Connect with us

Politics

House Dems formally condemn Trump remarks deemed ‘racist,’ after dramatic floor fight over Pelosi

Published

on

Speaker Pelosi accused of violating House decorum

The Democrat-controlled House of Representatives passed a resolution Tuesday evening condemning President Trump’s “racist” remarks this weekend — although the moment was largely overshadowed by a dramatic floor fight earlier in the day that ended with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ruled out of order for a breach of decorum.

The resolution, entitled “H. Res. 489 — Condemning President Trump’s racist comments directed at Members of Congress,” passed by a vote of 240-187 All Democrats voted yea, with Republicans joining them: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, Will Hurd, Fred Upton and Susan Brooks.

Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, who recently left the Republican Party after calling for Trump’s impeachment, also voted yes. The rest of the Republicans voted no.

The resolution asserted that “President Donald Trump’s racist comments have legitimized fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color.” It mentioned Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. It also quoted Benjamin Franklin, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President John Kennedy and President Ronald Reagan.

Trump had tweeted on Sunday that unnamed “Democrat Congresswomen” should go back and fix the “corrupt” and “crime infested places” from which they came and then “come back and show us how it’s done.” He later all but affirmed he was referring to Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley — all of whom, except Omar, were born in the United States.

AOC ‘SQUAD’ HOLDS PRESS CONFERENCE CALLING TRUMP ‘OCCUPANT’ OF WHITE HOUSE

But, the moment of Democrat unity was derailed just hours earlier. As Pelosi spoke in favor of the resolution on the floor, she used frank and unsparing terms about Trump’s comments — and soon became the story herself.

“There is no place anywhere for the president’s words, which are not only divisive, but dangerous — and have legitimized and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color,” Pelosi, D-Calif., said. “It’s so sad because you would think that there would be a given that we would universally, in this body, just say, ‘Of course. Of course.'”

Pelosi continued, her voice rising: “There’s no excuse for any response to those words but a swift and strong unified condemnation. Every single member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the president’s racist tweets. To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values, and a shameful abdication of our oath of office to protect the American people. I urge a unanimous vote, and yield back the balance of my time.”

Georgia Republican Rep. Doug Collins rose to challenge her and demand that her words be “taken down.” The extraordinary rebuke was the first of its kind involving a member of Congress and a speaker of the House in decades.

Collins immediately stood and asked if Pelosi wanted to “rephrase that comment.”

“I have cleared my remarks with the parliamentarian before I read them,” Pelosi claimed, before walking away to applause.

“Can I ask the words be taken down? I make a point of order that the gentlewoman’s words are unparliamentary and be taken down,” Collins said.

Fox News is told Collins used House Rule XVII, Clause 1(B). That rule requires that remarks on the floor “be confined to the question under debate, avoiding personality.”

“The chair will remind all members, please, please, do not make personality-based comments,” Cleaver said.

Collins then repeated his request to strike Pelosi’s comments. For more than 30 minutes after Collins’ objection, House members were huddled with the parliamentarian, Thomas J. Wickham Jr., to determine next steps.

As the consultation dragged on, Pelosi then appeared to leave the House floor, which itself constituted a violation of House Rules when someone’s words were taken down. Members are supposed to be seated on the floor when a member’s words are stricken.

The scene then became even more bizarre when the chair, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., told representatives after a lengthy huddle that he was trying to make a fair ruling as to whether Pelosi had broken House rules governing decorum, but people weren’t cooperating. Cleaver told Fox News he felt Pelosi was being singled out.

CONWAY BLASTS DEMS’ ‘TIRED’ CLAIMS OF RACISM, SAYS SHE ‘TOTALLY DISAGREES’ WITH HUSBAND’S SCATHING OP-ED

Cleaver simply declared, “I abandon the chair,” and left — a moment with no apparent precedent in modern congressional history. North Carolina Rep. G.K. Butterfield, also a Democrat, assumed the chair, before Hoyer took the reins.

Hoyer eventually assumed the chair upon Pelosi’s request so that a Democrat leader, and not a rank-and-file member, could take control. Hoyer eventually ruled that, based on the precedent “of May 15, 1984,” Pelosi’s language did not meet the standard.

