had received needle stick injuries within the last month from hypodermic needles left uncapped in the bathroom, and stated needles and blood had been found in the bathroom at this location for over a year, but the frequency of needles being left in the bathrooms had increased significantly in recent months,” the Oregon OSHA inspection narrative states, according to a report from Business Insider.
Additionally, over 5,000 employees have signed a petition for the coffee giant to place needle disposal units in high risk bathrooms. Ironically, the author of the petition ended up also getting struck by a needle after it launched.
“The author of this petition ended up getting poked by a dirty needle themselves, after two other coworkers were poked in the same cafe, not long after starting this petition. Since then, the author went to local Seattle news crews, and only after their story aired did Starbucks put safe sharps disposals in six cafes in Seattle, but they were only the cafes that already had an L&I complaint and fine about this issue before. The author still has yet to hear directly from anyone at Starbucks Corporate. The author still fully intends on hand-delivering this petition to Starbucks HQ. The author is obnoxiously tenacious like that,” the petition author wrote in an update.
Currently, Starbucks workers are made to remove hypodermic needles themselves and place them in a disposal unit that is not located in the rest room. They are given regular rubber gloves or some times tongs to remove them. They are also told to double-bag trash cans so that the needles are less likely to poke through and stab them.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks during a news conference at the State Department in Washington, D.C., March 15, 2019. (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Monday that the length of new U.S. sanctions on Iran’s oil industry will depend “solely on the Islamic Republic of Iran’s senior leaders.”
“The goal remains simple: to deprive the outlaw regime of the funds it has used to destabilize the Middle East for four decades and incentivize Iran to behave like a normal country,” Pompeo said at the State Department. He added that the sanctions will divert “well north of $10 billion” away from the Iranian regime.
Pompeo also announced an end to the temporary exemptions eight countries had been granted that allowed them to continue importing Iranian oil and gas.
“We’ll no longer grant any exemptions,” Pompeo said. “We are going to zero across the board. We’ll continue to enforce sanctions and monitor compliance and any nation or entity interacting with Iran should do its diligence and err on the side of caution; the risks are simply not going to be worth the benefits.”
“How long we’ll remain there at zero depends solely on the Islamic Republic of Iran’s senior leaders,” the secretary of state said.
The Trump administration pulled out of the Obama administration’s Iran nuclear deal in May and reimposed the rest of the sanctions lifted under the agreement in November.
“These demands are not just coming from the United States government and many of our allies and partners, they are similar to what we hear from the Iranian people themselves,” Pompeo said. “I want the Iranian people to know we are listening to them and stand with them. We will not appease their oppressors, as the last administration did. Our hopes are for a better life for them, and all people afflicted by the regime’s violence and destruction.”
Pompeo and Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin have previously said that the sanctions will not be lifted until Iran ends its nuclear program entirely, pulls its forces from Syria, and ends its sponsorship of terrorism.
Philadelphia Flyers Remove Kate Smith Statue Over Allegations Of Racism
Multiple professional sports franchises are distancing themselves from legendary 1930s singer Kate Smith due to her alleged history of singing racist songs.
Last week, the New York Yankees pulled Smith’s rendition of “God Bless America” from the stadium’s 7th-inning stretch, which had been a tradition at Yankee Stadium for nearly two decades. Then, on Easter Sunday, the Philadelphia Flyers announced that they had removed a statue of Smith from outside the team’s arena.
“The Flyers have enjoyed a long and popular relationship with ‘God Bless America,’ as performed by the late Kate Smith, a woman who was awarded the Presidential Medal of Honor for her patriotic contributions to our nation,” the Flyers said in a statement Sunday. “But in recent days, we learned that several of the songs Kate Smith performed in the 1930s include lyrics and sentiments that are incompatible with the values of our organization, and evoke painful and unacceptable themes.”
The decision to ditch Smith for racist songs that were recorded nearly 90 years ago was widely panned, with Smith’s family saying that they were “appalled” by the decision. Smith’s niece Suzy Andron said of the singer, “Aunt Katherine was probably one of the kindest people I’ve ever met. She was certainly anything but a prejudice person. She loved everybody.”
Smith allegedly sang songs titled “Pickaninny Heaven” and “That’s Why Darkies Were Born” in the early 1930s, in which the lyrics read: “Someone had to pick the cotton/ Someone had to plant the corn/ Someone had to slave and be able to sing/ That’s why darkies were born.”
