Friday Open Thread | ICE Agents forcibly removed a woman awaiting emergency surgery to a detention center.

prairieland-detention-center-in-alvarado-texasBARBARIC! How inhumane can ICE Agents get? Sick & in pain be DAMNED! If anyone walked into a Veterinary Clinic and forcibly removed a wounded dog awaiting surgery there would be OUTRAGE across the country & the person would be JAILED‼️ But for a 26 year old Latino mother of 2, THERE WAS NO MERCY. God help us all!

Why aren’t we seeing German, Irish, Russian or Canadian immigrants rounded up and deported? They have the complexion protection, that’s why. #ICE raids are about criminalizing Latinos for being in America. Nothing more! A young woman in the hospital awaiting surgery is NO THREAT to anyone.

A critically ill woman from El Salvador who was awaiting emergency surgery for a brain tumor was forcibly moved from a Texas hospital to a detention center by federal agents, raising concerns about President Trump’s directive to more aggressively pursue people living in the country illegally.

Sara Beltran-Hernandez, 26, a mother of two young children, was bound by her hands and feet and removed by wheelchair from Huguley Hospital in Fort Worth late Wednesday by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who brought her to a detention facility in Alvarado, Texas.

“It is heartbreaking and inhumane,’’ said Chris Hamilton, a Texas lawyer who tried to visit the woman Wednesday night at the detention center, where he was threatened with arrest for trespassing.

“This is unacceptable under our Constitution, and unacceptable from a standpoint of basic human rights,” Hamilton said. “This woman is critically ill and in severe pain.”

Lawyers who have been representing Beltran-Hernandez in an asylum petition said they plan to file an emergency appeal in Texas to get their client returned to the hospital.

ice-agents-3

“The medical team and legal team are focused on getting Sara the medical treatment she desperately needs,” said Lorena Massoni, a paralegal working on Beltran-Hernandez’s case.

Beltran-Hernandez was picked up by immigration agents in November 2015 while trying to get from El Salvador to New York to visit her mother and other relatives who live in Queens. She has been detained ever since at the Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas, while her family petitioned for asylum, citing threats of violence against her, from a domestic partner, among others.

Beltran-Hernandez was transferred from the detention center to the hospital in Fort Worth this month after complaining of headaches, nosebleeds and memory loss. Doctors diagnosed a brain tumor and put her on a waiting list for emergency surgery, which was supposed to take place this weekend, according to her legal team. They were stunned when the agents removed her from the hospital Wednesday.

“They had tied up her hands and ankles,” Melissa Zuniga, another paralegal on the case, said in a text message. “I don’t understand why at all when she’s extremely sick and being moved in a wheelchair.”

About SouthernGirl2

A Native Texan who adores baby kittens, loves horses, rodeos, pomegranates, & collect Eagles. Enjoys politics, games shows, & dancing to all types of music. Loves discussing and learning about different cultures. A Phi Theta Kappa lifetime member with a passion for Social & Civil Justice.
This entry was posted in Current Events, Foreign policy, Human Rights, ICEgov, Immigration, Institutional Racism, News, Open Thread, Politics, White Supremacy and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

65 Responses to Friday Open Thread | ICE Agents forcibly removed a woman awaiting emergency surgery to a detention center.

  1. rikyrah says:

    Mom teaches daughter about Black History month using https://mobile.twitter.com/i/moments/835238326151987200

    Liked by 1 person

  2. yahtzeebutterfly says:

    Like

  3. Like

  4. rikyrah says:

    Lack of Accountability Brought Us Here
    by Martin Longman
    February 24, 2017 12:35 PM

    ……………………..

    We haven’t been immune to this here at home, and similar concerns (from both right and the left) animated the movement to oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership. But we’ve also lost the ability to vote out the representatives we still elect. In fact, in two of our last five presidential elections, the popular vote loser won the contest, and our congresspeople increasing select their voters (through gerrymandering) rather than the other way around.

    When the neoconservatives were busy ginning up their invasions of Afghanistan and particularly Iraq, they didn’t anticipate that it would result in a flood of Muslim asylum seekers in Europe, nor that they’d be arriving in a stagnating economic situation where austerity was being cruelly imposed by the central bankers on the southern tier nations most impacted by the refugee crisis.

    We’ve had our own immigration problem, however exaggerated its threats may be. An inability to do sensible comprehensive immigration reform left us open for a populist backlash even if a smaller backlash explained our inability to act proactively.

