#rep. ted lieu | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 1 year

Text

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) has been accused of calling for civil war in a Presidents Day tweet.

“We need a national divorce,” the extremist Republican tweeted. “We need to separate by red states and blue states and shrink the federal goverrnment. Everyone I talk to says this. From the sick and disgusting woke culture issues shoved down our throats to the Democrat’s traitorous America Last policies, we are done.”

It’s not the first time Greene, who vocally supported the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection on the U.S. Capitol, has floated the idea of secession. In October 2021, she polled her Twitter followers on whether they thought the U.S. should “have a national divorce.” She was similarly condemned at the time.

Civil War broke out in the U.S. in the 1860s, after an alliance of Southern states seceded in an effort to continue the legal enslavement of Black people.

Monday’s tweet attracted backlash from both sides of the political aisle. Utah’s Republican Gov. Spencer Cox slammed her rhetoric as “destructive and wrong and — honestly— evil.”

“We don’t need a divorce, we need marriage counseling. And we need elected leaders that don’t profit by tearing us apart,” Cox tweeted. “We can disagree without hate. Healthy conflict was critical to our nation’s founding and survival.”

Sharing Greene’s tweet, former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) noted that “secession is unconstitutional” and no member of Congress should advocate for it.

Democrats, including 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson and Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), also denounced Greene’s rhetoric.

Others labeled the missive treasonous and traitorous. See some of the other reactions below.

73 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 1 year

Text

Democratic leaders said Wednesday that Republicans are on their own amid the conservative revolt that’s prevented Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) — or anyone else — from becoming the next Speaker in the new Congress.

Heading into this week’s Speaker vote, some lawmakers had floated the notion of finding a “unity” candidate who could win bipartisan support if McCarthy failed to rally a sufficient number of Republicans behind his Speakership bid.

But on Wednesday, a day after a group of conservatives blocked McCarthy’s bid on three separate ballots, Democratic leaders said they’re not ready to bail out the struggling Republicans — at least not yet.

“This is on them,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), the incoming chair of the House Democratic Caucus, said during a press briefing in the Capitol.

Aguilar said he hasn’t been approached by any lawmakers about a search for a potential consensus candidate, nor have Democratic leaders presented that possibility to their rank-and-file members, who are united behind Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the incoming minority leader who got all 212 Democratic votes on Tuesday’s three ballots.

“If there was something that was real, we would look at that,” Aguilar said. “But I haven’t seen any proof that Republicans are willing to engage.”

With Republicans flailing in their effort to seat a new Speaker, outside centrist groups are agitating for lawmakers in both parties to unite behind a moderate figure — perhaps one outside of Congress — to fill the void. This week, former Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), a centrist who is popular on both sides of the aisle, said the idea that he might be that figure is “an intriguing suggestion that I have not rejected.”

Yet even those Democrats who have supported the idea of a consensus candidate don’t appear ready to jump on board. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who has been open to that strategy, is also downplaying that idea this week amid the Republicans’ struggles to seat a new Speaker.

“At the end of the day, this is a Republican mess,” he told CNN Tuesday night. “This is a failure of them to govern. This is their problem to fix.”

“And Democrats stand ready if they want to vote for Hakeem Jeffries,” Khanna added, suggesting a strategy that’s a non-starter among Republicans.

The conservative revolt — and the stalemate it’s created — forced House lawmakers to vote on multiple Speaker ballots for the first time since 1923. And it’s creating a lingering uncertainty about how long the seat will remain empty — and what effect a dysfunctional House will have on the country.

“This is a crisis of the Congress,” Aguilar said. “And it’s a crisis at the hands of the Republican dysfunction.”

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), the incoming vice chair of the Democratic Caucus, echoed that message.

“For one day — it was unfortunate — we can deal with that. But now it gets serious, because we effectively don’t have a House of Representatives,” Lieu said. “This can’t keep on going. You can’t have one branch of the federal government simply not function.”

Lieu said he’s hoping Republicans can find a way to unify behind a Speaker nominee, “because we need Republicans to govern — if they can.”

“If they cannot,” he added, “then they should let Democrats govern.”

88 notes · View notes

shoujoboy-restart · 1 year

Text

Republicans: WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDEN?!? DONT YOU CARE ABOUT THEIR LIFE AND WELL BEING?!?!?

Also Republicans: I'm gonna spend 3 years allowing my child's mental health to deteriorate and ignore the issue until it solves itself because i own their body mind and soul and i know what's best for them even when I literally don't care if they kill themselves, also, wow how selfish to make this situation about you not about me.

A recent comment by a Montana state lawmaker who sponsored legislation to ban gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors has gone viral and drawn backlash online.

"One of the big issues that we have heard today and we've talked about lately is that without surgery the risk of suicide goes way up. Well, I am one of those parents who lived with a daughter who was suicidal for three years," Seekins-Crowe said in her remarks in March. "Someone once asked me, 'Wouldn't I just do anything to help save her?' And I really had to think and the answer was, 'No.'"