The precedent came after Republican Newt Gingrich, then a Georgia congressman, sparred with then-House Speaker Tip O’Neill, a Massachusetts Democrat. O’Neill remarked: “My personal opinion is this: You deliberately stood in that well before an empty House and challenged these people, and you challenged their Americanism, and it is the lowest thing I have ever seen in my thirty-two years in Congress.”

The parliamentarian determined at the time that the speaker’s use of the word “lowest” amounted to inappropriate language, and O’Neill’s words were taken down.

“The words used by the gentlewoman from California contained an accusation of racist behavior on the part of the President,” Hoyer said, affirming the House parliamentarian’s decision and technically banning Pelosi from speaking on the House floor for the rest of the day. “The words should not be used in debate.”

Democrats quickly voted along party lines to restore Pelosi’s speaking privileges and keep her comments on the record, effectively overruling Hoyer.

Collins, in a statement late Monday, condemned Democrats for effectively reversing Hoyer’s ruling.

“Democrats admitted her words violated the rules of decorum, the very rules that ensure democracy’s every voice can be heard as we carry out the people’s business,” Collins said. “Still, every Democrat lawmaker voted against striking her words from the record. It bears repeating the House prizes decorum because it is a symptom of and a catalyst for a healthy, confident democracy. I hope we recover that confidence soon and more forward with respect for the American people who sent elected officials, including the president, to represent them in Washington.”

But, Democrats privately told Fox News that rules of the House technically have been broken all the time, and that Republicans just wanted to distract from Trump’s remarks.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Among other volumes, the House has used Thomas Jefferson’s “Manual of Parliamentary Practice” as a touchstone for House operations even today. Jefferson’s manual stated that House members cannot use language on the floor “which is personally offensive to the President.”

The House also has relied on Cannon’s Book of Precedents, authored by the late Missouri Rep. Clarence Cannon, a Democrat. Cannon’s book says that “personal criticism, innuendo, ridicule and terms of opprobrium” are out of the order in the House.

Politics

Trump rips New York Times over Kavanaugh piece, calls for resignation of anyone involved in ‘SMEAR story’

Published

on

By

Trump rips New York Times over Kavanaugh piece, calls for resignation of anyone involved in 'SMEAR story'

President Trump blasted The New York Times over its supposed bombshell report on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, calling on “everybody” involved in the “smear” to resign.

“I call for the Resignation of everybody at The New York Times involved in the Kavanaugh SMEAR story, and while you’re at it, the Russian Witch Hunt Hoax, which is just as phony!” Trump tweeted Monday evening.

“They’ve taken the Old Grey Lady and broken her down, destroyed her virtue and ruined her reputation… She can never recover, and will never return to Greatness, under current Management. The Times is DEAD, long live The New York Times!”

NEW YORK TIMES CRITICIZED FROM BOTH SIDES OVER NOW-REVISED KAVANAUGH ALLEGATIONS

Late Sunday, The New York Times walked back an explosive report about a resurfaced allegation of sexual assault by Kavanaugh from his college days. The piece by Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, adapted from their forthcoming book, alleged there was corroboration of an incident in which Kavanaugh, as a college student at Yale, exposed himself to a female classmate at a party.

However, The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway — who reviewed an advance copy of the book – flagged an omission and the paper eventually revised the controversial story after being lampooned on social media over the gaffe.

The update included the significant detail that several friends of the alleged victim said she did not recall the purported sexual assault. The newspaper also stated for the first time that the alleged victim refused to be interviewed, and has made no other comment about the episode.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Trump was asked about whether anyone from The Times should be “fired” over the controversy. He called it a “fair” question but didn’t directly give an answer.

“I think The New York Times made another terrible mistake,” Trump said. “It’s a shame that a thing like that could happen… They used to have a thing called fact-checking. They don’t have fact-checking anymore.”

Fox News’ Brian Flood and Gregg Re contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Politics

With New Mexico rally, Trump seeks to flip state won by Clinton in 2016

Published

on

By

With New Mexico rally, Trump seeks to flip state won by Clinton in 2016

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Donald Trump will hold one of his signature rallies on Monday night in New Mexico, a longtime Democratic stronghold his campaign has added to the list of states it hopes to win in the November 2020 election.

