web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > News and News Media (Page 4)

Rep. Jim Jordan: Dems ‘focused’ on impeaching Trump, ‘not going to stop at anything’

Westlake Legal Group jim-jordan-AP Rep. Jim Jordan: Dems 'focused' on impeaching Trump, 'not going to stop at anything' Victor Garcia fox-news/topic/fox-news-flash fox-news/shows/the-story fox-news/politics/elections/house-of-representatives fox-news/politics/elections/democrats fox-news/person/nancy-pelosi fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/person/alexandria-ocasio-cortez fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/politics fnc article 7b750a55-d1cd-51b1-8208-26beb288b240

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, voiced his frustration with “the squad” Tuesday and reacted to the House of Representative’s vote to condemn President Trump’s controversial remarks.

“I mean they’re so focused on going after this president, so focused on actually getting to impeachment I believe that they’re not going to stop at anything even if it means breaking the rules on the House floor where there is a certain level of decorum that you must maintain,” Jordan said on “The Story with Martha MacCallum.”

The House passed a resolution Tuesday evening condemning Trump’s “racist” remarks this weekend.  The moment was 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.

Jordan defended the president’s comments and his displeasure with the Democrat’s position on the border with Mexico.

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

“I think the president was expressing the frustration that so many Americans feel about what’s going on at the border. Understand this Martha, it was just a couple months ago when the president said this is a crisis and all the Democrats say ‘no, it’s not. It’s manufactured, it’s contrived.’ And they wouldn’t provide the money we needed to actually deal with the situation on the border,” Jordan said.

Jordan also blasted the four congresswomen, noting their past controversial comments saying it was difficult to work with them.

“These are the same people who said abolish ICE, abolish the Department of Homeland Security. I mean these are the radical positions they take,” Jordan said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“These are the same individuals who said that the detention facilities to deal with this influx of amazing numbers we’ve seen on the border. They call these detention facilities ‘concentration camp’s and we’re supposed to figure out a way to work with them. It’s just difficult.”

Fox News’ Gregg Re contributed to this report.

Westlake Legal Group jim-jordan-AP Rep. Jim Jordan: Dems 'focused' on impeaching Trump, 'not going to stop at anything' Victor Garcia fox-news/topic/fox-news-flash fox-news/shows/the-story fox-news/politics/elections/house-of-representatives fox-news/politics/elections/democrats fox-news/person/nancy-pelosi fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/person/alexandria-ocasio-cortez fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/politics fnc article 7b750a55-d1cd-51b1-8208-26beb288b240   Westlake Legal Group jim-jordan-AP Rep. Jim Jordan: Dems 'focused' on impeaching Trump, 'not going to stop at anything' Victor Garcia fox-news/topic/fox-news-flash fox-news/shows/the-story fox-news/politics/elections/house-of-representatives fox-news/politics/elections/democrats fox-news/person/nancy-pelosi fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/person/alexandria-ocasio-cortez fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/politics fnc article 7b750a55-d1cd-51b1-8208-26beb288b240

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Photos of New York teenager’s corpse still being shared online: reports

Photos showing the corpse of a teenager allegedly killed by a man she’d met on Instagram continued to spread online on Tuesday amid efforts to curb their posting, according to reports.

Using the hashtag #yesjuliet, the gory pictures were redistributed widely, including by online posters making light of or celebrating the death of the teen, who had a small social media following in upstate New York.

Others urged people to stop circulating the images, seen on online chat sites including 4chan and Discord.

Discord users who saw the photos Sunday morning alerted police.

IS ‘FLESH-EATING’ BACTERIA HEADING TO A BEACH NEAR YOU?

Instagram spokeswoman Stephanie Otway told Fox News via email that her social media platform had blocked the hashtag #yesjuliet for attempting to spread the images.

But Rolling Stone reported that photos were still being circulated Tuesday, even via Twitter.

“On the Instagram side, we’re using technology that allows us to find other images that are visually similar to the original image posted and automatically remove them when people attempt to upload them,” Otway told Fox News. “When our teams become aware of other images from this incident on other social media sites, we are hashing them as a preventative measure to stop this content from being uploaded to Instagram.”

Utica police said they are working to address the sharing of the images with various Internet platforms.