    The left tried it’s own populist uprising against lack of accountability on Wall Street for the financial collapse of 2008, but the Occupy Movement fizzled in large part because the Democrats had a president to defend and a positive agenda to pursue. That created the opening that Trump ambled into, and it explains why the populist uprising was ultimately right-wing fascist in character.

    And it is fascist.

    Like

  5. rikyrah says:

    The Right Wants No Dissent
    by Martin Longman
    February 24, 2017 1:55 PM

    Republican lawmakers are less fond of public protest now that it’s not the Tea Party doing the protesting. In Arizona, the Senate just passed a bill that would “would open up protests to anti-racketeering legislation, targeting protesters with the same laws used to combat organized crime syndicates.”

    The same bill would “allow police to seize the assets of anyone involved in a protest that at some point becomes violent.”

    A Florida Republican introduced a bill that would make it easier to run over protesters with your car without being legally liable. North Dakota and Tennessee Republicans have done the same.

    In Minnesota, Republicans are pushing a bill that would allow the police to charge protesters for the cost of policing their rallies and marches.

    Not to be outdone, Mississippi Republicans want to make blocking traffic a crime punishable by a $10,000 fine and five years in prison.

    There are also a bunch of bills coming out of states like South Dakota, Colorado, and Oklahoma aimed at greatly stiffening penalties for interfering in the operation of pipelines.

    So far, none of these bills have become law, and most of them are unconstitutional. But they indicate a certain mood.

    And I know that mood is shared by our new Attorney General, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III.

    Like

  6. rikyrah says:

    Trump Knows How to Make Enemies, Not Deals
    by Nancy LeTourneau
    February 24, 2017 3:06 PM

    You would think that someone who wrote, “The Art of the Deal” would know a thing or two about how to wield the tools of both power and diplomacy. But as we saw during the campaign, whenever Donald Trump is challenged or threatened, he’s a one trick pony. All he knows how to do is demonize and belittle in an attempt to dominate.

    We’ve seen the same thing from Trump since he was elected. Remember how he compared our intelligence services to Nazis? His latest target is the FBI. Here are a couple of his tweets from this morning.

    The FBI is totally unable to stop the national security “leakers” that have permeated our government for a long time. They can’t even……

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 24, 2017

    find the leakers within the FBI itself. Classified information is being given to media that could have a devastating effect on U.S. FIND NOW

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 24, 2017

    If you didn’t know how our government works, you’d never guess that he is the guy in charge. He sees this as a battle for dominance between himself and the departments that are meant to be resources for his administration.

    It doesn’t take much imagination to figure out how people who are proud of what they do and committed to their work are likely to respond to something like this. While it’s true that some might cower in fear and become compliant, for the most part it only fuels their anger and resistance, creating a deeper divide.

    But that’s how Trump operates. And it’s why he continues to focus on demonizing those who challenge/threaten him politically – be it the media or Democrats or voters who protest. He is feeding the polarization – making any real deal-making impossible. I am reminded of what Ezra Klein wrote recently.

    Like

  7. Ametia says:

    UMM HMMM

    Like

  8. Ametia says:

    Trump Block CNN, New York Times And LA Times From White House Briefing

    Like

  9. Ametia says:

    Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism
    By Dr. Lawrence Britt
    Source Free Inquiry.co

    NAME THAT COUNTRY!

    Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:

    1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

    2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

    3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

    4. Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

    5. Rampant Sexism – The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

    6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

    7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

    8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.

    9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

    10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

    11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

    12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

    13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

    14. Fraudulent Elections – Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

    Like

  10. CNN @nytimes @latimes @politico @BuzzFeed

    The truth will always stand. Be encouraged. Pay no mind to the barking dog.

    Like

  11. Like

  12. Liked by 1 person

  13. Liked by 1 person

  14. Ametia says:

    The Trump White House just inflicted a serious wound on itself
    https://t.co/SODcPzEMna

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ametia says:

      THIS COMMENT, RIGHT HERE:

      “Speaks intelligently and clearly. Not afraid to answer the tough and complicated questions. This to me is a basic requirement for our leader. What the heck happened to our standards?”