One Flyers’ season ticket holder posted notes on Smith’s covered statue with the words, “God Bless Kate Smith,” and “Happy Easter!”
Others pointed to her charitable endeavors, with Outkick the Coverage’s Clay Travis estimating that Smith raised $600 million to fight Adolf Hitler and the Nazis in World War II.
While some saw the situation as an example of political correctness gone awry:
Smith passed away in 1986 at the age of 79.
Read more: https://www.dailycaller.com/2019/04/22/flyers-kate-smith-yankees-racism/
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact email@example.com.
AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
These days, whenever there’s a mass shooting, folks immediately offer up their sympathies. They take to social media, the broadest reaching platform they have access to, and say something to the effect of how their “thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.”
It’s the equivalent of telling someone you’re sorry to hear their loved one died. It shows that you’re sympathetic to what everyone is going through.
Lately, anti-gunners have started rebuffing these “thoughts and prayers,” mocking them outright. They think “thoughts and prayers” aren’t enough anymore.
On a July afternoon in 2012, Denton Dickerson logged onto Twitter to share his grief after getting notice that a dozen moviegoers had been murdered at a midnight showing of The Dark Knight Rises – a movie he was planning to see later that day.
“My thoughts and prayers go out to those affected by the Aurora Colorado shooting,” Dickerson, now 25, wrote. “There are some sick people in this world.”
Four years and dozens of mass shootings later, including one in his home state of South Carolina that left nine people dead during a Charleston prayer service, Dickerson’s tone on Twitter had shifted.
“Thoughts and Prayers are great but they are not enough,” he wrote in June 2016, hours after a shooting at an Orlando, Florida, nightclub killed 49 people.
Dickerson’s evolution reflects a dramatic change in how Americans use and react to faith-related language in response to mass shootings during a time when the nation has become staunchly polarised on gun policy.
The Washington Post analysed more than 600,000 tweets containing the phrase “thoughts and prayers” between 2012 and 2019 and found that the expression has become a political flash point on social media. Its usage often correlates with political views, faith affiliation and positions on gun policy, according to interviews with experts on religion and politics.
But what’s not discussed is that the anti-gunners have their own version of “thoughts and prayers.”
When people offer up that phrase, it’s typically from the heart, a statement that they’ll be praying for whatever those affected need and will be remembering those impacted by such a horrific event. It means something, even if it doesn’t mean what anti-gunners want it to represent.
You see, for anti-gunners, the only valid way to express sympathy is to immediately press for gun control, even before we know anything about what happened. It’s not uncommon to hear calls for banning “assault weapons” for hours and hours before we learn that the killer used a handgun. It’s not unusual to hear calls for universal background checks for days before finding out that the killer passed a background check at a gun store.
This is their version of “thoughts and prayers.”
However, the claim that anti-gunners somehow thoughts and prayers aren’t enough is also false. If it were, they’d be open to at least discussing non-gun control actions that could be taken regarding mass shootings. While I don’t think they’d stop advocating for gun control, they’d at least acknowledge that hardening schools or other steps might have an impact and be willing to talk about them.
For them, gun control is the talisman they hold up to “prove” they’re sympathetic to the victims. It’s their version of “thoughts and prayers” and is probably far less effective.
But this is also the world we live in, where calling for infringing on the rights of ordinary Americans is considered the best way to show you care in some demented and tortured minds.
Were the hacked e-mails from the DNC the moral equivalent of the Pentagon Papers? Did the American people have “a right to know” about the corruption in the Democratic primary process? Rudy Giuliani poses both questions — without necessarily fully buying into either premise — in a lively 18-minute interview with Chuck Todd on NBC’s Meet the Press yesterday.
At least we know this much … everyone wants to wring as much entertainment value out of the anti-climactic Mueller report as possible:
Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for President Donald Trump, suggested Sunday that the American people had a “right to know” about the private Democratic emails released during a state-sponsored hack by the Russian government aimed at bolstering Trump’s 2016 election. …
He compared the hacked information to the Pentagon Papers, which shed light on controversy surrounding the Vietnam War.
“They shouldn’t have stolen it, but the American people were just given more information about how deceptive, how manipulative her campaign was,” Giuliani said. “I wonder if there isn’t an argument that the people had a right to know that about Hillary Clinton.”