Utica Police Lt. Bryan Coromato told Fox News via email Tuesday night, “We are working to stay in contact with all platforms where these photos are appearing to have them removed, hoping to keep the exposure to a minimum.”

Westlake Legal Group bianca-devins Photos of New York teenager's corpse still being shared online: reports Frank Miles fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox news fnc/us fnc article 394f99ad-20b9-5e45-b245-2d4c77434677

Bianca Devins was killed, allegedly by a man she’d met recently on Instagram, who then posted photos of her corpse online, police said. (Instagram)

The teen was identified as Bianca Devins, Utica Police Sgt. Michael Curley said. He identified Brandon Clark, 21, as the suspect in her slaying.

Devins and Clark met on Instagram about two months ago, police said.

Initially, they were online acquaintances only, but the “relationship progressed into a personally intimate one,” police said. “They had spent time together, and were acquainted with each other’s families.”

Utica Police told Fox News they were continuing to examine the backgrounds of the pair and their relationship.

Police were also working to nail down the events of Saturday night through early Sunday.

The two, Devins and Carl, allegedly attended a concert together Saturday night in New York City and got into an argument. They arrived back in Utica early Sunday and went to a spot on a dead-end street, according to the police statement.

There, they argued until Clark used a large knife to kill the teenager, police said. Authorities began receiving calls around 7:20 a.m. Sunday, reporting that a man posted on a social media site that he’d killed someone.

The case is being investigated as a murder and attempted suicide, Coromato said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Clark was charged with second-degree murder Monday night, police said. It was unclear whether the suspect had an attorney who could comment on his behalf.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Westlake Legal Group Bianca-Devis Photos of New York teenager's corpse still being shared online: reports Frank Miles fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox news fnc/us fnc article 394f99ad-20b9-5e45-b245-2d4c77434677   Westlake Legal Group Bianca-Devis Photos of New York teenager's corpse still being shared online: reports Frank Miles fox-news/us/crime/homicide fox news fnc/us fnc article 394f99ad-20b9-5e45-b245-2d4c77434677

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens dead at age 99

CLOSEWestlake Legal Group icon_close Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens dead at age 99

Chief Justice John Roberts is doing all in his power to help the Supreme Court not look overtly political as it moves ideologically to the right. USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — John Paul Stevens, the second oldest and third longest-serving Supreme Court justice in history and a Republican president’s nominee who went on to lead the court’s liberal wing, died Tuesday at the age of 99. 

Stevens died in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., of complications from a stroke he suffered on Monday, according to a Supreme Cout of the United States press release. 

 “On behalf of the Court and retired Justices, I am saddened to report that our colleague Justice John Paul Stevens has passed away,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said in the release. “He brought to our bench an inimitable blend of kindness, humility, wisdom, and independence. His unrelenting commitment to justice has left us a better nation. We extend our deepest condolences to his children Elizabeth and Susan, and to his extended family.”

For 35 years, Stevens’ trademark bow tie and gentle mien belied a competitive edge that turned up in his opinions and dissents, most often defending the rights of individuals against the government.

Stevens’ brand of conservatism – a term he insisted still applied until his retirement in 2010 – all but disappeared during his long and distinguished career. He was a proud veteran of World War II and a code-breaker who went on to become a corruption-buster in his native Chicago. President Gerald Ford not only nominated him in 1975 but proudly defended him 30 years later in a letter to USA TODAY.

“I am prepared to allow history’s judgment of my term in office to rest (if necessary, exclusively) on my nomination thirty years ago of Justice John Paul Stevens to the U.S. Supreme Court,” Ford wrote a year before his death.

In lengthy interviews with The New Yorker and The New York Times near the end of his career, Stevens insisted that he had not changed his stripes but had simply withstood the court’s transformation from liberal to conservative. During that time, he came to align more with the court’s liberals than its new brand of conservatives, eventually becoming the senior justice on that side with the power to assign opinions and dissents.

Those dissents often went to himself and were perhaps his greatest contribution. In his last term, he penned a 90-page dissent to the court’s decision in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, which gave corporations the right to spend freely on elections.

“While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics,” he wrote.

And a decade earlier, he led the opponents of the high court’s ruling in Bush v. Gore, which ended the Florida recount and handed the 2000 election to George W. Bush.

“Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear,” he wrote. “It is the nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.”

That concern over impartiality led Stevens to oppose Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation in October 2018, following Kavanaugh’s intemperate performance at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing on allegations of sexual misconduct during his youth. 

Guns, abortion, death penalty 

On other issues, Stevens appeared to be a true liberal. He fiercely opposed Associate Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in 2008 that said the Second Amendment gave Americans the right to keep guns at home for self-defense, later calling for its repeal. And he stood firmly behind women’s right to choose their reproductive future.

“The societal costs of overruling (Roe v. Wade) at this late date would be enormous,” he wrote in a 1992 case. “Roe is an integral part of a correct understanding of both the concept of liberty and the basic equality of men and women.”

Stevens enjoyed his share of victories on the closely-divided court, including on a series of cases during Bush’s administration that gave prisoners at Guantanamo Bay the right to challenge their incarceration in U.S. courts, rather than military tribunals.

And in his last decade, the court also upheld the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law and banned the use of the death penalty against juveniles and those with intellectual disabilities, with Stevens leading the liberal wing against the court’s conservatives.

His greatest regret, he would later say, was his vote in 1976 to reinstate the death penalty after a four-year hiatus. By the end of his time on the high court, he had decided capital punishment was unconstitutional.

Court’s last World War II vet

Born in 1920, Stevens enlisted in the Navy just hours before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and later served out his time there as a cryptographer. His fierce patriotism led him to oppose the Supreme Court’s ruling that burning the American flag was a protected form of speech – a decision even Scalia supported.

Stevens had plans to become an English teacher until he was convinced he should attend Northwestern University School of Law, where he graduated at the top of his class in two years.

Content as a lawyer in Chicago, he was entering his sixth decade when President Richard Nixon named him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in 1970. Five years later, Ford named him to succeed Justice William O. Douglas, whose record 36 years on the high court Stevens nearly matched. He was succeeded by Justice Elena Kagan in 2010.

Over the years, Stevens survived both prostate cancer and heart bypass surgery and was the picture of good health. He would spend nearly half the time the court was in session at his condominium in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., reading briefs on the beach between tennis and golf matches. He swam in the Atlantic Ocean regularly until recent years, when he decided he was no longer safe without someone nearby to help him get out.

A devoted Chicago Cubs fan, Stevens was at Wrigley Field in 1932 when the New York Yankees’ Babe Ruth called his famous shot to center field. He threw out the first pitch at age 85, and attended Game 4 of the 2016 World Series in a red bowtie and Cubs jacket.

‘Maybe I should have had seven’

Since retiring from the court, Stevens maintained an active schedule of public speaking and wrote three books: “Five Chiefs: A Supreme Court Memoir,” “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution,” and “The Making of a Justice: Reflections on My First 94 Years.”

“It’s certainly not easy to get the Constitution amended, and perhaps that’s one flaw in the Constitution that I don’t mention in the book,” he said during a wide-ranging interview with USA TODAY in 2014. While the book called for six new amendments, he mused, “Maybe I should have had seven.”

During the interview, Stevens correctly predicted the court would soon address same-sex marriage and government surveillance programs, and he said the court’s 2008 decision on guns wouldn’t be the final word.

As for bringing cameras into the court, Stevens was a traditionalist. “If you leave it up to members of the court, I don’t think there’s a chance in the foreseeable future,” he said. “The downside is that whenever you bring television into a new arena, you’re never sure what’s going to happen.”

And as for retirement, Stevens reveled in the time for golf, tennis and reading – lots of reading, particularly history.

“It’s amazing,” he said, “how many interesting things there are to learn about the world.”

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/16/john-paul-stevens-supreme-court/546358001/

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens dead at age 99

CLOSEWestlake Legal Group icon_close Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens dead at age 99

Chief Justice John Roberts is doing all in his power to help the Supreme Court not look overtly political as it moves ideologically to the right. USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — John Paul Stevens, the second oldest and third longest-serving Supreme Court justice in history and a Republican president’s nominee who went on to lead the court’s liberal wing, died Tuesday at the age of 99. 

Stevens died in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., of complications from a stroke he suffered on Monday, according to a Supreme Cout of the United States press release. 