      Like

  15. Ametia says:

    MOST POWERFUL

    MOST DANGEROUS

    Like

  16. rikyrah says:

    Key congressman: It’s ‘a good thing’ if more Americans lose coverage
    02/24/17 11:20 AM
    By Steve Benen

    Rep. Mike Burgess (R-Texas) chairs the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee related to health care, which makes his perspective on the issue rather important. If Republicans ever present their alternative to the Affordable Care Act, for example, Burgess’ panel would be among the first to tackle the policy.

    It was therefore rather striking yesterday when the far-right congressman appeared at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and shared an unusual insight. BuzzFeed reported:

    Burgess was asked about concerns that repealing Obamacare will lead to a drop in the number of people with health insurance. He responded that it would be a good thing because it means fewer people are subject to the individual mandate.

    “First off, we’re not going to send an IRS agent out to chase you down and make you buy health insurance,” said Burgess. “So if the numbers (of insured people) drop I would say that’s a good thing because we restored personal liberty in this country.”

    It’s a fascinating perspective. It doesn’t matter if the ACA is helping bring health security to millions of Americans; what matters, in Burgess’ mind, is conservative ideological principles.

    U.S. News’ Robert Schlesinger noted in response, “If you listened to Burgess, you’d think that all or most of [the 20 million people insured by the ACA] were dragged kicking and screaming into the system and that they yearn for liberation from the tyranny of being able to afford catastrophic illness.”

    Burgess, however, isn’t the only one reading from this script. Vice President Mike Pence said this week he wants to gut “Obamacare” in order to bring back “freedom.” House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) added that his anti-ACA plans is based on a single principle: “Freedom is the ability to buy what you want to fit what you need. Obamacare is Washington telling you what to buy regardless of your needs.”

    Like

  17. rikyrah says:

    Bannon’s Goal: A Deconstruction of the Administrative State
    by Nancy LeTourneau
    February 24, 2017 10:33 AM

    ……………………………………………….

    The third, broadly, line of work is what is deconstruction of the administrative state…

    I think the consistent, if you look at these Cabinet appointees, they were selected for a reason and that is the deconstruction, the way the progressive left runs, is if they can’t get it passed, they’re just gonna put in some sort of regulation in — in an agency.

    That’s all gonna be deconstructed and I think that that’s why this regulatory thing is so important.

    Many of us noted as we watched the Cabinet nominees unfold that a lot of them had spent their careers trying to undermine the very departments they were being tasked with leading. Bannon was clear that this was intentional. They have been brought in to deconstruct the administrative state.

    The language Bannon used indicates that this goes way beyond what we’ve seen from Republicans in the past on the issue of regulatory reform. As I’ve written before, liberals too often forget that, under the separation of powers in our Constitution, the Executive Branch of our government is tasked with administering the federal government. We saw that on display during the last two years of Obama’s presidency with his “pen and phone” strategy. But this goes well beyond the kind of executive orders the president issued.

    We depend on the functioning of the federal government for things like product safety, public health, veterans care, a response to national disasters, environmental protections and a defense of civil rights – to name just a few. That is the administrative state that Bannon wants to deconstruct.

    I have often said that the best defense of liberal values is a government that works. Those of us who believe there is a role for the federal government to play in a functioning society should be focused on the pragmatic task of making sure that is done effectively. While there is often plenty of room for improvement, liberals have too often either ignored how presidents function in that arena or have joined conservatives in complaining about it.

    As we watch the Trump/Bannon administration deconstruct the administrative state, we’re likely to get a good lesson in just how important it has been all along.

    Like

  18. rikyrah says:

    Trump Kicked Off His Presidential Aspirations at CPAC in 2011
    by Nancy LeTourneau
    February 24, 2017 8:00 AM

    Watching Reince Priebus and Steve Bannon at CPAC yesterday, I noticed that they referred several times to the speech Donald Trump gave to that gathering in 2011. So I decided to watch it for myself. In one sense these two White House staffers were right — way back then Trump was saying a lot of the things he says today.

    It’s clear that Trump was considering a run for the presidency in 2012. It would be interesting to know why he delayed those plans until 2016. More about that later, but much like he has been saying over the course of the last year and a half, he talked a lot about “winning” and ended the speech with a promise that he’d make America great again.

    A couple of other things stood out to me. Perhaps least important is the fact that in 2011 gas prices were around $4/gallon. At CPAC, Trump predicted they would go up to $7 because this country didn’t talk tough enough to OPEC. Obviously he was wrong about that.