This isn’t the most entertaining part of the interview, however, which we’ll get to in a moment. The difference between the Pentagon Papers and practically everything else Giuliani mentions is the fact that the Pentagon Papers came from … the Pentagon. They were a government work product, detailing falsehoods from the Lyndon Johnson administration about the US involvement in Vietnam, especially our actions in backing and then deposing Ngo Dinh Diem. Daniel Ellsberg exposed them illegally, but that information should have been disclosed all along, at least to Congress. Once the Washington Post published the material, it significantly changed the character of American support for the war.
By contrast, the DNC e-mails (and John Podesta’s at the Center for American Progress) were private communications. Only the most anarchic or most authoritarian arguments could be deployed in service to a “right to know” the contents of those communications. While both examples involve theft, as Giuliani points out, there is at least some moral difference between the two — as well as legal differences, although those play in the opposite direction. The penalties for stealing classified government information and exposing them are much harsher than the penalties for stealing private data.
That’s not the most entertaining exchange, however. It’s the debate between Giuliani and Todd over what happens after the theft — especially in the media:
CHUCK TODD: So it is now okay for political campaigns to work with material stolen by foreign adversaries?
RUDY GIULIANI: It depends on the stolen material. If the stolen material is — first of all, was it all right for The New York Times and The Washington Post to print against the objections of the president —
CHUCK TODD: You’re putting the Pentagon Papers and Vladimir Putin on the same level —
RUDY GIULIANI: No, the theft.
CHUCK TODD: — of morality?
RUDY GIULIANI: The theft. How often have newspapers and you covered stolen classified material?
CHUCK TODD: I hope not often.
RUDY GIULIANI: Well, you do. You do —
CHUCK TODD: I hope not often to be honest.
RUDY GIULIANI: You do, and you justify it. And actually, I don’t know if NBC was part of it, but the media went to court to defend doing that because it’s part of the public’s right to know. But I guess the public didn’t have a right to know how sneaky, how dishonest, and how dishonorable [crosstalk] Hillary and the people around her were and make your own conclusion about it.
This has been the moral debate all along. The issue isn’t theft, and it’s not Russian involvement either. The question is what do you do after the theft. If the material has already been disseminated, as Giuliani points out was done with the DNC and Podesta material, there’s not much point in being shy about using it.
Todd’s response that media outlets rarely report based on stolen classified material is outright laughable. Almost all internal government information worth repeating is at least covered by some kind of restricted status, and frequently is classified at least at low levels. Anonymous sources within government provide that information routinely, and media outlets report on it routinely, even when it rises to the level of interfering with legitimate national-security efforts. (Remember the New York Times’ exposure of the terror-finance tracking in the SWIFT network in 2006, which turned out to be perfectly legal?)
Media outlets can’t argue simultaneously that they don’t conduct reporting on the basis of stolen material and that they can’t operate without anonymous sources providing it to them. Giuliani’s correct in making that point. Sometimes they have good reason to do so, but other times not so much — and they get played by disgruntled sources more often than not.
For the most part, though, Giuliani and Todd argue past each other. That doesn’t make it worthless, although nothing really gets resolved except the skill in both men in dancing around the others’ arguments. That’s what makes it entertaining, far more so than Todd’s later interview with Jerrold Nadler, which resolved nothing either but provided nothing more than a reason to caffeinate heavily on an Easter Sunday morning.
Report: Omar Attacked US Soldiers Who Died Fighting In ‘Black Hawk Down’ Operation
A newly unearthed tweet shows Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar attacking the U.S. soldiers who fought and died in the Battle of Mogadishu.
“In his selective memory, he forgets to also mention the thousands of Somalis killed by the American forces that day! #NotTodaySatan,” Omar wrote in a tweet in October 2017, uncovered Monday by John Rossomando of the Investigative Project on Terrorism.
Omar was responding to another tweet about the Battle of Mogadishu, a 1993 humanitarian operation by the U.S. military that sought to save starving Somalis by preventing food and aid from being captured by enemy combatants. The battle ultimately took the lives of 19 American soldiers and wounded 73 others, and it became the subject of the famous Hollywood movie “Black Hawk Down.”
Omar’s claim that “thousands of Somalis” were killed by American forces during that battle is wildly false by most expert’s estimations.
