Usa. Il 58% degli Elettori ritiene che i media siano ‘nemici del popolo’.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-11-23.

«Voters overwhelmingly believe “fake news” is a problem»

«the media have become “the enemy of the people.”»

«58% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat agree that the media are “truly the enemy of the people,”»

«Thirty-six percent (36%) don’t agree, including 23% who Strongly Disagree»

* * * * * * *

Il 58% degli Elettori americani considera i media i veri nemici del popolo.

Il risultato di questo sondaggio si presta a due letture, differenti ma complementari.

La prima lettura evidenzia come i media, tutti ideologicamente schierati sul credo liberal, sino riusciti ad assicurarsi la fama di spargere solo false notizie ed inattendibili interpretazioni delle medesime.

La seconda lettura è più sottile. Se a molti la faziosità dei media liberal è fastidiosissima, sarebbe tuttavia da ringraziarli ed incoraggiarli a proseguire con questo comportamento.

È infatti grazie alla loro martellante cassa di risonanza che l’Elettorato americano sta voltando le spalle ai liberal democratici, come attestano le recenti elezioni tenutesi in Virginia ed in New Jersey.

Sono riusciti, con il valido supporto di Joe Biden, Kamala Harris e Nancy Pelosi, a rendere le elezioni di midterm un prognosticato disastro elettorale, con perdita sia della House sia del Senato.

Mr Trump li ringrazia di cuore: media liberal sono i suoi migliori alleati.

Mai fermare un avversario che sta facendo errori.

* * * * * * *

---

58% Of Voters Agree: Media Are ‘Enemy of the People’.

Voters overwhelmingly believe “fake news” is a problem, and a majority agree with former President Donald Trump that the media have become “the enemy of the people.”

A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports finds that 58% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat agree that the media are “truly the enemy of the people,” including 34% who Strongly Agree. Thirty-six percent (36%) don’t agree, including 23% who Strongly Disagree.

Usa. Il senato bloccherà la legge sull’aborto, richiedendo il voto con soglia 60 per cento.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-09-08.

Torniamo a malincuore sul problema dell’aborto, che adesso è materia di acerrima lotta politica.

Esso infatti è parte integrante dell’ideologia liberal, ed i democratici ne fanno bandiera di combattimento.

Combattere l’aborto significa combattere i liberal.

Precisiamo subito un aspetto lessicologico, su cui i democratici giocano ambiguamente.

Il famoso provvedimento Roe v, Wand sentenzia che in quella particolare situazione l’aborto non trovava contrasto nella Costituzione.

Travisandone i termini, mentendo, i liberal democratici sostengono invece che l’aborto sia un ‘diritto costituzionale’, cosa che non è. Non è un «constitutional rights».

A riprova, se esistesse un ‘diritto costituzionale’ all’aborto, la Suprema Corte avrebbe immediatamente annullato questi provvedimenti statali che lo regolamentano.

* * * * * * *

«The U.S. Senate’s filibuster rule likely imperils a bill intended to protect abortion rights that Democrats are readying following the Supreme Court’s decision not to block a strict new Texas ban»

«the chamber’s rule requiring 60 of its 100 members to agree on most legislation»

«The nation’s 6-3 conservative top court this week allowed Texas’ six-week abortion ban to go into effect»

«That decision led House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to declare that the Democratic-controlled chamber will soon debate and vote on legislation aimed at stopping similar state anti-abortion regulations»

«that bill faces little to no chance of passing the Senate»

«Non credo che una regola arcaica dovrebbe essere usata per permetterci di mettere la testa sotto la sabbia … e non agire su queste questioni importanti … Non andremo da nessuna parte se manteniamo questo ostruzionismo»

«Progressive Democrats have repeatedly over the past year suggested doing away with the filibuster to allow other Democratic priorities to pass, including a voting rights bill intended to counteract a wave of new voting restrictions passed by Republican-governed states»

* * * * * * *

Usa. Corte Suprema rifiuta di bloccare la legge del Texas che limita l’aborto.

Texas. Corte di Appello federale approva la nuova legge sull’aborto.

Usa. Suprema Corte ammette il Mississippi sulle restrizioni all’aborto.

Usa. Corte Suprema. Rivaluterà la sentenza Roe v. Wade sull’aborto.

America dissennata. I Dem antepongono l’aborto alla cura dell’epidemia.

Stati Uniti. Suprema Corte. Schedulate per febbraio le cause sull’aborto.

Alabama. Aborto. Se crollasse quel mito crollerebbero i liberal democratici.

* * * * * * *

E così la Harris-Biden Administration e la Nancy Pelosi possono dire e fare ciò che vogliono, che tanto il Senato non approverà quanto da loro disposto.

Si stanno rodendo il fegato di rabbia ed odio impotente, incapaci, nella loro nullità politica, di proporre un accordo politico. Stanno lentamente capendo che hanno perso anche questa battaglia. E, se si occupassero di più della economia, non sarebbe poi un male, dato che gli Stati Uniti sono adesso in stagflazione, e se la terranno per un bel pezzo.

*

---

Filibuster imperils Pelosi’s abortion bill in U.S. Senate – Klobuchar

Washington, Sept 5 (Reuters) – The U.S. Senate’s filibuster rule likely imperils a bill intended to protect abortion rights that Democrats are readying following the Supreme Court’s decision not to block a strict new Texas ban, a leading Democratic senator said on Sunday.

Senator Amy Klobuchar told CNN’s “State of the Union” that some Senate Republicans support abortion rights but not enough to overcome the chamber’s rule requiring 60 of its 100 members to agree on most legislation.

The nation’s 6-3 conservative top court this week allowed Texas’ six-week abortion ban to go into effect, which observers said showed the justices may be ready to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that established a national right to abortion.

That decision led House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to declare that the Democratic-controlled chamber will soon debate and vote on legislation aimed at stopping similar state anti-abortion regulations. But Klobuchar said that bill faces little to no chance of passing the Senate.