    …………………

    If Trump’s appearance at CPAC on February 10, 2011 was his initial trial balloon about entering the 2012 presidential race, it is important to know that a little over one month later he appeared on The View to talk about a possible entry into the race. It was on that show that he launched his foray into the whole birther movement. A little over a month later, on April 27th, President Obama released his long-form birth certificate and three days after that he roasted Trump at the White House Correspondents Dinner. There have been those who speculated that perhaps it was that roasting that inspired Trump to run for president. Simply based on this timeline, I’m guessing that the opposite is true. Trump was planning to run in 2012, but decided not to challenge Obama — holding out for 2016.

    Like

  19. rikyrah says:

    So, who will ask Spicer about this?

    This is what happens when our leaders demonize brown people.

    A 51-year-old Olathe [Kansas] man was charged Thursday in a Wednesday night shooting at an Olathe bar that left one man dead and two others wounded…

    At least one witness reportedly heard the suspect yell “get out of my country” shortly before shooting men he thought were Middle Eastern. Both men, engineers at Garmin, appear to be originally from India.

    Like

  20. rikyrah says:

    DNC Chair Candidates ‘Debate’ on CNN for No Discernible Reason
    by Josh Alvarez
    February 23, 2017 5:47 PM

    ……………….

    rogressives’ lingering (and justifiable) distrust of the DNC and the Democratic establishment has led some, like Glenn Greenwald, to portray Perez v Ellison as analogous to Clinton v Sanders. But what exactly makes Ellison, who has held his congressional seat since 2007, not part of the establishment whereas Perez, who first entered the national scene in 2009 when he was tasked with rebuilding the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, is left unsaid. “Establishment,” it seems, has become a term of derision that applies only to your political enemies. There is no discernible difference between Perez and Ellison’s capability, intelligence, or politics. They are both left-of-center and have the accomplishments and credentials to prove it. The job of the DNC Chair is first and foremost to help Democrats win elections nationwide and organize party apparatuses to work effectively in local, state, and national races. Given that, it seems Ellison’s success of running for office and helping other Democrats in Minnesota gives him the edge over Perez.

    But don’t leave it to a cable news business to not exploit any possibility for a manufactured debate. Dana Bash and Chris Cuomo tried their best to stir contention between the candidates, though there was nothing to disagree about. Everybody on the dais and everybody who bothered staying up to watch the show knows what has to be done. National success is built on local success and the DNC has to regain trust as a competent institution that can channel progressive energy towards tangible political victories. But CNN was determined to make the situation fit the story they already had in mind and which was published this morning: “Democratic divisions on display at DNC debate” the headline reads. The candidates, in the network’s telling, “struggled during a debate sponsored by CNN Wednesday to define a vision of how they would effectively counter Trump’s administration and break through in clear opposition to his message.” This was corporate gonzo journalism at its most boring.

    Why did the DNC ever agree to this? Nothing in those two hours bolstered confidence or even created a discernible gap between Ellison or Perez. Why put the two contenders for DNC leadership, who are really fighting for the votes of 447 people in a private gathering, in a situation that risks a loss of confidence among Democratic voters?

    The DNC Chair election can’t come soon enough.

    Like

    • eliihass says:

      “…Why did the DNC ever agree to this? Nothing in those two hours bolstered confidence or even created a discernible gap between Ellison or Perez. Why put the two contenders for DNC leadership, who are really fighting for the votes of 447 people in a private gathering, in a situation that risks a loss of confidence among Democratic voters?…”

      And an insight and heads up to the republicans…

      Like

  21. rikyrah says:

    Trump, Like Anita Hill, Inspires Women to Run
    by Martin Longman
    February 23, 2017 3:44 PM

    Apparently, the combination of Hillary Clinton’s unexpected loss and the genital grabber-in-chief’s surprising win has motivated more women to explore running for office than at any time since 1992. Of course, 1992 was dubbed the Year of the Woman because Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer of California, Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois, and Patty Murray of Washington were all elected to the U.S. Senate. Prior to that election, the only two women in the Senate were Democrat Barbara Mikulski of Maryland and Republican Nancy Kassebaum of Kansas.

    This doesn’t seem like much to talk about in retrospect, but it was a big deal at the time, and the narrative revolved around an alleged backlash against the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill hearings that had taken place the year before. At least in Patty Murray’s case, the hearings may have provided her impetus to run.

