LGBTQ Activists Cartoons

LGBTQ activists held "dance party" protest outside Ivanka Trump's D.C. home

Soros

LGBTQ activists held "dance party" protest outside Ivanka Trump's D.C. home

Hundreds of people protested in front of Ivanka Trump’s Washington D.C. home on Saturday for “climate justice.”
LGBTQ activists hosted a “dance party” protest to “send the clear message that our climate and our communities matter,” a detailed Facebook event said.
A crowd of protesters took to the streets with signs to protest President Donald Trump’s administration’s stance on climate change, the Daily Mail reported.
“The entire Trump Administration has shown a blatant disregard for our planet and its inhabitants,” the event page read. “Also, in case you hadn't heard, Trump revoked protections for LGBTQ government employees and removed LGBTQ questions from the census.”
Barricades were put up in front of Trump’s home by police, although it was uncertain if she and her family were home during the protest, WUSA reported.
Police told WUSA that the event had ended peacefully.

New York lawmakers miss deadline to pass state budget

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo a Democrat.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and state lawmakers missed the April 1 deadline for passing the state budget by the start of the new fiscal year and were still far apart on policy issues on Saturday.
Mr. Cuomo issued legislators a new deadline: Pass the budget by midnight on Sunday or he will pass an extender of the current budget instead.
Mr. Cuomo’s extender would last until May 21, when the U.S. Congress is expected to pass its budget resolution.
The governor said this would have the benefit of giving lawmakers more clarity about potential cuts to New York from a new Republican congress and president.
In a statement minutes after midnight on Saturday, Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, said the basic outlines of the roughly $160 billion spending plan for the new fiscal year were resolved, but policy issues that lawmakers intend to pass with the budget weren't.
Two obstacles were a measure to remove minors from the criminal-justice system and a replacement to 421-a, the expired law that gave real-estate developers tax breaks in exchange for including affordable housing in their real-estate portfolios.

Senate showdown, will GOP use 'nuclear option,' to confirm Gorsuch?