“My solution to this … I believe we should abolish the filibuster,” Klobuchar, chair of the Senate Rules Committee, told CNN. “I do not believe an archaic rule should be used to allow us to put our heads in the sand … and not take action on these important issues … We just will get nowhere if we keep this filibuster in place.”

Progressive Democrats have repeatedly over the past year suggested doing away with the filibuster to allow other Democratic priorities to pass, including a voting rights bill intended to counteract a wave of new voting restrictions passed by Republican-governed states.

Senate moderates, including Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, have rejected that idea, however.

Klobuchar said one way to discourage the frequency of filibusters would be to make senators who object to ending debate actually stay on the floor debating. This “talking filibuster” was the tradition until the 1970s.

She said another approach would be a “carveout” that would only change the filibuster for legislation directly tied to one subject, such as abortion rights.

Usa. Il caso di Mr Andrew Cuomo. Biden suggerisce le dimissioni. La difesa. La Faida.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-08-07.

Mr Andrew Cuomo, 1957, è Governatore dello Stato di New York dal 2011, membro eminente del Partito Democratico, liberal ortodosso di stretta osservanza.

«Since late 2020, Cuomo has faced allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault. By April 2021, eleven women had made accusations against him. In a long-anticipated report published on August 3, 2021, New York State Attorney General Letitia James stated that Cuomo sexually harassed multiple women during his time in office. President Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and Kirstin Gillibrand have all called on him to resign»

* * *

It’s OK when Joe does it! Cuomo presents pics of Biden, Obama, Kamala and the Clintons hugging and kissing people to excuse his handsy behavior as part of his desperate defense against AG report

– Cuomo, in an 85-page defense against the Attorney General’s report, used photos of other Democrats and George Bush in an attempt to show that all politicians get handsy 

– He says his behavior against women is nothing out of the ordinary and any claim of assault is untrue

– Some of the women say he groped their behinds and breasts – which he denies but the AG says is true

– Everyone from de Blasio to Biden is now calling for him to stand down but he is refusing to

– He now faces impeachment at the NY legislature, civil lawsuits and potential criminal charges in Albany and Westchester, where prosecutors have opened investigations into the allegations 

Negli Stati Uniti è in corso una faida all’interno del partito democratico, e tutti i liberal reclamano la testa di Mr Cuomo, costi quello costi. Nei disperati tempi nei quali si stava peggio, Mr Cuomo avrebbe pagato con la vita, suicidandosi impiccandosi ad un albero di fragole, la sua pretesa a decidere con la sua testa. Adesso, per il momento, potrebbe anche continuare a vivere.

* * *

---

A nostro sommesso avviso, ma certi di asserire un concetto corretto, una persona accusata di un qualcosa dovrebbe essere ritenuta essere innocente fino a sentenza definitiva.

Quasi tutte le legislazioni in materia definiscono come reato una qualche azione prevista dal codice penale. Ma la stessa azione compiuta prima di essere stata contemplata nel codice penale non può essere considerata reato.

Sempre a nostro modo di vedere, il tribunale dovrebbe valutare le accuse solo ed esclusivamente sulla scorta di una documentazione oggettiva, verificabile e verificata: senza prove inconfutabili le accuse sarebbero solo calunnie.

Similmente, il tribunale dovrebbe lasciare alla difesa ampi margini operativi, affinché siano espresse, e comprovate, tutte le istanze della persona accusata.

Nell’emettere sentenza, il tribunale dovrebbe valutare infine le situazioni al contorno.

* * *

Orbene, undici donne hanno asserito che Mr Andrew Cuomo avrebbe loro inferto dei sexual harassment, ossia qualcosa da loro ritenuto essere oltraggioso sessualmente. Non è dato di sapere le date cui risalirebbero i fatti, ma sembrerebbero essere di vecchia data, ossia ben prima che il sexual harassment fosse stato considerato da tribunali e leggi.

Non solo.

Nell’ideologia liberal e nei tribunali liberal il sexual harassment è considerato essere il peggiore dei peggiori reati.

Sempre a nostro modo di vedere, il fatto che Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, e Kirstin Gillibrand abbiano detto che Mr Andrew Cuomo deve dimettersi solo sulla base di quanto hanno asserito quelle donne, ci sembrerebbe essere una bruttura, anche tenendo presente che Mr Andrew Cuomo si dichiara innocente.

È la negazione di ogni qualsiasi forma di giustizia, per non dire di sano buon senso.

* * *

La musica cambierebbe se una simile prava azione fosse stata fatta spinti dall’invidia, al solo fine di eliminare una personalità diventata scomoda: ma questo sarebbe un pensar male, cosa aliena alla nostra mentalità.

* * *

---

Most New Yorkers want Cuomo to resign over sexual harassment, poll finds

NEW YORK, Aug 4 (Reuters) – Some 59% of New Yorkers think Governor Andrew Cuomo should resign after an investigation found that he groped, kissed or made suggestive comments to 11 women in violation of U.S. and state law, a Marist Poll showed on Wednesday.

After state Attorney General Letitia James unveiled the five-month independent investigation’s conclusions on Tuesday, the Democratic governor said in a video statement he has no plans to resign and denied he had acted inappropriately.

The poll of 614 randomly selected New York state adults was conducted by landline or mobile phone on Tuesday and survey questions were available in English or Spanish, Marist said. It found that 59% said the governor should resign in light of the findings, 32% said he should serve out his term and 9% said they were unsure.

Among New York Democrats, 52% said he should resign, 41% said he should not and 8% were unsure, while 77% of Republicans said he should quit, 16% said he should stay and 7% were unsure.

The poll also found that 44% of respondents said Cuomo did something illegal, 29% said he did something unethical but not illegal, 7% concluded he did nothing wrong, 6% had not heard enough about the allegations and 13% were unsure.

