Saturday, November 3, 2018

To my friends in Texas: Thinking of voting for Beto O'Rourke? Don't !!!

Beto O'Rourke is advocating for Leninist socialism




Tuesday, October 30, 2018

The Lies of Elizabeth Warren...documented by Elizabeth Warren

Received the following letter from a friend...I do not know if this is the standard answer Elizabeth Warren gave to all inquiries, however it does reveal the Senator's poor judgment of character. More importantly, coming from a so-called law maker, her contradiction in the last paragraph regarding "credible allegations" puts her in the "he's guilty no matter what he says" category and then she has the audacity to say, "...and will fight for judges committed to equal justice under law."  And what law would cover credible allegations which prove to be wrong? ~ Norman E. Hooben
Oh, and by the way, Judge Kavanaugh is most likely the most knowledgeable Constitutionalist to come down the pike since the Founding Fathers enshrined those precious words that gave us the longest run of freedom in hundreds of years...maybe thousands!
I wrote to Elizabeth Warren about Brett Kavanaugh's nomination and asking that she vote to confirm him.
This is the buffalo bull crap she sent back to me!!! What kind of world is this delusional madwoman living in!
Dear Patricia,
Thank you for contacting me about Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court. I believe that there were many reasons to oppose Justice Kavanaugh's nomination, including the serious allegations of sexual assault by multiple women, his radical views and his record as a judge, and the secretive and rushed process Republicans used to advance his nomination. That's why I voted no on his nomination and urged all of my colleagues to do the same.
Millions of Americans watched Dr. Christine Blasey Ford tell her harrowing story of being sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh. The courage she showed was remarkable, and her testimony was credible and compelling. I believe her. And Dr. Ford wasn't alone. Other women also described being sexually assaulted by Justice Kavanaugh or seeing him engage in inappropriate sexual behavior. Despite these alarming allegations, and Justice Kavanaugh's partisan, insulting, and disqualifying testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senate Republicans voted to put Justice Kavanaugh on the nation's highest court.
Justice Kavanaugh's nomination was the latest step in a decades-long campaign by right-wing groups and their billionaire backers to capture our courts. Over the last forty years, as the rich have gotten richer and working families have struggled to make ends meet, the scales of justice have been weighted further and further in favor of the wealthy and the powerful.
Justice Kavanaugh has furthered that tilt. Over the course of his career, he has voted to limit the ability of women to make their own health care decisions, opposed a ruling protecting women's access to birth control under the Affordable Care Act, opposed rules designed to address climate change and protect the environment, and ruled that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau - the agency that has returned $12 billion directly to people cheated by corporate lawbreakers - is unconstitutional. Justice Kavanaugh also believes that sitting presidents should not face personal civil suits or criminal investigations or prosecutions while in office.
In addition to concerns about the credible sexual assault allegations against Justice Kavanaugh and his pro-corporate record, I was concerned about the process Republicans used to rush his nomination through the Senate. Republicans refused to request hundreds of thousands of documents from Justice Kavanaugh's time in government and designated many others "committee confidential" to hide them from the public. Then, days before Justice Kavanaugh was scheduled to come before the Judiciary Committee, a Bush White House attorney announced that over 100,000 documents from Justice Kavanaugh's time in the White House Counsel's Office would be withheld on the basis of "constitutional privilege." The process was designed to keep Senators - and the American public, from having a meaningful opportunity to examine Justice Kavanaugh's full record.
I believe that the credible allegations of sexual assault, his record as a judge, and the broken process Republicans used to advance his nomination should have disqualified Justice Kavanaugh from a lifetime position on the nation's highest court, where he will be making decisions that affect every person in this country for a generation. I will continue to oppose judges who will not stand up for every American and will fight for judges committed to equal justice under law.
I appreciate your reaching out to me about this issue, and please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about issues of importance to you.
Elizabeth Warren
United States Senator
Washington, DC
317 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-4543 Boston, MA
2400 JFK Federal Building
15 New Sudbury Street
Boston, MA 02203
Phone: 617-565-3170 Springfield, MA
1550 Main Street
Suite 406
Springfield, MA 01103
Phone: 413-788-2690


Monday, October 29, 2018


By Norman E. Hooben

18 U.S. Code § 594 - Intimidation of voters
U.S. CodeTitle 18Part IChapter 29 › § 594

Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, at any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing such candidate, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 720; Pub. L. 91–405, title II, §204(d)(5), Sept. 22, 1970, 84 Stat. 853; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

Regarding the clause, “or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate…”  What if a person votes for any candidate based on the lies told by others?  Is that considered 'causing'?
Now it is well known that many politicians lie when they speak in their respective Houses of Congress (Senate and House of Representatives) and they are protected from any liability in accordance with Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution.  (members of both Houses of Congress shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.)
The “What if…” question comes into play when such lies are repeated when said politicians are not in attendance at the so-called ‘Session’.  Does the Constitution offer protection for lies told on the street or anywhere outside their respective Houses?  I don’t think so.  And I don’t think we should restrict this narrative to politicians.  There are a number of hate groups and individuals that make statements that are purely hateful and obvious lies that I’m sure affect the way their ignorant followers vote.  In my humble opinion these politicians, hate groups, and individuals should be held liable for intimidating voters for it would be a pleasure to see Chuck Schumer, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren, and even such small fry haters as ‘Polly Sighbe fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.