 “On behalf of the Court and retired Justices, I am saddened to report that our colleague Justice John Paul Stevens has passed away,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said in the release. “He brought to our bench an inimitable blend of kindness, humility, wisdom, and independence. His unrelenting commitment to justice has left us a better nation. We extend our deepest condolences to his children Elizabeth and Susan, and to his extended family.”

For 35 years, Stevens’ trademark bow tie and gentle mien belied a competitive edge that turned up in his opinions and dissents, most often defending the rights of individuals against the government.

Stevens’ brand of conservatism – a term he insisted still applied until his retirement in 2010 – all but disappeared during his long and distinguished career. He was a proud veteran of World War II and a code-breaker who went on to become a corruption-buster in his native Chicago. President Gerald Ford not only nominated him in 1975 but proudly defended him 30 years later in a letter to USA TODAY.

“I am prepared to allow history’s judgment of my term in office to rest (if necessary, exclusively) on my nomination thirty years ago of Justice John Paul Stevens to the U.S. Supreme Court,” Ford wrote a year before his death.

In lengthy interviews with The New Yorker and The New York Times near the end of his career, Stevens insisted that he had not changed his stripes but had simply withstood the court’s transformation from liberal to conservative. During that time, he came to align more with the court’s liberals than its new brand of conservatives, eventually becoming the senior justice on that side with the power to assign opinions and dissents.

Those dissents often went to himself and were perhaps his greatest contribution. In his last term, he penned a 90-page dissent to the court’s decision in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, which gave corporations the right to spend freely on elections.

“While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics,” he wrote.

And a decade earlier, he led the opponents of the high court’s ruling in Bush v. Gore, which ended the Florida recount and handed the 2000 election to George W. Bush.

“Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear,” he wrote. “It is the nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.”

That concern over impartiality led Stevens to oppose Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation in October 2018, following Kavanaugh’s intemperate performance at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing on allegations of sexual misconduct during his youth. 

Guns, abortion, death penalty 

On other issues, Stevens appeared to be a true liberal. He fiercely opposed Associate Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in 2008 that said the Second Amendment gave Americans the right to keep guns at home for self-defense, later calling for its repeal. And he stood firmly behind women’s right to choose their reproductive future.

“The societal costs of overruling (Roe v. Wade) at this late date would be enormous,” he wrote in a 1992 case. “Roe is an integral part of a correct understanding of both the concept of liberty and the basic equality of men and women.”

Stevens enjoyed his share of victories on the closely-divided court, including on a series of cases during Bush’s administration that gave prisoners at Guantanamo Bay the right to challenge their incarceration in U.S. courts, rather than military tribunals.

And in his last decade, the court also upheld the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law and banned the use of the death penalty against juveniles and those with intellectual disabilities, with Stevens leading the liberal wing against the court’s conservatives.

His greatest regret, he would later say, was his vote in 1976 to reinstate the death penalty after a four-year hiatus. By the end of his time on the high court, he had decided capital punishment was unconstitutional.

Court’s last World War II vet

Born in 1920, Stevens enlisted in the Navy just hours before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and later served out his time there as a cryptographer. His fierce patriotism led him to oppose the Supreme Court’s ruling that burning the American flag was a protected form of speech – a decision even Scalia supported.

Stevens had plans to become an English teacher until he was convinced he should attend Northwestern University School of Law, where he graduated at the top of his class in two years.

Content as a lawyer in Chicago, he was entering his sixth decade when President Richard Nixon named him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in 1970. Five years later, Ford named him to succeed Justice William O. Douglas, whose record 36 years on the high court Stevens nearly matched. He was succeeded by Justice Elena Kagan in 2010.

Over the years, Stevens survived both prostate cancer and heart bypass surgery and was the picture of good health. He would spend nearly half the time the court was in session at his condominium in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., reading briefs on the beach between tennis and golf matches. He swam in the Atlantic Ocean regularly until recent years, when he decided he was no longer safe without someone nearby to help him get out.

A devoted Chicago Cubs fan, Stevens was at Wrigley Field in 1932 when the New York Yankees’ Babe Ruth called his famous shot to center field. He threw out the first pitch at age 85, and attended Game 4 of the 2016 World Series in a red bowtie and Cubs jacket.