* * *

‘I think he should resign’: Biden calls for NY Gov. Cuomo to step down after sexual misconduct allegations

– In March, Biden said Cuomo should resign if the AG investigation confirmed sexual misconduct claims.

– Responding to the report in a 14-minute address, Cuomo remained defiant.

*

Washington — President Joe Biden on Tuesday called for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to resign following a damning new report from the state attorney general’s office that alleged Cuomo sexually harassed 11 women including state employees in violation of state and federal laws.

“I think he should resign,” Biden said, sticking by his position from March when he said the Democratic governor should resign if the AG investigation confirmed the sexual harassment claims.

Biden did not say when asked whether the New York state legislature should impeach Cuomo if he refused to step down. The president said he was sure some of Cuomo’s embraces of women were “totally innocent” as the governor has claimed.

“But apparently, the attorney general decided there were things that weren’t,” Biden said.

The president’s statement is the most devastating yet politically for Cuomo, who for months has resisted calls that he resign from prominent New York Democrats as he seeks to finish his third term. Cuomo is up for reelection in 2022.

The bombshell report released by New York Attorney General Letitia James’s office provided corroborated accounts of harassment by Como that included unwanted groping, kissing, hugging and inappropriate comments, including claims from one executive assistant who says Cuomo reached under her blouse and grabbed her breast.

Responding to the report in a 14-minute address, Cuomo remained defiant, making clear he plans to stay in office and denying the claims. The governor, who was not charged with any crimes, vowed to bring in a sexual harassment expert to train his staff.

“The facts are much different than what has been portrayed,” Cuomo said. “I want you to know directly from me that I never touched anyone inappropriately or made inappropriate sexual advances. I am 63 years old. I have lived my entire adult life in public view. That is just not who I am. And that’s not at all who I have ever been.”

At one point, Cuomo highlighted a photo montage that showed him kissing, hugging and embracing famous politicians and co-workers to push back at claims he inappropriately kissed a worker on her forehead.

“I do it with everyone,” Cuomo said. “I do banter with people. I do tell jokes – some better than others”

Cuomo, a Biden ally, visited the White House in February to discuss states’ needs during the coronavirus pandemic, just weeks before the governor became the subject of sexual misconduct claims.

Even before the AG investigation got underway, the majority of New York’s congressional delegation, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., called for Cuomo to resign in March after the allegations first surfaced publicly. Calls for him to resign renewed after the release of the report.

“No elected official is above the law,” the senators said Tuesday. “The people of New York deserve better leadership in the governor’s office. We continue to believe that the governor should resign.”

“We commend the brave women who came forward and spoke truth to power,” Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said in a statement. “The time has come for Governor Andrew Cuomo to do the right thing for the people of New York State and resign.”

In recent weeks, Cuomo had questioned the independence of the investigators. And his office has suggested James, a fellow Democrat, is interested in a run for governor herself, something James has not said publicly.

The report – which includes some previously unreported allegations – followed a five-month investigation. It contends Cuomo and his senior staff retaliated against at least one former employee, fostered a toxic workplace that enabled the harassment to occur and created a hostile work environment.

Among those Cuomo was found to have harassed included several members of his staff, a state trooper who was part of his security detail, an energy company employee, and a Department of Health doctor who administered a coronavirus test on him live on television last year.

“I believe these women,” James said, calling the claims “substantiated” and “corroborated” but saying it is up to Cuomo whether he resigns. “That decision is ultimately up to the governor of the state of New York.”

Usa. La Harris-Biden Administration potrebbe dichiarare default a breve termine.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-07-09.

«to avoid a default …. require a suspension bill to pass

the Senate with 60 votes ….

debt ceiling suspension ends July 31»

* * * * * *

«Congress lacks clear plan to raise debt limit ahead of deadline»

«Two-year federal debt ceiling suspension is coming to an end»

«Republicans aiming to use debate to attack deficit spending»

«With a month to go before a suspension of the federal debt ceiling runs out, the U.S. Congress lacks a clear plan to raise it, even as the majority Democrats express confidence that a payments default will be avoided»

«“We’re considering all the options,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a brief interview Thursday when asked about her legislative strategy»

«One option being discussed by Democrats is to raise the debt ceiling using the same so-called budget reconciliation package they plan to use to enact most of President Joe Biden’s $4 trillion, longer-term economic agenda»

«That package needs just a simple majority to pass in the Senate, thereby bypassing a Republican filibuster, but it may not be ready for final votes until September or October»

«to avoid any hint of doubt about the U.S. honoring its payment obligations»

«Many experts argue that budget reconciliation allows for an increase — though not another suspension — of the limit. But some moderate Democratic members may be reluctant to vote for a debt ceiling increase that’s done without Republican votes, wary of getting attacked on the campaign trail in 2022 by GOP opponents as profligate deficit spenders»

«Doing that in the House would still require a suspension bill to pass the Senate with 60 votes — giving Republicans a chance to hold the bill hostage for some demands»

«The U.S. Treasury will be able to deploy extraordinary accounting maneuvers to avoid a default for some time after the current debt ceiling suspension ends July 31»

* * * * * * *

La Harris-Biden Administration è politicamente incapace di gestire il Senato, di raggiungere accordi, e tanto meno poi di saperli mantenere.

Tra un mese scadranno i termini del provvedimento che permette alla Amministrazione di sfondare il tetto del debito.

Ma per rinnovarlo, oppure per alzarlo, servirebbe una votazione in Senato sopra il 60%.

Maggioranza che la Harris-Biden Administration non ha e che i repubblicano non si sognano nemmeno lontanamente di concedere.

---

*

Congress Lacks Clear Plan to Raise Debt Limit Ahead of Deadline.

– Two-year federal debt ceiling suspension is coming to an end

– Republicans aiming to use debate to attack deficit spending

*

With a month to go before a suspension of the federal debt ceiling runs out, the U.S. Congress lacks a clear plan to raise it, even as the majority Democrats express confidence that a payments default will be avoided.

“We’re considering all the options,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a brief interview Thursday when asked about her legislative strategy.

