Novara
Novara's JournalTell me again how the DOJ has been doing nothing
IN APRIL.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/07/26/trump-justice-investigation-january-6/
Ooooooh, the J6 plot thickens
https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1551195824788488197
Abortion and why MEN want it abolished
I was asked to cross-post this response from General Discussion here. The discussion is why Alito is so damn wrong about abortion and gender equality: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216962217
You don't need to look that far back.
In fact, there are a ton of current studies that show women with children make less money and are promoted far less than men and than women without children. Mothers are the slowest group to succeed in the working world behind white men, black men, and childfree women.
Keeping women pregnant takes them out of the workforce and keeps them on an uneven footing throughout their careers. Because if they don't advance when they are younger, by the time they have 20 years of experience and they're still on the lower rungs of the ladder, they're much less likely to go much higher.
WOMEN TWO THIRDS LESS LIKELY THAN MEN TO GET PROMOTED AT WORK AFTER HAVING CHILDREN
A report published by the universities of Bristol and Essex for the Government Equalities Office found that just 27.8 per cent of women were in full-time or self-employed work three years after childbirth, compared to 90 per cent of new fathers.
The data also showed that women who did return to work after becoming a parent were two thirds less likely to get promoted in the five years after the child was born compared to their male counterparts with 26 per cent of fathers receiving promotions or moving to a better job compared to 13 per cent of mothers.
Furthermore, 17 per cent of women were found to have left employment completely in the five years following childbirth, compared to four per cent of men.
The researchers conducting the report looked at how childbirth affects employment and career progression across a sample group of more than 3,500 new parents.
More in the link.
THIS IS WHY THEY DO THIS SHIT, folks. They are afraid of the competition.
DOJ's contact information:
Early on I said I'd post DOJ's contact info so we can send letters and make calls when the hearings wrap up. The committee may not be done yet (indeed, they mentioned additional hearings in September), but it appears they might be done with this phase of presentations.
We have seen evidence of conspiracy - seditious conspiracy, conspiracy to defraud the U.S., we see evidence the orange asshole put Pence's life in danger, as well as everyone in the Capitol building, we see his utter dereliction of duty.
We now get to put pressure on the DOJ.
Here's the DOJ's contact information: https://www.justice.gov/contact-us
I think all of us should call or write letters. The more pressure we place on them, the harder it will be for them to find any excuse not to go after him with everything they've got. Remember, they hired additional staff. Let's put them to work!
Pence needs to testify
I posted this in response to a thread but I think it stands on its own (edited slightly):
Pence needs to tell the committee and/or the DOJ what the SS were telling him while they were trying to get him out of the Capitol, he needs to explain what he was doing and who he was calling (plenty of photos of him on the phone in the garage that day), and he needs to explain what he did.
It's my understanding that he did not have the authority to mobilize the National Guard but it's clear he knew no one else would make that call, and together with Milley they got them mobilized.
On some of those phone calls I'll bet he was talking to individuals about removing the orange fuck via the 25th Amendment and that's one reason he took over to mobilize the National Guard. I suspect people told him that the orange asshole sat all afternoon watching the TV with glee and Pence knew the asshole was incapable of doing a thing about the violence. Remember that Pence was a congressperson and I suspect he was really angry that the orange asshole gave the order for the Capitol attack. The Capitol is considered sacred by a lot of legislators.
I despise Pence but his actions on that day were correct. However, he is a coward if he does not testify. He should actually be volunteering information. So I suspect he is compromised and maybe blackmailed by the orange fuck to keep quiet.
Pence is stupid enough to think he has a political career left. He might still have political viability if he came out and told the country that HE was the only person acting with integrity that day, that HE acted presidential. But he's a fucking coward and he's afraid to anger the cultists.
Don't trample each other in your rush to run away from Mango Mussolini now.
Wow. Hearing
@GOPChairwoman
is threatening Trump that they’ll stop paying his legal bills if he announces.
Guess she’s another one backing
@RonDeSantisFL
https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/1550144145964113922
Tonight is gonna be explosive
Even a day after Jan. 6, Trump balked at condemning the violenceHe struggled to do it. Over the course of an hour of trying to tape the message, Trump resisted holding the rioters to account, trying to call them patriots, and refused to say the election was over, according to individuals familiar with the work of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack.