‘Maybe I should have had seven’

Since retiring from the court, Stevens maintained an active schedule of public speaking and wrote three books: “Five Chiefs: A Supreme Court Memoir,” “Six Amendments: How and Why We Should Change the Constitution,” and “The Making of a Justice: Reflections on My First 94 Years.”

“It’s certainly not easy to get the Constitution amended, and perhaps that’s one flaw in the Constitution that I don’t mention in the book,” he said during a wide-ranging interview with USA TODAY in 2014. While the book called for six new amendments, he mused, “Maybe I should have had seven.”

During the interview, Stevens correctly predicted the court would soon address same-sex marriage and government surveillance programs, and he said the court’s 2008 decision on guns wouldn’t be the final word.

As for bringing cameras into the court, Stevens was a traditionalist. “If you leave it up to members of the court, I don’t think there’s a chance in the foreseeable future,” he said. “The downside is that whenever you bring television into a new arena, you’re never sure what’s going to happen.”

And as for retirement, Stevens reveled in the time for golf, tennis and reading – lots of reading, particularly history.

“It’s amazing,” he said, “how many interesting things there are to learn about the world.”

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/16/john-paul-stevens-supreme-court/546358001/

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Sets the 2020 Tone: Like 2016, Only This Time ‘the Squad’ Is Here

WASHINGTON — With three days of attacks on four liberal, minority freshman congresswomen, President Trump and the Republicans have sent the clearest signal yet that their approach to 2020 will be a racially divisive reprise of the strategy that helped Mr. Trump narrowly capture the White House in 2016.

It is the kind of fight that the president relishes. He has told aides, in fact, that he is pleased with the Democratic reaction to his attacks, boasting that he is “marrying” the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party to the four congresswomen known as “the Squad.”

His efforts to stoke similar cultural and racial resentments during the 2018 midterm elections with fears of marauding immigrant caravans backfired as his party lost control of the House. But he is undeterred heading into his re-election campaign, betting that he can cast the entire Democratic Party as radical and un-American.

“He’s framing the election as a clash of civilizations,” said Charlie Sykes, a conservative writer who is critical of Mr. Trump. The argument Mr. Trump is making is both strategic and cynical, he said. “They’re coming for you. They hate you. They despise America. They are not you.”

“And if you look at the Electoral College map,” Mr. Sykes added, “the places that will play are the places Donald Trump will need to win the election.”

While the Democrats were voting Tuesday to condemn the president’s attacks against the four women as racist, Trump campaign officials, by contrast, were trying to cast Monday as a landmark day for the Democratic Party — the day that the progressive “Squad” became the de facto leaders of their party.

The four freshman, female members of Congress — Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna S. Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan — hold no formal leadership positions in their party, and none have been on the national political stage for much longer than a year. Yet Republicans, led by Mr. Trump and buttressed by his allies in the conservative media, have spent months seizing on and distorting their more inflammatory statements.

Aides to Mr. Trump’s campaign conceded that the president’s tweets about the four women on Sunday were not helpful, were difficult to defend and caught them off guard. They would have preferred he had not tweeted that the four women, all racial and ethnic minorities, should “go back” to their own countries.

But they said that his instincts were what guided his campaign in 2016, when his attacks on immigrants resonated with alienated white voters in key states. They believe there is political value in having “the Squad” as the new face of their political opponents when Mr. Trump is tracing a path to re-election that runs through Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, where the four women are unpopular.

Brad Parscale, the Trump campaign manager, has been telling people that it is very hard to persuade voters in the current hyperpartisan political landscape.

Mr. Trump’s re-election strategy, instead, is to solidify his base and increase turnout. A major component of that is to portray his opponents as not merely disliking him and his policies, but also disliking America itself.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_158003625_3029d1dd-70d2-4f4f-b4ed-58bbf91dd188-articleLarge Trump Sets the 2020 Tone: Like 2016, Only This Time ‘the Squad’ Is Here United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J tlaib, rashida Race and Ethnicity Pressley, Ayanna Presidential Election of 2020 Omar, Ilhan Ocasio-Cortez, Alexandria Minorities

During a news conference on Monday, Representatives Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez denounced Mr. Trump’s comments.CreditAnna Moneymaker/The New York Times

The strategy is reminiscent of how President Richard M. Nixon and the Republican Party tried to frame their fight with Democrats during the 1972 elections around questions of patriotism and loyalty. Nixon supporters took to using the slogan “America: Love It or Leave It” to cast the Democrats and the growing opposition to the Vietnam War as anti-American — not merely anti-Nixon or anti-Republican.