One option being discussed by Democrats is to raise the debt ceiling using the same so-called budget reconciliation package they plan to use to enact most of President Joe Biden’s $4 trillion, longer-term economic agenda. That package needs just a simple majority to pass in the Senate, thereby bypassing a Republican filibuster, but it may not be ready for final votes until September or October. Another option is to use the budget reconciliation process to set up a stand-alone bill to boost the debt ceiling.

The debate is one well-known to investors, going back decades. Republican lawmakers typically use the issue to criticize deficit spending, while the administration of the day highlights the need to boost the limit — a simple consequence of previously enacted legislation — to avoid any hint of doubt about the U.S. honoring its payment obligations.

In 2011, Republicans’ initial refusal to agree to raise the debt ceiling at the request of then-President Barack Obama laid the ground for a downgrade of the U.S. sovereign credit rating, roiling financial markets. The limit was later increased after Democrats agreed to discretionary spending cuts, and to caps for future spending — though those were subsequently largely evaded.

Election Worry

Many experts argue that budget reconciliation allows for an increase — though not another suspension — of the limit. But some moderate Democratic members may be reluctant to vote for a debt ceiling increase that’s done without Republican votes, wary of getting attacked on the campaign trail in 2022 by GOP opponents as profligate deficit spenders.

House Budget Chairman John Yarmuth said Democrats are also talking about voting to suspend the debt ceiling to Oct. 1, 2022 as part of a budget resolution they want to pass next month to set up the fast-track reconciliation bill. Doing that in the House would still require a suspension bill to pass the Senate with 60 votes — giving Republicans a chance to hold the bill hostage for some demands.

“There is not a guarantee we can get 60 votes in the Senate to do that,” said Yarmuth. “There really hasn’t been a lot of discussion about it.”

The U.S. Treasury will be able to deploy extraordinary accounting maneuvers to avoid a default for some time after the current debt ceiling suspension ends July 31. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has indicated that those measures could run out during Congress’s long August recess, which lasts until early September, but hasn’t given a firm date.

“I spoke to Secretary Yellen, and she said it is just too hard to predict right now,” Yarmuth said on Wednesday.

Some Democrats are urging their leadership to try to raise the debt ceiling in July to avoid any market uncertainty that could harm the economic recovery.

“The answer is that we have to do it. The ‘how to do it’ will be a tactical decision that the leadership makes, but I think sooner is better than later,” said Democratic Representative Peter Welch of Vermont.

Usa. Nancy Pelosi starebbe per dire addio alla politica. Midterm si avvicina.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-27.

Mrs Nancy Pelosi nacque il 26 marzo 1940. Speaker della Camera dei rappresentanti dal 2007 al 2011 e nuovamente dal 2019, è tuttora in carica.

È un concentrato di odio livoroso, che espresse al meglio stracciando platealmente il discorso fatto dall’allora Presidente Trump.

Ma questo fu solo l’inizio.

Trump. Discorso sullo Stato dell’Unione. Pelosi lo straccia platealmente.

Nancy Pelosi ha depositato il primo atto da mettere in discussione e voto nel Congresso.

* * * * * * *

Mrs Nancy Pelosi è vetusta e midterm si avvicina a grandi passi: sarà uno scontro all’ultimo sangue, il cui esito è al momento impredicibile, ma che potrebbe anche capovolgere la attuale situazione degli schieramenti.

*

---

Le voci di un possibile addio di Nancy Pelosi scuotono i Dem.

Le prossime elezioni di Midterm potrebbero essere decisive per la tenuta della presidenza Biden: i repubblicani hanno la possibilità di riconquistare la maggioranza dei seggi.

Dopo aver assunto di nuovo nel 2018 l’incarico di Speaker della Camera, prima donna della storia americana a occupare quella poltrona, Nancy Pelosi si definì “ponte verso la futura generazione di leader” e accettò a una condizione: lo avrebbe fatto per l’ultima volta. Adesso, forse, il conto alla rovescia è cominciato. Nel 2022, quando ci sarà una nuova tornata elettorale, la leader democratica avrà 82 anni.

In questi giorni si stanno rincorrendo le voci su un suo possibile passo indietro, altri indicano nella figlia Christine, 56 anni, come candidata per lo storico seggio californiano alla Camera al suo posto. Le prossime elezioni di midterm potrebbero essere decisive per la tenuta della presidenza Biden: i repubblicani hanno la possibilità di riconquistare la maggioranza dei seggi.

                         Decisione entro marzo.

Nancy dovrà decidere entro l’11 marzo 2022 se correre per il seggio, ma intanto il dibattito si è aperto e i media americani hanno cominciato a chiedersi: cosa farà la Speaker? In gioco c’è uno dei giganti del partito, una donna ostinata che, anche di recente, ha dato una grossa mano alla raccolta di fondi per il partito, con 32 milioni di dollari arrivati nel primi tre mesi del 2021, parte di quel miliardo di dollari che il ‘ciclone Nancy’ ha portato ai democratici nei suoi vent’anni di attività politica.

Il duello rovente con Donald Trump, nei passati quattro anni, le ha portato nuova popolarità tra i liberal, seppure con qualche distinguo tra i radicali, ma anche l’odio degli elettori repubblicani, che non le hanno mai perdonato il gesto irrituale di strappare platealmente le pagine del discorso del tycoon, alla fine dell’intervento sullo Stato dell’Unione del 2020.

La domanda sul futuro della Speaker, al Congresso dall’87, nata in Maryland ma sbocciata politicamente in California, arriva nel momento in cui Pelosi si trova ad affrontare il momento più difficile della sua carriera, alla guida di una delle maggioranze democratiche più risicate della storia, da tenere compatta davanti all’agenda da migliaia di miliardi di dollari portata avanti dal presidente Joe Biden.

                         La ricerca di spazio.