Captain Haad, a representative of the Somali National Alliance, said during a 2001 interview that 133 Somali militiamen died battling U.S. Delta Force soldiers and rangers, according to the Investigative Project on Terrorism. Mark Bowden, the author of “Black Hawk Down: A Story of Modern War,” estimated that 500 Somalis died. More liberal estimations put the death toll near 1,000.
When reached by The Daily Caller News Foundation for a statement on Monday, a spokesman for Omar’s office said they were not aware of the tweet and did not have a comment.
Omar has generated numerous controversies since getting elected to Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District in November. The first-term congresswoman received enormous criticism after video was uncovered of her describing the 9/11 terrorist attackers as “some people” who “did something.” In another unearthed video, Omar appeared to shrug off the severity of saying the name of “Al Qaeda,” and she mockingly noted that Americans don’t show the same kind of shock when speaking of “America” or the “Army.”
Omar was the subject of a House resolution that was originally meant to condemn anti-Semitism following her suggestion that lawmakers supportive of Israel have “dual loyalties.” However, following intense backlash from the Democratic Party’s more progressive wing, the resolution was changed to encompass most forms of bigotry and did not specifically condemn Omar’s remarks.
Read more: https://www.dailycaller.com/2019/04/22/omar-attacks-soldiers-who-died-in-somalia/
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
US State Department: ‘Terrorist Groups Continue Plotting Possible Attacks in Sri Lanka’
The US State Department is urging increased caution if you plan to travel to Sri Lanka because terrorist groups are continuing to plot possible attacks.
Terrorists in Sri Lanka killed nearly 300 people in a series of attacks on Easter Sunday. So far, 24 people have been arrested.
“Terrorist groups continue plotting possible attacks in Sri Lanka,” a travel advisory from the State Department warned.
“Terrorists may attack with little or no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets/shopping malls, local government facilities, hotels, clubs, restaurants, places of worship, parks, major sporting and cultural events, educational institutions, airports, and other public areas,” the warning continued.
The State Department urged people who still intend to travel there to “be aware of your surroundings when traveling to tourist locations and crowded public venues” and “monitor local media for breaking events and adjust your plans based on new information.”
Australia and Ireland have also issued similar warnings to their citizens about traveling to Sri Lanka.
Yahoo News reports that the US embassy in Colombo said it would remain closed to the public on Monday and Tuesday, but will continue to provide citizen services.
President Donald Trump talks with aides and Secret Service agents as he attends the 2019 White House Easter Egg Roll in Washington, D.C., April 22, 2019. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)The lawsuit he just filed in an effort to avoid doing so is frivolous.
I believe three things at the same time. First, Donald Trump should have voluntarily produced his tax returns years ago. Second, the law Democrats are using to demand production of Trump’s returns — which grants the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee the right to see the returns of any American taxpayer — is overbroad and vulnerable to abuse. And third, the lawsuit Trump has just filed in hopes of repelling that demand is both frivolous and (to the extent the courts pay it any mind) dangerous to our constitutional system of checks and balances.
The core problem with Trump’s lawsuit is clear: It defies Congress’s inherent investigative authority by defining Congress’s “legislative sphere” so narrowly that it would prohibit Congress from meaningfully investigating the president. Moreover, it argues, “‘Oversight’ and ‘transparency,’ in a vacuum, are not legitimate legislative purposes that can justify subpoenaing a private citizen.”
But wait. Didn’t we just finish a multi-year national ordeal during which Donald Trump’s defenders consistently argued that investigation of the executive branch was a legislative function — i.e. that it was ridiculous for the executive branch to “investigate itself,” and it was ridiculous for anyone to believe that the president could obstruct justice if he tried to impede or supervise that probe, because the investigators worked for him?
Yes, yes we did. So it strains credulity for those same folks, when Congress launches such an investigation — empowered, in this case, by a specific statute that grants it the ability to see Trump’s returns and by an enormous reservoir of inherent authority through its lawmaking and impeachment powers — to turn around and argue that it’s acting as “law enforcement,” and law enforcement is exclusively the president’s responsibility.
Fortunately, the Supreme Court agrees. In Eastland v. United States Servicemen’s Fund, a private anti-war organization challenged a congressional subpoena aimed at its bank, claiming that the subpoena violated its First Amendment rights. The Supreme Court held that the subpoena was “immune to judicial interference” under the Constitution’s speech-or-debate clause, because the subpoenaing committee’s actions fell within the “legitimate legislative sphere.”