    According to Jean Sinzdak, of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, there was a more general uptick of women who ran for office in 1992, and this is the first time since then that she’s seen a comparable level of interest.

    Like

  22. rikyrah says:

    If this account is true, then the current FBI investigation is permanently tainted and we need an immediate special counsel.

    — Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) February 24, 2017

    Like

  23. rikyrah says:

    A section of people in the back of #CPAC2017 waving Russian flags — a staffer just came and demanded they all be handed over. pic.twitter.com/mZVoVUqudn

    — Tim Alberta (@TimAlberta) February 24, 2017

    Like

  24. rikyrah says:

    THE 11TH HOUR WITH BRIAN WILLIAMS 2/23/17
    VP Pence: Activists at town halls won’t stop Obamacare repeal
    Reacting to the scenes of anger from constituents at town halls across the country, Vice Pres. Mike Pence says they won’t stop the repeal of the Affordable Care Ac

    Like

  25. rikyrah says:

    Pence’s claims on ACA and jobs fall apart under scrutiny
    02/23/17 03:47 PM
    By Steve Benen

    In early December, during the presidential transition process, Mike Pence told ABC News, “[W]e’re working on President-Elect Trump’s commitment to repeal and replace Obamacare. It’s all going to begin right out of the gate by repealing this disastrous policy that’s been killing jobs.” Yesterday, the Republican vice president said something similar, calling the Affordable Care Act “a job killer.”

    There are some reality-based criticisms of the ACA, pointing to legitimate areas where the law could be changed, but Pence’s argument isn’t one of them.

    Let’s revisit our previous coverage, looking anew at how the data has changed since the last time the vice president got this wrong. As regular readers may recall, in 2014, the first full year of ACA implementation, job growth reached a 15-year high. In fact, the first two years of ACA implementation were the best back-to-back years for job creation since the 1990s.

    But we can go a little further with this. Forbes’ Dan Diamond made a great observation, which inspired the above chart, noting private-sector employment in the United States over the last eight years. The red line shows the final two years of the Bush/Cheney era, as the private sector shed jobs; the light blue line shows the first year of the Obama era, when the Great Recession started to end; and the hard blue line shows March 2010 through the present.

    As Diamond added a while back, “Obamacare was signed into law in March 2010. The private sector hasn’t lost jobs since.”

    Like

  26. rikyrah says:

    Trump’s ‘military operation’ apparently isn’t a military operation
    02/23/17 04:20 PM
    By Steve Benen

    Just this week, it seemed Donald Trump’s administration was relying a little too often on the “Never-Mind-What-Trump-Said” approach to public policy, and today, it happened again.

    At a White House event this morning, the president declared that, thanks to his policies, “we’re getting really bad dudes out of this country.” Trump added, “And they’re the bad ones, and it’s a military operation because that has been allowed to come into our country.”

    It was a striking quote for a variety of reasons – including plenty of reports about immigrants facing deportation who are not “really bad dudes” – but it was that reference to a “military operation” that seemed especially problematic. There are all kinds of legal constraints on what the U.S. military can do on domestic soil, and if Trump is implementing his deportation policy while utilizing American troops, a controversial policy is about to get a whole lot more problematic.

    Which is why it was important that Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, talking to reporters during an official visit to Mexico, clarified matters.

    “Listen to this: no – repeat, no – use of military forces in immigration operations. None…. So again, I repeat, no use of military forces in immigration.

    “At least half of you get that right, because it continually comes up in the reporting.”

    Look, I don’t blame Kelly for pushing reporters to get the details right, but under the circumstances, journalists aren’t the ones causing confusion. It was, after all, his boss – the president of the United States – who referred to the deportations as a “military operation” about three hours before the DHS secretary was saying the exact opposite

    Like

  27. rikyrah says:

    The Trump administration’s infrastructure plans start to unravel
    02/24/17 10:13 AM—UPDATED 02/24/17 10:28 AM
    By Steve Benen

    Of all of Donald Trump’s grand ideas, the Republican’s dream of a massive infrastructure package seemed almost plausible. “We are going to fix our inner cities and rebuild our highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals,” Trump vowed the night he won the election. “We’re going to rebuild our infrastructure, which will become, by the way, second to none. And we will put millions of our people to work as we rebuild it.”

    Democrats thought that sounded pretty good, and they even unveiled their own proposal to mirror Trump’s goals and demonstrate that the minority party was serious about tackling the issue.