L’insolito messaggio lanciato nei giorni scorsi da una moderata come lei, quando ha invocato il boicottaggio delle Olimpiadi invernali di Pechino nel 2022, come critica per il mancato rispetto dei diritti umani, è sembrato un modo per riconquistare spazio, forse luce, messa nell’ombra da Biden e dalla sua vice, Kamala Harris, ma anche per parlare all’ala radicale del partito, sempre piu’ insofferente alla sua presenza. O forse un modo per chiudere il cerchio di una vita politica, nata nel segno delle battaglie per i diritti civili.

Il democratico di New York Hakeem Jeffries viene considerato come l’erede piu’ probabile alla successione, ma finora il rappresentante alla Camera ha dribblato qualsiasi domanda. Quando, di recente, gli hanno chiesto se avrebbe sostenuto una ricandidatura di Pelosi, Jeffries ha risposto, dicendo che i democratici sono concentrati sull’agenda Biden.

Nessuno slancio, neanche formale. Un messaggio che Nancy avrà registrato, ufficialmente come in linea con il partito, ma intimamente come segno che il tempo delle grandi decisioni, forse, è davvero arrivato.

Usa. Secondo smacco di Nancy Pelosi, incapace di imparare dai propri errori.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-31.

Una delle caratteristiche dell’ideologia liberal è quella di considerare gli avversari politici alla stregua di nemici mortali, i quali devono non tanto essere battuti nelle elezioni, quanto piuttosto essere eliminati, soppressi.

La fotografia ben evidenzia la carica di odio rancoroso che Nancy Pelosi nutre nei confronti di Mr Trump: il suo volto è tutto un programma.

Adesso è la seconda volta che la Pelosi tenta un impeachment a Mr Trump, ed è la seconda volta che morde il marmo.

Una cosa è dire che una persona è stata imputata, ed una totalmente differente è che sia stata condannata.

* * * * * * *

«Forty-five Senate Republicans backed a failed effort on Tuesday to halt former President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, in a show of party unity that some cited as a clear sign he will not be convicted of inciting insurrection at the Capitol»

«Republican Senator Rand Paul made a motion on the Senate floor that would have required the chamber to vote on whether Trump’s trial in February violates the U.S. Constitution»

«The Democratic-led Senate blocked the motion in a 55-45 vote»

«But only five Republican lawmakers joined Democrats to reject the move, far short of the 17 Republicans who would need to vote to convict Trump on an impeachment charge»

«It’s one of the few times in Washington where a loss is actually a victory,…. Forty-five votes means the impeachment trial is dead on arrival»

«Paul and other Republicans contend that the proceedings are unconstitutional because Trump left office last Wednesday and the trial will be overseen by Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy instead of by U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts»

«The Constitution makes clear that impeachment proceedings can result in disqualification from holding office in the future, so there is still an active issue for the Senate to resolve»

«[Trump] was acquitted by the then Republican-controlled Senate last February on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress arising from his request that Ukraine investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden and his son»

«But reaching the two-thirds threshold required for conviction will be a steep climb»

«Trump remains a powerful force among Republicans and his supporters have vowed to mount election challenges to lawmakers in the party who support conviction»

«Although the Constitution calls on the chief justice to preside over presidential impeachment trials, a senator presides when the impeached is not the current president»

* * * * * * *

Quando una persona pensa ed agisce secondo ideologia ed è abbacinata dall’odio viscerale incorre spesso in errori anche severi. È scollata dal reale.

*

---

Senate Republicans unite behind failed effort to challenge Trump impeachment trial.

Washington (Reuters) – Forty-five Senate Republicans backed a failed effort on Tuesday to halt former President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, in a show of party unity that some cited as a clear sign he will not be convicted of inciting insurrection at the Capitol.

Republican Senator Rand Paul made a motion on the Senate floor that would have required the chamber to vote on whether Trump’s trial in February violates the U.S. Constitution.

The Democratic-led Senate blocked the motion in a 55-45 vote. But only five Republican lawmakers joined Democrats to reject the move, far short of the 17 Republicans who would need to vote to convict Trump on an impeachment charge that he incited the Jan. 6 Capitol assault that left five people dead.

“It’s one of the few times in Washington where a loss is actually a victory,” Paul later told reporters. “Forty-five votes means the impeachment trial is dead on arrival.”

Paul and other Republicans contend that the proceedings are unconstitutional because Trump left office last Wednesday and the trial will be overseen by Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy instead of by U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts.

Leahy, 80, was briefly hospitalized on Tuesday evening after not feeling well but was released after an examination, his spokesman, David Carle, said in a statement.

Some Republican senators who backed Paul’s motion said their vote on Tuesday did not indicate how they might come down on Trump’s guilt or innocence after a trial.

“It’s a totally different issue as far as I’m concerned,” Republican Senator Rob Portman told reporters.

The senators voted after being sworn in as jurors for the impeachment trial.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who moved to thwart Paul’s motion, dismissed the Republican constitutional claim as “flat-out wrong” and said it would provide “a constitutional get-out-of-jail-free card” for presidents guilty of misconduct.

There is a debate among scholars over whether the Senate can hold a trial for Trump now that he has left office. Many experts have said “late impeachment” is constitutional, arguing that presidents who engage in misconduct late in their terms should not be immune from the very process set out in the Constitution for holding them accountable.

The Constitution makes clear that impeachment proceedings can result in disqualification from holding office in the future, so there is still an active issue for the Senate to resolve, those scholars have said.

‘MATTER OF POLITICAL CONSEQUENCE’

Fellow Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who has been critical of Trump, rejected Paul’s move.

“My review of it has led me to conclude that it is constitutional, in recognizing that impeachment is not solely about removing a president, it is also a matter of political consequence,” Murkowski told reporters on Tuesday.

She joined fellow Republicans Mitt Romney, Susan Collins, Ben Sasse and Patrick Toomey in opposing Paul.

Trump is the only president to have been impeached by the House of Representatives twice and the first to face a trial after leaving power, with the possibility of being disqualified from future public office if convicted by two-thirds of the Senate.