As the Court noted, the purpose of that clause — which prevents members of Congress from being “questioned in any other place” about their “Speech or Debate in either House” — is to “insure that the legislative function the Constitution allocates to Congress may be performed independently.” And, make no mistake, the legislative function is not confined to debating and passing legislation. The legislative function includes investigation. Here’s the Court in Eastland:
The power to investigate and to do so through compulsory process plainly falls within that definition. This Court has often noted that the power to investigate is inherent in the power to make laws because “[a] legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change.” . . . Issuance of subpoenas such as the one in question here has long been held to be a legitimate use by Congress of its power to investigate.
“Where the legislative body does not itself possess the requisite information — which not infrequently is true — recourse must be had to others who do possess it. Experience has taught that mere requests for such information often are unavailing, and also that information which is volunteered is not always accurate or complete; so some means of compulsion are essential to obtain what is needed.” [Internal citations omitted.]
Moreover, the demand for Trump’s returns clearly pertains to an area where “legislation could be had.” The private business activities of American presidents are subject to congressional regulation (within constitutional limits), and knowledge about those activities is relevant to congressional decision-making. Impeachment, too, is clearly and unequivocally a legislative function. Indeed, it’s exclusively a legislative function.
And while Trump is right to be skeptical of the Democrats’ motives for demanding his returns (there is more than the whiff of a fishing expedition to the request), the Supreme Court has made it clear that “in determining the legitimacy of a congressional act [under the speech-or-debate clause] we do not look to the motives alleged to have prompted it.” The clause protects against even an “inquiry” into the “motivation” for the relevant congressional act.
It’s hard, then, to view Trump’s lawsuit as anything other than a delaying tactic, an excuse for defying an applicable federal statute while the case winds through the courts. But delaying tactics should not so explicitly challenge our proper constitutional order. Congress has the power — by statute and through the Constitution — to demand Trump’s tax returns. Courts should promptly reject Trump’s suit, and Trump should produce his returns. Trump may disagree with the law that grants Congress such broad authority, but it is the law, and presidents must comply with the law.
Something to Consider
If you enjoyed this article, we have a proposition for you: Join NRPLUS. Members get all of our content (including the magazine), no paywalls or content meters, an advertising-minimal experience, and unique access to our writers and editors (conference calls, social-media groups, etc.). And importantly, NRPLUS members help keep NR going. Consider it?
If you enjoyed this article, and were stimulated by its contents, we have a proposition for you: Join NRPLUS.
Two of the old members of the tribe – Haaretz op-ed writer Israel Harel, on the right, and Y.R., a member of Kibbutz Mishmar Ha’emek on the left – spoke together calmly on the eve of the Passover holiday. Y.R. admitted that the situation is disappointing, but was quickly comforted.
“Look at where we are today on the eve of this Passover, compared to what was in our childhood,” wrote Israel Harel in the Haaretz Hebrew edition,“nothing will take it away from us.” Just before Harel describes the fond memories from 1948, he praises the bravery of Y.R. during the Yom Kippur War in October 1973.
>> Israel’s left will lose if it doesn’t have a plan to end the occupation | Opinion ■ Israelis celebrate festival of freedom as Palestinians suffer acts of wickedness | Opinion ■
Harel does not wonder, of course, about why it was necessary to sacrifice thousands of Israeli soldiers who were killed in that war, and destroy the lives of thousands of others who were wounded – after all, before that Shabbat was a Shabbat eve, when Anwar Sadat sent official messages in the spring through the Americans in an attempt to open negotiations on ending the state of war. But the “leftist” Golda Meir shut her ears.
I’m sorry to have to say this to Y.R., but the death of his friends could have been prevented if Golda had truly been a leftist. But in Israel we settle accounts with a prime minister over cigars more than over the deaths of thousands of soldiers.
“This was not just another conversation of how are you, and how’s the family and what are the kids doing, and where are the grandchildren serving,” wrote Harel – and the mention of the grandchildren and their military service made me think. Is there really another society in the world where so many conversations focus on the military service of the children, or grandchildren, and if God grants them health and a long life then even the great-grandchildren? Or alternatively, as nostalgia, about the military service of those themselves holding the discussion, or their parents or even their grandparents?