Sen. Mitch McConnell details efforts to replace ObamaCare

 “There were too many shaky hands holding the lighters near too many fuses.” – Stephen King, The Drawing of the Three
It’s always a numbers game on Capitol Hill. Which side possesses the most votes. After all, that’s the essence of democracy.
The Founders feared direct democracy -- and various other forms of republican democracy. So they tempered the power of the majority.
Unlike the House,  the Senate was the deliberative body. There, the minority could often prevail -- entailing a supermajority to shut down filibusters.
Neutralizing a Senate filibuster used to take 67 votes (two-thirds). The Senate dropped that to a three-fifths requirement in 1975. However, a two-thirds vote is still necessary to alter the Senate’s rules.
This is why the numbers game is so important. It’s clear that a majority of senators want to confirm Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. But it’s doubtful that a supermajority of 60 senators are willing to shut off debate on President Trump’s nomination.
This brings us to the so-called “nuclear option,” a fundamental obliteration of the Senate’s structure requiring a supermajority to overcome a threatened Democratic filibuster of Gorsuch.
It’s unprecedented for the Senate to successfully filibuster a Supreme Court pick. Defeat a nominee on the floor? Yes. Look at what happened to President Reagan’s nomination of Robert Bork for the high court in 1987. Bork scored a scant 42 yeas when 51 ayes were necessary for confirmation. Require a Supreme Court nominee to secure 60 votes to shut off the filibuster before confirmation? Well, that’s a mixed bag.
Neither of President Obama’s selections for the court -- Justices Sonia Sotomayor nor Elena Kagan -- faced a “cloture” vote to end a filibuster. But the Senate confirmed both picks with supermajorities. Sotomayor secured 68 yeas. Kagan marshaled 63 yeas.
However, when President George W. Bush tapped Justice Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court in 2006, Senate Democrats (then in the minority) demanded a cloture vote to end a filibuster. Alito scored 72 yeas on the procedural vote. The Senate then confirmed Alito, 58-42.
This is what riles Senate Republicans. The GOP sports only 52 members right now. Two Democrats have announced their support for Gorsuch: Sens. Joe Manchin, West Virginia, and Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota.
Both are moderate Democrats in red states who face potentially brutal re-election campaigns next year. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., insists that if someone is going to sit on the High Court for life, they should command 60 votes on the Senate floor.
“It’s going to be a real, uphill climb to 60,” Schumer predicted for Gorsuch.
“It’s the most powerful court in the world,” said Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa. “If you’re seeking to be an associate justice on the Supreme Court, you ought to be able to rack up 60 votes. I don’t think that’s unreasonable.”
Republicans know they face a deficit to defy the Democrats’ filibuster of Gorsuch. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is unwavering.
“We are going to get Judge Gorsuch confirmed,” he said. “It will really be up to (Democrats) how the process to confirm goes moving forward.”
Embedded in McConnell’s remark is a gambit to deploy the “nuclear option” to confirm Gorsuch. After all, it’s about the numbers. So if McConnell doesn’t have the numbers, he’s willing to do something drastic to promote Gorsuch.
“If the nominee cannot get 60 votes, you don’t change the rules,” Schumer argued. “You change the nominee.”
The 60-vote threshold is dubious for Supreme Court justices. All recent justices proved they could command 60 votes at some point in the process. But the ceiling for Gorsuch so far is at 54 votes.
So what exactly is the nuclear option?
Schumer is wrong about one thing. The nuclear option is not a rules change. It’s a change in Senate precedent. The chamber currently has 44 rules. But as mentioned before, altering those rules requires 67 votes, seven more votes than necessary to invoke cloture and stop debate on Gorsuch’s nomination.
So with only 52 Republican senators, McConnell can’t switch Senate rules. But he could set a new precedent.
See, the Senate also operates on precedent -- a set of parliamentary criterion based on things that happened before. So, if you can’t change the rules, perhaps establish a new precedent.
Democrats opened Pandora’s Box on the nuclear option in November 2013 when they held the majority in the Senate. Senate Democrats didn’t have 67 votes to change the chamber rules. But then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, enacted a new precedent of how many votes are necessary to extinguish filibusters on executive branch nominees except Supreme Court picks.
As we say, it is a numbers game. Reid had the numbers -- a simple majority -- to form a new precedent for those types of nominees.
It’s a numbers game today, too. McConnell has 52 Republicans on his side. He could conceivably launch the nuclear option to constitute a new precedent to require but a simple majority to end filibusters of Supreme Court nominees -- rather than the old bar of 60 votes. All McConnell needs are 51 Republicans to go along to with his gambit.
McConnell must be sure he has at least 51 of his 52 members willing to do the deed. Fifty yeas would suffice if Vice President Pence comes round to break the tie. It’s unclear whether McConnell has those votes. Some Republican senators are leery of re-opening Pandora’s Box to authorize a new precedent. Senators are generally reluctant to change the chamber’s long-standing traditions for a quick-fix today.
One school of thought is that McConnell could let the issue percolate over the upcoming, two-week Easter and Passover recess. This could gin up support among Republicans or even let the Democrats marinate for a while about the consequences.
But Fox is told by multiple, senior Republican sources that should the Democrats not help Republicans count to 60 on Gorsuch, McConnell has the votes on his side to deploy the nuclear option. It’s likely this will all go down on Thursday with a prospective confirmation vote on Friday.
It likely looks like this:
The Senate Judiciary Committee meets Monday to vote the Gorsuch nomination out of committee and dispatch it to the floor. Actual debate on Gorsuch begins in the Senate on Tuesday. Also on Tuesday, McConnell files a “cloture petition” to end debate on Gorsuch.
By rule, cloture petitions require an intervening day before they’re “ripe” for a vote. So a vote to end debate on Gorsuch likely comes Thursday.
Let’s say Gorsuch fails to get 60 votes to end the filibuster Thursday. That’s where McConnell trips the nuclear wire. From a procedural standpoint, the Senate must be in what’s called a “non-debatable” posture.
In other words, a failed cloture vote is just that. There’s no more debate. This parliamentary cul-de-sac is important because it’s practically the only procedural locus in which McConnell could initiate the nuclear option. Any other parliamentary disposition prevents McConnell from going nuclear. But this unique place -- following a failed cloture vote -- is practically throbbing with political isotopes.
McConnell could switch his vote to halt debate so he winds up on the “prevailing side” of the cloture vote. In other words, the Democrats won. The “nay” side prevailed. By briefly siding with the Democrats since they won that round, grants McConnell the right to demand a revote on that same issue.
This is where McConnell lights the fuse.
All McConnell must do is make a point of order that the Senate needs only a simple majority (51 votes) to end debate on a Supreme Court nominee. Naturally, whichever GOP senator is presiding over the chamber would rule against McConnell. After all, that’s not the precedent.
But McConnell would then appeal that ruling, forcing another vote. At that stage, the Senate is voting to sustain the ruling of the presiding officer. But if 51 senators vote no (remember, McConnell wants to establish a new precedent), the Senate has rebuked the chairman’s ruling and set a new precedent. Only 51 yeas are then necessary to break a filibuster on a Supreme Court nominee.
That is the nuclear option.
McConnell could summon Pence to preside over the Senate should he have two defectors on his side. Bizarrely, it’s possible Pence could rule against McConnell’s point of order -- adhering to Senate precedent. But Pence could then vote to break a 50-50 tie to establish a new precedent should it come to that.
The Senate would then re-take the failed cloture vote on Gorsuch. Presumably Gorsuch secures 51 yeas to end debate. And then Democrats, fuming at the GOP’s political artifice, would require the Senate to burn off 30 hours before a final vote to confirm Gorsuch on Friday night.
The Senate usually grants opponents of an issue 30 hours of debate once the chamber votes to end debate.
Prepare for nuclear fallout.
Republicans will claim that Democrats opened Pandora’s Box with their version of the nuclear option in 2013. Democrats will counter they had to because of Republican filibusters back then. Republicans will declare they had no other choice but the nuclear option because Democrats filibustered Gorsuch.
Democrats will contend it never should have come to this. The GOP should have granted President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland a hearing.
Regardless, 51 votes will be the new precedent to break filibusters on Supreme Court picks. This is the nuclear option. It may be inevitable. As Stephen King wrote, “there were too many shaky hands holding the lighters near too many fuses.”