He was acquitted by the then Republican-controlled Senate last February on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress arising from his request that Ukraine investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden and his son.

The House approved a single article of impeachment – the equivalent of an indictment in a criminal trial – on Jan. 13, accusing him of inciting an insurrection with an incendiary speech to supporters before they stormed the Capitol. A police officer and four others died in the melee.

But reaching the two-thirds threshold required for conviction will be a steep climb. Trump remains a powerful force among Republicans and his supporters have vowed to mount election challenges to lawmakers in the party who support conviction.

Some Republicans have criticized Trump’s false claims of voting fraud and his failed efforts to overturn Biden’s Nov. 3 election victory. But no Senate Republicans have said definitively that they plan to vote to convict him.

Although the Constitution calls on the chief justice to preside over presidential impeachment trials, a senator presides when the impeached is not the current president, a Senate source said. First elected to the chamber in 1974, Leahy is the most senior Democrat in the chamber and holds the title of Senate president pro tempore.

The nine House Democrats who will serve as prosecutors set the trial in motion on Monday by delivering the article of impeachment to the Senate.

Nancy Pelosi ha depositato il primo atto da mettere in discussione e voto nel Congresso.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-08.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ha depositato ieri 1° gennaio il primo atto da mettere in discussione e voto nel Congresso prossimo venturo. La bozza è già stata pubblicata ufficialmente.

«117° Congress. 1^st Session. Adopting the Rules of the House of Representatives for the One Hundred Seventeenth Congress, and for other purposes»

* * * * * * *

«This package, which will be introduced and voted on once the new Congress convenes, includes sweeping ethics reforms, increases accountability for the American people, and makes this House of Representatives the most inclusive in history»

«Thanks to the leadership of Chairman McGovern and our Members, Democrats have crafted a package of unprecedented, bold reforms, which will make the House more accountable, transparent, and effective in our work to meet the needs of the American people»

«These future-focused proposals reflect our priorities as a Caucus and as a Country, ….  which would require Congress to honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral»

*

«In clause 8(c)(3) of rule XXIII, gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, or granddaughter” will be removed»

« In their place, terms such as “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, or grandchild” will be used, instead.»

* * * * * * *

Questo è

«the most inclusive in history»

«a package of unprecedented, bold reforms»

«to meet the needs of the American people»

«reflects our priorities»

*

Il popolo americano farà solenni festeggiamenti, finalmente appagato nel suo supremo desiderio.

Si lasci pure ai buzzurri, mai sufficientemente esecrati, parlare di lavoro, occupazione, disoccupazione, pil e crescita economica.

Ma questa legge susciterà milioni di posti di lavoro ed una crescita spettacolare del pil, annientando nel contempo il malefico Covid-19, cinicamente ordito dalle potenze straniere.

P.S. Con questo non chiamate la moglie ‘vecchia ciabatta’: sarebbe un sexual harassment di chiara marca maschilista.

*

Nancy Pelosi Bans ‘Gender’ Terms Like Mother, Daughter, Father, Son in House Rules

 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rules Committee Chairman James McGovern (D-MA) unveiled the rules for the 117th Congress on Friday, which contain “future-focused” proposals, including the elimination of gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, and daughter.”

“This package, which will be introduced and voted on once the new Congress convenes, includes sweeping ethics reforms, increases accountability for the American people, and makes this House of Representatives the most inclusive in history,” said the House Committee on Rules in a statement.

House Speaker Pelosi went on to say she is “pleased to join Chairman Jim McGovern in introducing this visionary rules package, which reflects the views and values of the full range of our historically diverse House Democratic Majority.”

“Thanks to the leadership of Chairman McGovern and our Members, Democrats have crafted a package of unprecedented, bold reforms, which will make the House more accountable, transparent, and effective in our work to meet the needs of the American people,” said Pelosi.

“These future-focused proposals reflect our priorities as a Caucus and as a Country,” the House Speaker added.

Within the proposals are the creation of the “Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth,” which would require Congress to “honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral.”

In clause 8(c)(3) of rule XXIII, gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, or granddaughter” will be removed.

In their place, terms such as “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, or grandchild” will be used, instead.

Usa. Massachusetts. Ed Markey vince le primarie su Joseph Kennedy.

---

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-09-03.

«Il settantaquattrenne senatore Ed Markey ha sconfitto nelle primarie democratiche in Massachusetts il trentanovenne Joe Kennedy. Si tratta di una sconfitta storica per la “dinastia” Kennedy: è la prima volta che un esponente della famiglia di origine irlandese che diede agli Usa il presidente John Fitzgerald viene sconfitta nel Massachusetts.

Joseph Kennedy, pronipote del presidente John Fitgerald assassinato nel 1963, ha perso secondo gli ultimi dati ottenendo il 46,5% dei voti contro il 53,5% di Markey. Avendo scelto di partecipare al ballottaggio per il Senato, Kennedy, esponente della quarta generazione della famiglia ed entrato alla Camera dei rappresentanti nel 2013, non potra’ correre per riconfermare il suo seggio alla Camera: il prossimo Congresso non avrà quindi nessun esponente della storica famiglia della politica Usa.

Dal 1947, con l’eccezione di due soli anni, c’è sempre stato un Kennedy fra gli eletti al Congresso. Markey, 37 anni alla Camera e al Senato dal 2013, ha vinto con un programma liberale e anti-establishment sostenuto fra gli altri dalla senatrice Elizabeth Warren e dalla più giovane eletta al Congresso, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Markey è favorito per ottenere il seggio di senatore alle elezioni di novembre: soltanto due repubblicani hanno vinto nello stato del Massachusetts negli ultimi 50 anni.» [Fonte]

* * * * * * *

---

«The Kennedy name still opens a lot of doors in Massachusetts, but it is no longer a golden ticket at the ballot box»

È la fine di un’era durata oltre settanta anni.