And so one generation holds the hand of another, and the chain of service of the “national issue,” whose goals develop from generation to generation, continues. This time, expanding the country’s borders so it will include the West Bank too, and, according to the election results, a life of hard work is guaranteed for the grandchildren on the issue, as well as for their children and grandchildren.
Now the job of the first, and maybe even of the two tribal elders, Y.R. and Harel, is to patrol in Nablus and guard the settlers in some God-forsaken hole on the West Bank.
Despite everything, Y.R. does not understand the pessimism that has spread in our land: “Disaster, as it is reflected in the newspaper you write for and I read, it is not,” Harel quotes Y.R. as saying. Really, what is bad about the situation today? At this very moment, the West Bank is hermetically sealed and millions of Palestinians are being kept under lock and key, waiting for the holiday of their masters to pass while the settlers and the rest of the jailers are enjoying the vacation and the blossoming spring.
If we imagine two elderly Palestinians having a conversation similar to the one Harel and Y.R. conducted, one of them would certainly ask his friend in which Israeli prison his son is imprisoned, and if not his son then his grandson. And maybe this same nostalgia will carry their memories to the prisons where they sat, and if they are old enough, it’s reasonable to assume they will compare the conditions of the Israeli prisons to those of the English – and maybe they will say the Israelis will leave too, like the English and Turks before them.
Harel says Y.R. “voted for a left-wing party.” It can be assumed that this is the left of the sort that was Golda’s left. Harel also wrote that Y.R. “does not feel they stole his country.” Y.R. is not afraid of the stormy winds of fascism in our country, when the classic right – in the persona of Likud – hooks up with the fascist right in the form of the heirs of Meir Kahane, and the party of Bezalel Smotrich.
They haven’t stolen your country, Y.R. and Harel, because the natural path for the continued holding of a people under conditions of imprisonment leads to the trampling of all democratic parameters, and the classic right and Golda’s version of the left are willing to pay this price. To the two honorable gentlemen, I will just whisper that as long as you and your children serve as the jailers of another people, even if the economic situation reaches the heavens, you will always feel that everything is temporary, that everything is about to change in a moment.
A happy Passover. We wish you that the freedom it symbolizes will include everyone.
Democrats have made it clear that they are not satisfied with the Mueller report exoneration of our President, and will now go to ALL lengths to find “dirt” on him – no matter what that “dirt” is.
They’re threatening to open investigations into every aspect of his life… and Trump is fighting back.
President Donald Trump has now filed a lawsuit against House Democrats, led by House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, to prevent them from issuing subpoenas in search of his financial records.
According to Daily Wire:
NBC News reports the filings accuse Democrats of having “declared all-out political war” on the President, and that Democrats’ subpoenas are less a legal device and more a “weapon of choice” for members of the House Oversight Committee and the House Ethics Committee.
This is just a continuance of the infamous “witch hunt.”
Democrats pledged, immediately upon taking over the House in January, that they would begin a number of investigations into the President, including probes into the Trump campaign, whether Trump’s continued — yet hands off — ownership of the Trump Corporation violated government financial regulations, and whether Trump is profiting off his position in violation of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause.
But let’s be honest. Democrats don’t care about justice. If they did, a lot of their so-called “leaders” would be in prison. They care about getting trump one way or another.
After the Mueller report was released last week, showing no signs of collusion between the Trump 2016 presidential campaign and Russian officials looking to sway the results of the 2016 presidential election, Democrats have also pledged to investigate the investigators. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and others, have said they will call Special Counsel Robert Mueller and members of his team to testify in front of various House committees, to explain how they found no evidence of collusion despite a nearly two year-long investigation.
Last week, Cummings issued several subpoenas to various arms of the Trump organization, including a company called Mazars, which NBC News describes as “an accounting firm that Trump had used to prepare several years of financial statements.”
“The subpoena requested a slew of financial documents and related materials from Trump, his trust, the Trump Organization, the Trump Corporation, Trump’s holdings company, the Trump Foundation and the Trump International Hotel in Washington,” the outlet says.
Mazars informed Cummings that they would not give over the documents willingly, and that a subpoena would probably be required to obtain all the information Cummings and his committee want.
Great use of Government time and taxpayer money, folks.
We have an immigration crisis. We have a healthcare crisis. We have a homelessness crisis.
Democrats are focusing on Trump… and ONLY Trump.
It’s all so unbelievably frustrating.