President Barack Obama will reportedly name Sally Yates, Georgia’s U.S. Attorney in the state’s Northern District, to be deputy attorney general early this week, a federal official told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Yates will join Loretta Lynch, the president’s pick for attorney general, to lead the federal law enforcement agency—the first time since the mid-1990 two women will potentially run the agency and the first time in history that two U.S. Attorneys have both been promoted to the job.
The gender shift may make headlines, but it shouldn’t surprise—the president has been deliberately bringing gender and racial equality to the judiciary for years. A full 42% of the president’s judgeships have gone to women, nearly doubling the 22% of judgeships his predecessor George W. Bush gave to women, according to The New Yorker. He’s also appointed more minorities than any of his predecessors: Thirty-six percent of his judgeships have gone to minorities, doubling Bush’s minority appointments. Obama says this new makeup “speaks to the larger shifts in our society.”
What an unmitigated turd the ex-mayor has turned into as he fades away. I can’t square this Rudy with the Rudy whose presidential campaign I contributed to, is it alzheimer’s affecting him, or just too much partisan bile?
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani attributed the execution-style assassination of two police officers on Saturday afternoon to the protests that broke out across the city following a grand jury’s failure to indict a police officer for killing Eric Garner.
“We’ve had four months of propaganda starting with the president that everybody should hate the police,” Giuliani said during an appearance on Fox News on Sunday. “The protests are being embraced, the protests are being encouraged. The protests, even the ones that don’t lead to violence, a lot of them lead to violence, all of them lead to a conclusion. The police are bad, the police are racist. That is completely wrong.”
Giuliani then argued that most of the city’s violence is centered in the black community through so-called “black against black” crime and heralded the police for keeping African Americans safe. “Actually, the people who do the most for the black community in America are the police,” he explained.
On November 26, the Obama administration put forward new anti-smog regulations that should prevent thousands of premature deaths and heart attacks every year. About two weeks later, Obama’s appointees at the Federal Reserve implemented new rules curbing reckless borrowing by giant banks that will reduce profits and shareholder earnings but increase the safety of the financial system. Yet both of these were minor stories compared to normalizing relations with Cuba after decades and his sweeping plan to protect millions of unauthorized immigrants from deportation. Somewhere in the meantime, Democrats broke the congressional logjam and got a whole boatload of nominees confirmed.
It has been, in short, a very busy and extremely consequential lame-duck session. One whose significance is made all the more striking by the fact that it follows an electoral catastrophe for Obama’s party. And that is the Obama era in a microcosm. Democrats’ overwhelming electoral win in 2008 did not prove to be a “realigning” election that handed the party enduring political dominance. Quite the opposite. But it did touch off a wave of domestic policymaking whose scale makes Obama a major historical figure in the way his two predecessors won’t be.
234: The number of bills passed by the 113th Congress, the lowest recorded total in congressional history. The number is down 18 percent from the 112th Congress and about four times less than the 80th in 1947-1948, which President Harry Truman dubbed the “Do-Nothing Congress.”
Todays brain dead deadbolt extraordinaire Missouri State Rep. Rick Brattin has a nice idea. women who want or need an abortion must get a mans approval. Because. Because he’s really smart and really knows a lot of stuff and stuff. He said he was inspired to change the laws around abortion consent because he was required to obtain his wife’s consent before having a vasectomy. Which seems to be a mystery since there are no laws governing that. But whatever. Paybacks. This is your tax dollars at work. I think he should be spit shining that lard head bust of Rush they have on display to give people an idea of who they really are. That pile of slag must make them proud. “My hero. He is. So smart. Spot on. love him.” They care if it was “legitimate rape” and not that fake rape or just fooling around rape or I must have been more drunk than I thought rape or it wasn’t rape it was a party.
I don’t care if Kevin’s unhappy, opening the banking pandora’s box of Federally insured swaps and derivatives is something wrong that he did and he should not have done it. No matter how much he obfuscates with thinly crafted rationalizations for his bad deed it still remains odious. Kevin characterizes the criticism as coming from the “far left” but I’m not far left, I voted reliably Republican all the way up to 2012, when I decided enough was enough — neither are his constituents who are calling. Indeed, you’d be hard pressed to find people who “Far left” in Dennis’ district.
Kevin Yoder’s phone is ringing off the hook, and he isn’t happy.
Some constituents are equally hot.
The Kansas Republican faced furious criticism this week for his significant role in a measure allowing federally insured banks to use financial “swaps,” a tool designed to protect banks from bad loans.
Critics say that the relaxed rule — part of a bill signed into law Tuesday night by President Barack Obama — provides a potential backdoor bailout for the nation’s biggest banks, and that Yoder offered the measure as a favor for wealthy bank-related campaign donors.
More on the insertion that nobody wants to own at The HIll:
Dodd-Frank’s derivatives push-out provision has a very simple structure and an essentially incontestable purpose. It requires that when large financial conglomerates wish to engage in inherently risky derivatives trading in pursuit of potential profits, they do so through subsidiaries that are kept legally separate from federally insured depository institutions likewise owned by those conglomerates. In effect, it is a “firewall” requirement — a time-honored means, where financial regulation is concerned, of maintaining the safety and soundness of financial institutions whose services are used by ordinary rather than high-flyer Americans.