---

Ed Markey defeats Joseph Kennedy III in Massachusetts primary.

US Representative Joseph Kennedy III has been defeated in his bid to become senator for Massachusetts.

The grandson of assassinated presidential candidate Robert Kennedy lost the Democratic primary to incumbent Senator Ed Markey on Tuesday.

Mr Markey, 74, will stand for another six-year term in the election on 3 November.

It is the first time a member of the Kennedy dynasty has been defeated in a congressional vote in the state.

Mr Kennedy, 39, is currently serving his fourth term in Congress and was seen as a favourite when he announced he would run for the seat in September last year.

He was supported by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and delivered the Democratic response to President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address in 2018.

But neither his record nor his family’s legacy were enough to ensure victory against Mr Markey, a political veteran who co-authored the Green New Deal with Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

“Our movement is fuelled by young people who are not afraid to raise their voices or make enemies,” Mr Markey wrote on Twitter after Tuesday’s primary.

———-

The Kennedy name still opens a lot of doors in Massachusetts, but it is no longer a golden ticket at the ballot box.

That is the lesson learned the hard way by Congressman Joe Kennedy, whose bid to unseat 74-year-old Senator Ed Markey came up well short on Tuesday.

Kennedy boasted a famous surname and the reputation as a rising star among Democrats, but Markey had the backing of the party’s liberal wing and a particularly valuable endorsement from Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. He worked with the New York congresswoman to sponsor the Green New Deal climate plan in Congress, which earned him the enthusiastic support of environmental activists.

Younger voters in particular backed Markey by a significant margin, suggesting those who did not live through the golden years of the Kennedy clan may view the family not as a trusted political name, but rather the embodiment of establishment privilege and power.

Markey’s victory could also be a testament to the power of incumbency, as another congressional veteran, Richard Neal – chair of the powerful House Ways and Means committee – held off a strong challenge by younger liberal challenger Alex Morse.

Politicians who are generally well liked and not out-of-step with their constituents can be difficult to unseat.

Facebook, Twitter resistono all’azione della Pelosi. I tempi sono mutati.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-02-12.

La cosa che sicuramente i liberal democratici detestano al massimo grado è la verità e le prove probanti che la supportano. La odiano di un distillato di odio satanico.

Mentire come un liberal democratico, come Nancy Pelosi …. Un video la incastra.

Trump. Discorso sullo Stato dell’Unione. Pelosi lo straccia platealmente.

Mrs Nancy Pelosi si è conquistata il titolo onorifico di «Nacy the Ripper».

Il video è diventato virale, da tutti commentato, ivi comprese considerazioni impietose sulla mimica facciale di Mrs «Nacy the Ripper», così scossa dalla rabbia furibonda da far contrarre persino i muscoli butolinizzati.

Adesso sta facendo ferro e fuoco con Facebook e con Twitter per imporre la rimozione di detto video, come se la rimozione della prova di ciò che ha fatto potesse cancellare l’atto perpetrato.

Ma Facebook e Twitter fanno orecchie da mercante.

Ma Mrs «Nacy the Ripper» continua a rodersi furente a costo di far saltare tutti gli effetti della terapia botulinica.

*

---

Pelosi Clashes With Facebook and Twitter Over Video Posted by Trump

The video was edited to appear as if Speaker Nancy Pelosi were ripping a copy of President Trump’s State of the Union address while he honored a Tuskegee airman and military families.

Facebook and Twitter have rejected a request by Speaker Nancy Pelosi to remove a video posted by President Trump that was edited to make it appear as though she were ripping a copy of his State of the Union address as he honored a Tuskegee airman and other guests. ….

*

---

Democrats blast Facebook and Twitter over Pelosi speech-ripping video

The video posted by President Donald Trump makes it appear as though the speaker tore up the text during heart-warming moments of the State of the Union.

House Democrats blasted Twitter and Facebook on Friday for hosting what they called a misleadingly edited video posted by President Donald Trump that features House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ripping up his State of the Union speech.

The incident is the latest test of the companies’ new policies on manipulated media.

The video, posted Thursday, splices in footage of Pelosi’s paper-shredding amid moments in which Trump honored the last surviving Tuskegee Airman, announced the reunion of a service member with his family and praised a fallen soldier, among other parts of Tuesday’s address. Pelosi in fact tore up the document at the end of the speech, an action that prompted fierce attacks from Republicans.

Democrats pounded both social media platforms for not taking down the video, in a dust-up that echoed last spring’s controversy over a video that had been deceptively edited to make Pelosi falsely appear to be drunk.

*

---

Questa non è la prima volta che Mrs «Nacy the Ripper» attacca Facebook

Nancy Pelosi al vetriolo contro Facebook: “Un’azienda vergognosa, diffonde bugie e pensa solo ai soldi”

«Le parole contro Facebook usate da Nancy Pelosi, speaker della Camera Usa al centro del processo di impeachment contro Donald Trump, sono state violentissime: “Facebook è una società vergognosa” ha detto Pelosi, “ed è complice nel fuorviare il popolo americano con denaro proveniente da dio sa dove”. 

Secondo la speaker, l’azienda di Mark Zuckerberg ha un solo interesse, ossia il profitto: “Tutto quello che vogliono sono i loro tagli alle tasse e nessuna azione antitrust contro di loro”. 

Inoltre, Pelosi lancia un’accusa: è convinta, spiega, che Facebook abbia aiutato l’amministrazione Trump, anche se in modo indiretto, consentendo alla sua propaganda di arrivare dovunque»

*

---

Pelosi spokesman dismisses Facebook decision to remove some manipulated videos

«A spokesman for the U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed Facebook’s (FB.O) announcement that it would remove deepfakes and some other manipulated videos from its platform as inadequate on Tuesday.

“Facebook wants you to think the problem is video-editing technology, but the real problem is Facebook’s refusal to stop the spread of disinformation,” tweeted Drew Hammill, a spokesman for the speaker.