    But as president, Trump’s focus has shifted away from areas of bipartisan consensus. Axios reported yesterday that the Capitol Hill calendar is already “way overstuffed,” so Republicans are moving forward with a different infrastructure strategy in mind.

    [The plan is to] push off until next year any consideration of the massive infrastructure plan Trump wants to push for roads, airports and other big projects, giving Republican lawmakers more breathing room amid a crowd of issues that’ll require massive effort, time and political capital. […]

    Republican strategists say that Democrats, who’ll be reluctant to give Trump a win, will be in a jam as midterm elections close in: They’ll be under huge pressure to support big projects that’ll bring money and improvements to their districts. And blue-collar unions, including construction and building trades, can be expected to favor of the package, driving a wedge into the Democratic base.

    As political strategies go, this is … odd. Trump could pursue this popular goal now – instead of, say, fighting to take Americans’ health care benefits away – but according to these Republican sources, the White House prefers to use the plan as an election-year prop in 2018.

    And that wouldn’t necessarily be absurd – interesting things can happen when election-year pressures rise – were it not for the fact that the entire plan appears based on faulty assumptions.

    Like

  28. Lonnie Starr says:

    If I remember correctly it is against the law to interfere with a medical treatment. Her lawyers should have no problem finding the law on this.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. rikyrah says:

    As support for ‘Obamacare’ goes up, Trump’s backing goes down
    02/24/17 09:20 AM—UPDATED 02/24/17 09:30 AM
    By Steve Benen

    Mike Pence spoke to the far-right CPAC audience yesterday, and the vice president spoke with pride about his party’s intentions to destroy the Affordable Care Act. “America’s Obamacare nightmare is about to end,” he declared. “Despite the best efforts of liberal activists around the country, the American people know better.”

    Pence, who’s often confused about key aspects of the health care debate, may want to take a closer look at what the American people know.

    With congressional Republicans discussing proposals to replace the Affordable Care Act, public support for the 2010 health care law has reached its highest level on record.

    Currently, 54% approve of the health care law passed seven years ago by Barack Obama and Congress, while 43% disapprove, according to a national Pew Research Center survey…. The new survey finds that when those who disapprove of the law are asked about what should happen to it now, more want GOP congressional leaders to focus their efforts on modifying the law than on getting rid of it.

    This data from the Pew Research Center coincides with new results from a Quinnipiac poll, which found a sharp shift in Americans’ attitudes against repealing the ACA. Shortly before the president’s inauguration, Quinnipiac found 48% of Americans supported Trump’s efforts to repeal the reform law, while 47% opposed. Now, those numbers are largely reversed: 54% oppose repeal, while 43% support it.

    Like

  30. Ladies this who administration is nerve wrecking. Beautiful day here in NY going to try and breathe and relax everyone do the say. Hugs.

    Like

  31. Liked by 2 people

  32. Ametia says:

    Kansas Is Imploding and That Is Bad News for Donald Trump

    An ambitious effort by a Republican governor to drastically cut his state’s taxes is crumbling—and that’s a bad omen for Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress who are hoping to slash tax rates at the national level.
    Shortly after he became governor of Kansas in 2011, Sam Brownback went to work on rewriting the state’s tax code. Together with the Republican-dominated legislature, he eliminated the top income tax bracket, lowered everyone else’s income tax rate, and created a loophole that allowed some business owners to pay no state income taxes at all.
    Brownback sold the cuts as a way to jolt the Kansas economy to life, promising major job growth thanks to the lower tax rates. To pass these tax measures, Brownback worked to replace moderate Republicans in the legislature who opposed his ideas with true-believer conservatives. He helped knock off nine moderate Republican incumbents, and the effort paid off when his tax reform passed in 2012.

    http://links.motherjones.com/a/585/click/2812213/741758729/_fbceabf30962fa37549e715407b40deed22f9b44/1c5d67fd090b495e1aa1808e40f5767416a9b9d7

    Like

  33. rikyrah says:

    these stories continue to be horrific😬😬😬

    Liked by 1 person

  34. rikyrah says:

    Good Morning,Everyone😐😐😐

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Liked by 2 people

  36. Liked by 4 people

  37. Good morning, everyone!

    This is so disturbing. We all might need therapy before this is over. #ICE bounding a young mother’s hands & feet and forcibly removing her from the hospital while she’s waiting for surgery? How are they any different from ISIS?

    Liked by 5 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s