Trump vs. Freedom Caucus: President takes names, starting with Amash

Freedom Caucus member talks next efforts to repeal ObamaCare

The list of House Freedom Caucus members being targeted by President Trump for sinking Republicans’ ObamaCare overhaul plan grew Saturday when the White House singled out Michigan GOP Rep. Justin Amash for a primary defeat.
“Donald Trump is bringing auto plants & jobs back to Michigan,” tweeted White House social media Director Dan Scavino Jr. “@justinamash is a big liability. #TrumpTrain, defeat him in primary.”
Most of the ultra-conservative caucus’ roughly 35 members withheld their support for the Republican House leadership’s overhaul plan, which kept it from even getting a final vote in the GOP-led chamber, despite Trump’s rigorous dealmaking efforts.
The president invited caucus leaders to the White House and met with them and others in the House Republican conference on Capitol Hill in the days before the scheduled final vote.
Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., purportedly agreed to cancel the vote, instead of forcing non-supporters to cast “no” ballots on the record. However, Trump still appears bent on political revenge, with the White House suggesting support for a more moderate conservative against Amash in next year’s midterm elections.
“The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don't get on the team, & fast,” Trump tweeted Thursday. “We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!”
Also that day, The Post and Courier newspaper in South Carolina reported that Trump dared Freedom Caucus member Rep. Mark Sanford, R-S.C., to vote against the overhaul bill.
Sanford, who with Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul has a competing ObamaCare replacement bill, said White House Budget Director Mick Mulvaney told him: "The president asked me to look you square in the eyes and to say that he hoped that you voted ‘no’ on this bill so he could run (a primary challenger) against you in 2018," according to the paper.
The Freedom Caucus members who opposed the House leadership plan say it doesn’t go far enough to repeal and replace ObamaCare, and they largely appear entrenched in that position.
“Trump admin & Establishment have merged into #Trumpstablishment,” Amash, a Tea Party favorite seeking a fourth term, tweeted Saturday in response to Scavino’s tweet. “Same old agenda: Attack conservatives, libertarians & independent thinkers.”
Previously, Amash had tweeted that instead of draining the swamp, Trump was being sucked into it.
Amash and Stanford are not the first Freedom Caucus members on Trump’s political hit list. Trump told caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, R-N.C., at the closed-door Capitol Hill meeting: “Oh Mark, I'm coming after you.”
Daniel Jacobson, a former Obama White House lawyer, argued Saturday that Scavino's tweet violates federal law about mixing official business with politics.
"This violates the Hatch Act. WH staff can't use an official or de facto govt Twitter acct (which this is) to call for defeat of a candidate," he tweeted.

Indebted to Ohio, Pence returns to vow ObamaCare fight 'ain't over'

Vice President Pence said Saturday in Ohio that President Trump’s effort to overhaul ObamaCare “ain’t over yet,” trying to assure voters in the battleground state that he and Trump will make good on their winning campaign promise.
Trump suffered a major defeat in late-March when the GOP-led House could not pass an overhaul bill.
However, the president now appears willing to resort to more hardball tactics, including negotiating next time with Democrats and backing 2018 primary challenges against members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus who led the opposition to House leadership’s overhaul bill.
Texas Republican Rep. Blake Farenthold later Saturday expressed concerns on Fox News about both tactics, saying that working with Democrats will likely result in a more liberal-leaning bill, which will further alienate more GOP conservatives in Congress.
“If you move further to the left, you’re not just going to lose the Freedom Caucus,” he said. “You’ll lose people like me.”
Farenthold also suggested a recent White House tweet about backing GOP primary challenges and courting congressional Democrats is “the wrong way” to get overhaul legislation passed.
“It ain’t over yet,” Pence said about ObamaCare during a roundtable discuss Saturday at Dynalab, in Reynoldsburg, Ohio, that largely focused on jobs. “You can take that to the bank.”
“I’m really here to ask one simple question,” Pence also told the small group that including Ohio GOP Sen. Rob Portman, whose support for Trump helped him become the first Republican presidential candidate to win the state since 2004.
“With this group right here, you have a car (dealer), a flag maker and a pizza maker,” Portman said. “You have a great group of entrepreneurs here.”
Pence said that the administration has created about 500,000 new jobs in its roughly first 10 weeks and that Trump remains focused on tax reform and improving the country’s infrastructure.