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump holds a campaign rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina, U.S., September 9, 2019. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

The last time New Mexico supported a Republican in a presidential race was 2004. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton beat Trump there by 8 percentage points three years ago.

Trump’s campaign sees an opening in the state with Latinos, who it believes will swing his way despite tough immigration policies, including a crackdown on migrants from Central America and a push to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico.

Democrats have criticized those efforts. But a Trump campaign aide said the Republican president could win over Latinos who came to the United States legally and believe others should, too.

“Big crowd expected in New Mexico tonight, where we will WIN. Your Border Wall is getting stronger each and every day — see you in a few hours!” Trump tweeted ahead of his trip.

The campaign also views Trump’s support for the fossil fuel industry as a plus in the state, which is rich in oil and natural gas, said the campaign aide, who declined to be named. Trump is likely to discuss energy on Monday night.

Trump won the White House in 2016 with electoral votes from traditional Republican-leaning states and some surprise Democratic-leaning ones.

The Trump campaign says it wants New Mexico’s five electoral votes to augment the 306 electoral votes the president received in his first election, not create a separate path for victory. A candidate must get 270 electoral votes nationally to win.

Democrats, who did well in New Mexico during the 2018 mid-term elections, are skeptical.

“Last cycle, Democrats crushed Republicans in New Mexico because voters are fed up with President Trump’s toxic healthcare agenda and broken promises,” said David Bergstein, a communications director for the Democratic National Committee focused on battleground states.

“We take nothing for granted, but this GOP strategy looks like they’re concerned about a realistic pathway to 270 electoral votes,” he added.

Trump won electoral-vote-rich swing states such as Ohio and Florida in 2016, while also picking up Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania from Democrats.

The campaign says it is eyeing more pickups in 2020, including Colorado, New Hampshire, Minnesota and Nevada.

Reporting by Jeff Mason; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Tom Brown

Continue Reading

Politics

California adds Iowa to ‘travel ban’ over refusal to fund gender transitions

Published

on

By

California adds Iowa to 'travel ban' over refusal to fund gender transitions

California announced Monday that it has added Iowa to the list of states on its ever-expanding “travel ban” list because of that state’s new prohibition against funding gender-transition surgeries under Medicaid.

The announcement by state Attorney General Xavier Becerra means that as of Oct. 4, California will no longer offer taxpayer-funded trips to Iowa for any public employee or student at a state-run university.

Becerra’s authority came from a 2016 California law signed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown that bars state-funded travel to other states that undercut LGBT rights. The list already included Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina, Texas, Oklahoma and Mississippi.

WATCH: LIBERAL POLICIES BLAMED FOR WORSENING CALIFORNIA’S HOMELESSNESS CRISIS

Conservatives have called the law ineffective, inconveniencing, possibly unconstitutional and hypocritical. The state’s sports teams have turned to private funding to get around the restrictions, according to The Los Angeles Times.

A homeless woman smokes as she waits for city crews to clean the area near Los Angeles City Hall Monday, July 1, 2019. California is overrun with homeless individuals. (AP Photo/Richard Vogel)

A homeless woman smokes as she waits for city crews to clean the area near Los Angeles City Hall Monday, July 1, 2019. California is overrun with homeless individuals. (AP Photo/Richard Vogel)

“The Iowa Legislature has reversed course on what was settled law under the Iowa Civil Rights Act, repealing protections for those seeking gender-affirming health care,” Becerra said in a statement. “California has taken an unambiguous stand against discrimination and government actions that would enable it.”

The brouhaha began after the Iowa Supreme Court ruled in March that taxpayers could be forced to pay for gender reassignment surgery. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds signed a law effectively overriding that ruling two months later.

At the federal level, the Trump administration has disputed the idea that sex-based discrimination prohibitions under law include protections for gender identity. The Health and Human Services Department, in May, angered progressive advocates with rules that both allowed doctors not to perform certain operations and stated that “gender identity” was not protected under sex discrimination law in health care.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News’ Sam Dorman contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Categories

Recent Posts

Like Us On Facebook

Trending