"I was not going to give in to her emotional manipulation because she was incapable of making those decisions and I had to make those decisions for her," Seekins-Crowe said. She continued, "I was not going to let her tear apart my family and I was not going to let her tear apart me because I had to be strong for her, I had to have a vision for her life when she had none, was incapable of having none." Seekins-Crowe said that she was scared and "spent hours on the floor in prayer because I didn't know that when I woke up, if my daughter was going to be alive or not. But I knew that I had to make those right decisions for her so that she would have a precious, successful adulthood at that time."

Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., lambasted the GOP state lawmaker on Twitter on Thursday for her remarks

"I vehemently disagree with this speech by GOP state rep Kerri Seekins-Crowe. But you know what she didn’t say? That it should be the government’s role to make personal decisions for families. Why is she now shoving her private decision down other people’s throats?" he wrote.

This is peak authoritarian narcissistic parent behaviour: "it hurts me so much that you are living as an independent individual with your own identity! YOU ARE TEARING ME APART BY LIVING FREELY AND OUTSIDE MY INFLUENCE AND APPROVAL!"

And Ted Lieu made a great point: this woman knows not accepting her child could result in suicide, she's not even truly denying that like most conservatives atrempt to, she does not care if her child killed themselves, but she's such a cowardly cunt sociopath that she can't have blood on her hands by herself, no, she wants her cruelty and narcissism to be enforced by the state so even supportive parent may have to deal with their children suffering, she wants her cruelty to become the norm"

That's exactly what republicans are doing, forcing their ideological motivations and behaviours unto citizen's as a whole so they don't feel alienated for being judged for their inhumane behaviour, they don't want to be on the wrong did soft history, but they sure want to force everyone else to be there to pull focus away from them.

#discourse #politics #transphobia #suicide #suicide mention #abuse #abuse mention #child abuse tw

25 notes · View notes

ms-cellanies · 10 months

Text

Ted Lieu cuts to the truth which is something Gym Jordan is incapable of doing.

16 notes · View notes

jessica-marie-baumgartner · 9 months

Text

Vice President Kamala Harris

President Joe Biden

President Jimmy Carter

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

Rep. Jerry Nadler

Former Rep. John Lewis

Sen. Dianne Feinstein

Biden HUD Secretary Marcia Fudge

Rep. Jamie Raskin

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee

Rep. Barbara Lee

Former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Rep. Ted Lieu

Rep. Raul Grijalva

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre

Former DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe

Former Vice President Al Gore

Rep. Corrine Brown

Rep. Maxine Waters

Former Rep. Alcee Hastings

President Bill Clinton

Former Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson

President Barack Obama

Former Presidential candidate Jesse Jackson

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

Sen. Sherrod Brown

Sen. Debbie Stabenow

Rep. Danny Davis

Former Sen. Ted Kennedy

Biden Climate Czar John Kerry

Teresa Heinz (John Kerry’s wife)

Former Rep. Stephanie Tubbs

Sen. Bernie Sanders

Rep. Lacy Clay

Former DNC Chair Howard Dean

Sen. Dick Durbin

Former Sen. Harry Reid

Georgia Gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams

Sen. Corey Booker

These are all the democrats who openly and repeatedly denied election results between 2000 and 2018. I've yet to see any of them indicted for "conspiracy" or "obstruction."

#election integrity #election deniers #trump #president trump #donald trump #president donald trump #trump indictment #2020 election #2024 election #election interference #two tiered justice system

6 notes · View notes

kp777 · 2 years

Link

By Julia Shapero

Axios

July 11, 2022

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) called on the Senate on Monday to say whether Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh lied under oath about their views on Roe v. Wade.

The big picture: Gorsuch and Kavanaugh both said during their Senate confirmation hearings that they viewed Roe v. Wade as settled precedent. The justices' statements have since come under increased scrutiny after they joined the majority opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade last month.

Driving the news: Ocasio-Cortez, along with Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), asked the Senate to issue a finding on whether Kavanaugh and Gorsuch lied under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"Multiple Supreme Court Justices misled the American people during their confirmation hearings about their views on Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood," they said in the letter to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. "At least two of them, Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, directly lied to Senators."

"We respect the right of individual Justices to have their own views on various constitutional issues," they added. "But we cannot have a system where Justices lie about their views in order to get confirmed. That makes a mockery of the confirmation power, and of the separation of powers."

Background: Ocasio-Cortez has expressed her concerns about Gorsuch and Kavanaugh multiple times since the Roe ruling.

The congresswoman told "Meet the Press" in late June that impeachment should be "very seriously considered" if the justices lied during their confirmation hearings.

She also sarcastically tweeted "[t]he least they could do is let him eat cake" on Friday after Kavanaugh was forced out of a restaurant by abortion rights protesters.

#u.s. supreme court #lying under oath #neil gorsuch #brett kavanaugh #u.s. senate #senate judiciary committee

39 notes · View notes

karagin22 · 1 year

Text

5 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 2 years

Text

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday said that the Supreme Court has “gone rogue” after it overturned Roe v. Wade last month, a move that upset Democrats who say several justices had not been forthcoming about their feelings regarding the 1973 landmark abortion rights decision during their confirmation hearings.