The public could get its first glimpse of outtakes from that recording Thursday night, when the committee plans to offer a bold conclusion in its eighth hearing: Not only did Trump do nothing despite repeated entreaties by senior aides to help end the violence, but he sat back and enjoyed watching it. He reluctantly condemned it — in a three-minute speech the evening of Jan. 7 — only after the efforts to overturn the 2020 election had failed and after aides told him that members of his own Cabinet were discussing invoking the 25th Amendment to remove him from office.
“This is what he wanted to happen,” Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.), who is scheduled to lead the questioning Thursday along with Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), said in an interview this week. “You might have earlier on said, ‘Was he incompetent? Was he someone who freezes in a moment when they can’t react to something? Or was it exactly what he wanted to have happened?’ And after all of this, I’m convinced that this is exactly what he wanted to have happen.”
Committee aides on Wednesday dubbed the prime-time presentation the “187-minute hearing,” a reference to the period between Trump’s speech on the Ellipse on Jan. 6 before protesters marched to the Capitol and his remarks late that afternoon from the Rose Garden urging the rioters to go home. The hearing will focus heavily on Trump’s inaction in the White House during that time, the aides said on a background call with reporters.
Emphasis mine.
More: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/07/20/even-day-after-jan-6-trump-balked-condemning-violence/
This is what the J6 committee should do about the secret service scofflaws
Seize their phones. Have a techie look at their contact lists to determine when the information was added. If the date of their contacts is prior to the migration, that means they selectively migrated some data and either didn't migrate the other data or deleted it so it couldn't be migrated.
Then serve each one of them with a subpoena and ask them under oath who gave the order to delete texts and/or to not migrate texts from two specific dates. Remember, they have to follow the official records retention policy. Ask them how contacts managed to migrate to the new phones but texts didn't. Again, they need a tech expert to testify that contacts that were entered before the migration and which ended up migrating means they didn't migrate texts or they deleted them prior to the migration.
I am sure those texts disappeared because someone gave the order to delete them. I really doubt all of them decided to delete them on their own. If all of them are in the hot seat, what are the chances that at least one of them won't give up the person who gave this order? Would all of them take the blame and possibly go to prison to protect that person? I'm thinking maybe not.
Weeping mom blasts Texas grand jury for DECLINING to indict man who accidentally shot and killed ...
Weeping mom blasts Texas grand jury for DECLINING to indict man who accidentally shot and killed her daughter, 9, as he chased armed man who had just robbed him at ATMA distraught mother slammed a Texas grand jury for refusing to indict the man who shot and killed her young daughter while chasing down a man who'd just robbed him in February.
On February 14, Arlene Alvarez was sitting in her family's car listening to music through headphones when she was shot in the head by Tony Earls, a 41-year-old who was on the street chasing down a man who had just robbed him at an ATM.
Earls thought the robber had hopped into a vehicle and he mistook the Alvarez family car for one his assailant may have been traveling in.
Gwen, the girl's mother, says he fired a total of nine shots at them, knowing he was going to kill someone or at the very least hoping he would.
Earls was later charged with aggravated assault but a Grand Jury on Tuesday declined to indict him, accepting his claim that he was acting in self-defense.
More in the link.
House passes protection for same-sex, interracial marriages with bipartisan support
House passes protection for same-sex, interracial marriages with bipartisan supportForty-seven Republicans joined all Democrats in support of the Respect for Marriage Act that also would protect interracial marriage and repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between one man and one woman. Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and NRCC Chair Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) were among the Republicans who voted in support, a signal that at least a portion of the party believes marriage equality is settled law.
It’s unclear if the legislation has enough support in the Senate for passage. And Democratic leaders didn’t commit to bringing it up for a vote, stating the legislative schedule ahead of the midterms may not allow for immediate consideration.
House Democrats scheduled the vote Tuesday in response to an opinion written by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas last month in which he openly questioned whether the court “should reconsider” rulings that guaranteed access to birth control and same-sex couples’ right to marriage — two issues many Americans have viewed as settled law.
Thomas’s opinion — filed as a concurrence to the Supreme Court ruling that overturned federal abortion protections in Roe v. Wade — opened the door for congressional Democrats to attempt to draw a sharp contrast between themselves and Republicans ahead of the fall midterm elections.
More in the link.
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Apr 10, 2015, 07:15 AMNumber of posts: 5,841