The reason behind Dodd-Frank’s rendition of this common requirement is straightforward: If Wall Street conglomerates are able to use our bank deposits — which are meant to be kept safe — in addition to their own money to gamble on speculative derivative instruments, then (a) there will be much more gambling of precisely the kind that brought us the 2008 crash; and (b) we taxpayers, rather than Wall Street, will cover the losses that the next crash occasions. We will, in other words, be bailing out Wall Street all over again — socializing losses even as Wall Street continues to privatize gains for itself.
This is, of course, perfectly disgusting. But what is yet worse is that no one will “own” it — presumably because it is so disgusting. We still do not know who inserted the provision, nor do we know why. All that we know is that whoever did it did it both (a) surreptitiously, apparently in hopes no one would notice, and (b) at the last minute, in connection with a continuing resolution cum omnibus spending bill, apparently in hopes of holding continued government operation itself hostage to the provision’s getting through.
All alterations in candidate names were my own alteration just to put a different light on the situation
If Jeb Smith does run, he may face Hillary Jones on the Democratic side. Now, a “Jones vs. Smith” contest doesn’t exactly thrill many people…
Jeb Smith and Hillary Jones are both somewhat tame and moderate politicians, driven more by political consultants and polls than by any burning personal ideology. Both are familiar with the concept of “triangulation” in politics. To put this another way, we might wind up with a 2016 race of “the bland leading the bland.” Still, it’s hard to see either one of them not instantly becoming the frontrunner in their respective party’s field on name recognition alone. How good a candidate will either prove to be, though? It’s worth taking a look at the pros and cons each will bring to the race, in an early look at what their campaigns will likely have to overcome. Today I’ll be weighing Smith’s pros and cons, and later in the week I’ll do the same for Hillary Jones.
Jeb Smith’s Positives
The biggest positiveSmith has as a Republican candidate is his family. No, not his father or his brother or even his mother but his more immediate family. Smith’s voice within the Republican Party on the subject of immigration is pretty unique, because he married a Mexican woman (the mother of his three children) and speaks fluent Spanish. That right there could earn him millions of votes that other Republicans could never even hope to get. There are two prominent Latino Republicans who will also likely run, but both Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz aren’t exactly seen as prominent voices for the Latino community. Both Rubio and Cruz are of Cuban descent, which (because of Cubans’ unique and favored immigration status) doesn’t carry a whole lot of weight with Latinos outside Florida. This is before even touching upon their political positions. Smith actually lives up to his father’s concept of “compassionate conservatism” when it comes to immigration (he married a foreigner who became an immigrant, so this is no surprise), while Cruz and Rubio are fighting to stake out the harshest possible position on the issue. Rubio tried being somewhat reasonable on immigration in the Senate, but when he heard the outcry from the base, he quickly denounced his own immigration bill and decided to take a more absolutist position. To put it another way, Cruz and Rubio aren’t going to manage much in the way of Latino outreach in 2016, but Jeb Smith certainly could.
Tucked deep inside the 1,603-page federal spending measure is a provision that effectively ends the federal government’s prohibition on medical marijuana and signals a major shift in drug policy.
The bill’s passage over the weekend marks the first time Congress has approved nationally significant legislation backed by legalization advocates. It brings almost to a close two decades of tension between the states and Washington over medical use of marijuana.
Under the provision, states where medical pot is legal would no longer need to worry about federal drug agents raiding retail operations. Agents would be prohibited from doing so.
Unhappy Republicans say Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has given President Barack Obama a present this holiday season - a gift certificate good for confirmation of 12 judicial appointments, not long after the voters had delivered the Democrats a lump of coal in midterm elections.
Cruz, a tea party favorite and potential 2016 presidential contender, disputed the claim through his spokesman on Monday.
But there was no dissent that Democrats, who must turn over power to Republicans in January, were in position to confirm not only the judges, but 11 other appointees before the Senate wraps up work for the year.
Among them are nominees that Republicans have sought to block for two relatively high-profile posts. They are Vivek Murthy to become surgeon general and Sarah Saldana to head Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency that will oversee the new administration policy on immigration that Cruz wants to defund.
Montana has never been known as a black-tie place. Governors wear cowboy boots and bolo ties, and people joke that a tuxedo is a pair of black jeans and a sport coat. But this winter, when lawmakers arrive at the State Capitol, they will have to abide by a new dress code: No more jeans. No casual Fridays. And female lawmakers “should be sensitive to skirt lengths and necklines.”
Republican leaders who approved the guidelines say they are simply trying to bring a businesslike formality to a State Legislature of ranchers, farmers and business owners that meets for only four months every other year. But the dress code has set off a torrent of online mockery, and is being pilloried by Democratic women as a sexist anachronism straight from the days of buggies and spittoons.
“The sergeant-at-arms could be standing there with a ruler, measuring hemlines and cleavage,” said Jenny Eck, a Democratic House member.