Ocasio-Cortez said the move from the conservative wing means a number of changes should be considered for the high court.

“I believe impeachment should be on the table. I believe court expansion should be on the table. I believe that ethics rules should be on the table. I believe that recusal requirements should be on the table,” Ocasio-Cortez told reporters.

“I think all of it should be considered right now. And we shouldn’t be putting any tools out because of … the degree of which this court has gone rogue.”

Ocasio-Cortez also noted one Supreme Court Justice whom she believed should be impeached.

“I believe that Clarence Thomas should be impeached without a shadow of a doubt,” the New York Democrat said.

Ocasio-Cortez noted a letter that she and Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) wrote to Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) asking Democrats in the upper chamber to take a position on whether Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, who were also a part of the majority opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade, had lied under oath during their confirmation process.

Not all Senate Democrats, however, are on board with considering impeachment against some of the Supreme Court Justices that joined the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

“I don’t think it’s realistic,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) told “Fox News Sunday” over the weekend regarding impeaching Thomas. “I think it’s a mistake as to whether he’s going to be impeached. It’s not realistic, but [Thomas] should show good judgment. If this court is going to be credible, it has to be as apolitical as possible.”

Responding to Durbin’s apprehension about considering impeachment against Supreme Court Justices, Ocasio-Cortez called it a “crisis of legitimacy.”

“Here’s where I think there’s a very serious issue: Is the United States Senate about to establish a new precedent that it is now acceptable and there will be no consequence for a nominee to lie to duly-elected members of the United States Senate in order to secure a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land?” she asked.

125 notes · View notes

tomorrowusa · 11 months

Photo

^^^ from Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA-36)

In addition to being a US House member, Rep. Lieu is a retired US Air Force colonel.

News from hotly contested war zones is seldom clear until the dust settles. But based on past performance, the Kremlin usually has the credibility of George Santos.

Inside the Kremlin's Year of Ukraine Propaganda

One thing the Kremlin can truthfully take credit for is the “the firehose of falsehood” method of propaganda.

Ukraine made advances both north and south of Bakhmut about a week ago. That isn’t the sort of thing that is just done randomly. 😉

2 notes · View notes

burritosandpeppermint · 1 year

Text

"The Financial Times reported Sunday that scientists in the California-based Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) had achieved a "net energy gain" from an experimental fusion reactor."

Woo hoo! Yeah! California!

#i don't really care that much about sports #but i'm still a proud californian #and science is cool #go home team

6 notes · View notes

adittyofdittos · 9 days

Text

I will pray our criminal justice system treats Trump just like any other criminal defendant.

From Rep Ted Lieu (D-CA) (Incidentally my parent’s rep in the house) replying to a tweet by Franklin Graham (Billy Graham’s son) reported in this article from RawStory.

While the article is generally a slam on Graham for asking people to pray for Trump by mostly showing people praying for his punishment instead, Lieu’s reply is what I think should be the real one.

More than for a person who you believe to be good to be exonerated (there’s no h in exhonerated??? I’ve been living a lie!!) or for a person you believe to be bad to get punished, the ideal for me is “Liberty and Justice for All.” That the system should work regardless of anyone’s feelings about the matter.

That’s not to say that I don’t personally believe Trump is guilty and don’t think it’s vital to the health of our nation that he be convicted and punished for his crimes.

It’s to say that I, no matter how convinced I am that I am correct, should not have the right to decide that. It’s to say that policy that cannot be individualized should not be individualized. It is no more morally correct for me to pray for Trump to go to Hell than it is for Graham to pray for heaven’s aid.

Because it’s not really about Trump. Or this particular case. Or even me ;) They’re cyphers: representatives of government, law, justice, trust and how they are executed. They’re stand ins for whether we believe in a greater power - be that divine, administrative, or both - operating for the greater good.

Trump only gets what he doesn’t deserve if the system fails. If the system works, not only does he get what he deserves, whatever it is decided that is, so does everyone else. And that’s a much more just outcome than what I or you may want in regard to one person, no matter how socially influential.

So I think this is the correct prayer. Let Justice be done. Let the system work for the benefit of all. May it neither elevate the privileged above the law nor crush the disenfranchised beneath it. Let the law be merciful to the deserving, protective of the weak, righteous against the iniquitous, wise enough to tell the difference between all of that, and fair enough to act in accordance with that wisdom. May all Defendants get a fair trial.

Do I think that will happen?

There’s not exactly the most promising history of fair treatment. But things improve. I may not be as all in on Hope as Disney but there’s a place for it. It’s even important. So it’s everything else to try to make our system fairer AND a prayer on top. Because Justice can always use more help. It is eternally aspirational.

It’s simply that it isn’t Justice if it does what I or you personally want.

Justice has to be for all.

The people we like. The people we don’t. Especially the people we don’t. Otherwise it’s just a pretty bandaid for our cruelty. See, I am allowed terrible things because that one deserves it.

And I will shut up now with my Sunday Saturday sermonizing.

1 note · View note