Facebook had told Reuters that as part of its new policy it will not remove a heavily edited video that attempted to make Pelosi seem incoherent by slurring her speech and making it appear like she repeatedly stumbled over her words.»

Trump trionfa nei sondaggi. Lo dice la Cnn….

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2020-02-09.

La manovra ordita da Mrs Nacy Pelosi, «Nacy the Ripper», e dai suoi sodali liberal democratici non solo era un colossale fiasco preannunciato – sarebbero serviti al senato 76 voti – ma risulta anche esitare con un effetto del tutto non voluto e dannoso per i liberal democratici.

Mr Trump ne è uscito da trionfatore, e questo quasi contemporaneamente alla figuraccia fatta nel Caucus Iowa dai vetusti candidati democratici alla nomination. Sono un gruppetto di ottantenni, vetuste mentalità scollate dalla realtà dei fatti, troppo indaffarati con cateteri e pannoloni per poter concepire un piano politico ragionevolmente accetto dagli Elettori.

Ad incoronare il Presidente Trump come trionfatore è addirittura la Cnn, una delle più rinomate distillerie di odio politico non solo degli Stati Uniti ma anche nel mondo.

«Donald Trump just got the best polling news of his presidency»

«Donald Trump has never made it to the 50% approval mark in Gallup polling, which makes him the first president never to rise above the halfway mark in the poll. But he’s pretty damn close right now.»

«In Gallup’s latest poll released Tuesday morning, 49% approve of the job Trump is doing in office while 50% disapprove.»

«Trump’s current 49% approval puts him ahead of where his predecessor — Barack Obama»

«The Democratic-led impeachment effort likely contributed to Trump’s strengthening numbers»

«And that 94% approval is Trump’s highest rating — by 3 points — ever among Republicans»

«It’s hard not to see the impeachment investigation in the House and subsequent trial in the Senate as the prime driver of the near-total fealty that Republicans are now exhibiting toward Trump»

«While 94% of Republicans approve of the job Trump is doing, just 7% of Democrats feel the same; that 87-point gap is the largest ever measured in Gallup polling. Ever.»

«But it’s not just among Republicans where Trump’s numbers have improved. His approval among independents in this latest Gallup poll is 42% — up 5 points from where he was among this group in January and tied for his highest mark ever among unaffiliateds»

«More than 6 in 10 people now approve of the job Trump is doing with the economy»

«The only person that can claim a very big victory in Iowa last night is ‘Trump»

* * * * * * *

Dei pareri affrettati tutti ne farebbero volentieri a meno.

Tuttavia queste situazioni e la brillante situazione economica suggerirebbero che Mr Trump abbia ragionevoli possibilità di ottenere un secondo mandato presidenziale.

Se così fosse, sarebbe la scomparsa politica dei liberal democratici.

*

---

Donald Trump just got the best polling news of his presidency

Donald Trump has never made it to the 50% approval mark in Gallup polling, which makes him the first president never to rise above the halfway mark in the poll. But he’s pretty damn close right now.

In Gallup’s latest poll released Tuesday morning, 49% approve of the job Trump is doing in office while 50% disapprove. Trump’s previous high was in April 2019 when he got to 46% approval in Gallup. The first poll Gallup conducted when Trump became president in January 2017 showed him at 45% approval.

Trump’s current 49% approval puts him ahead of where his predecessor — Barack Obama — was at this same time in his first term. (Obama was at 46% approval.) Which is absolutely remarkable, given the first 3+ years of Trump’s presidency and the fact that he became just the third president in American history to be impeached by the House last month.

The Democratic-led impeachment effort likely contributed to Trump’s strengthening numbers. You see it most clearly in the fact that 94% of self-identified Republicans in the poll said they approve of the job Trump is doing — up 6 points from those who said the same thing in Gallup’s poll last month. And that 94% approval is Trump’s highest rating — by 3 points — ever among Republicans.

It’s hard not to see the impeachment investigation in the House and subsequent trial in the Senate as the prime driver of the near-total fealty that Republicans are now exhibiting toward Trump. Trump, as well as his allies in the House and Senate, from the start have portrayed the impeachment proceedings as a purely partisan effort led by Democrats who just can’t accept that Trump beat Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Tribalism was already at work in our politics — you can trace its current nasty iteration back 20 years to the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton — but what Trump has done is supercharge it. And if possible, the attempt to impeach him has amped up the tribalism even more. The best evidence? While 94% of Republicans approve of the job Trump is doing, just 7% of Democrats feel the same; that 87-point gap is the largest ever measured in Gallup polling. Ever.

But it’s not just among Republicans where Trump’s numbers have improved. His approval among independents in this latest Gallup poll is 42% — up 5 points from where he was among this group in January and tied for his highest mark ever among unaffiliateds.

Those gains likely have less to do with impeachment — although it’s worth noting that 52% of all respondents in Gallup think Trump should be acquitted in the Senate trial — than they do with the continued strength of the economy. More than 6 in 10 people now approve of the job Trump is doing with the economy, which is both the best Trump has ever done on that question and the highest mark for any president on it since George W. Bush in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. (Bush overall approval numbers shot to 90% following the attacks.)

Combine Republicans rallying even more closely to Trump during impeachment and independents started to come around on Trump due to the perceived strength of the economy and you see how Trump has reached new polling heights. And while these numbers obviously don’t factor in the utter mess of the Iowa caucuses that played out on national TV Monday night, it’s hard not see how that chaos doesn’t help Trump too.

“The Democrat Caucus is an unmitigated disaster,” the President tweeted Tuesday morning. “Nothing works, just like they ran the Country. Remember the 5 Billion Dollar Obamacare Website, that should have cost 2% of that. The only person that can claim a very big victory in Iowa last night is ‘Trump.'”

In short: it’s been a very good 24 hours for Trump. And the next 24 look pretty good too, as he is all-but-certain to be acquitted by the Senate on the articles of impeachment.