Pat Buchanan, the populist, conservative former presidential candidate who served as an aide to Nixon, said that by elevating the four, Mr. Trump is trying to set the terms of his re-election fight.

“Rather than let Democrats in the primaries choose his adversary, Trump is seeking to make the selection himself,” Mr. Buchanan said. And if the election is seen as a choice between Democrats like Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and Ms. Omar, Mr. Buchanan added, “Trump wins.”

Mr. Buchanan said he envisioned a scenario in which the battle for the Democratic nomination becomes, in part, a referendum on these four women. “The Democratic candidates will be forced to choose in the coming debates as to whether to back the four,” he said, “or put distance between themselves and the four.”

Only four Republicans and one independent broke and voted with the Democrats to condemn the president’s language in the House vote Tuesday, a stark reminder of just how far the party has come from the period when its leaders believed their political future depended on being a big tent, welcoming to Latino and African-American voters.

Instead, a range of party leaders were pushing messages of patriotism. Some attempted to sidestep the racial implications, while others seemed less concerned about the potential blowback.

“Forget these four,” said Kellyanne Conway, the counselor to the president, in an interview with Fox News on Tuesday. “They represent a dark underbelly of people in this country,” she added. “We are sick and tired of people denigrating that American flag, the American military, veterans and America.”

Others were jumping on the bandwagon, but seeking to reframe and soften the message. Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the third-ranking House Republican, effectively offered Mr. Trump a tutorial in how to go on the offensive without inviting a backlash.

“Our opposition to our socialist colleagues has absolutely nothing to do with their gender, with their religion or with their race,” Ms. Cheney told reporters Tuesday. “It has to do with the content of their policies.”

The election is still more than 15 months away, and eventually the Democrats will have a standard-bearer to define the party in opposition to Mr. Trump. Still, some Democrats worry that criticism of the four congresswomen will resonate with a segment of their voters and independents, who may prove just as uneasy with the policies, and some of the rhetoric, of “the Squad” as they are with Mr. Trump’s own bombast.

The Democrats who fared the best in the midterms were those who played down Mr. Trump while highlighting issues like protecting the health insurance of people with pre-existing conditions. And many of the strategists who are rallying behind former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. believe the party can’t count on increasing turnout among young people and minorities, and needs to lure back voters it lost to Mr. Trump.

In research published in a journal in February, Carlos Algara and Isaac Hale found that among white voters, high levels of racial resentment — measured by asking people whether they agree with statements such as “I am angry that racism exists” — were a better indicator of how someone would vote than party affiliation or ideological beliefs.

Trump campaign officials have expressed confidence in the state of the race. Mr. Trump’s favorability rating is about 46 percent.CreditErin Schaff/The New York Times

They found that there was still a sizable number of white Democrats who harbor relatively high levels of racial resentment, and that is helping Republicans across the board.

Mr. Algara, a political scientist at the University of California, Davis, said that a forthcoming analysis of the 2018 midterm elections found that even without Mr. Trump on the ballot, white Democrats with high levels of racial resentment were likely to vote for Republican candidates.

“The president and the Republican National Committee know that if you prime racial resentment attitudes among Democrats, you’re more likely to win their votes,” he said. “It’s a very effective strategy.”

But many Democrats believe that Mr. Trump has repelled so many voters who gave him the benefit of the doubt in 2016 that he is only digging himself into a deeper hole. “He’s risking everything on a strategy of recreating his exact 2016 coalition, but things have changed,” said Nick Gourevitch, a pollster with the Global Strategy Group, a Democratic firm.

There are Trump supporters who agree that the president’s rhetoric could backfire, and wish he hadn’t gone down this road.

“I think a more successful strategy would be to focus on the growth in the economy and policies and go after moderates and independents,” Anthony Scaramucci, who briefly served as White House communications director, said on CNN on Tuesday.

He added that he found the comments reprehensible and was surprised that more Republicans were not speaking out. He said he found that “astonishing.”

And some Republicans believe that the president is squandering an opportunity to capitalize on what had been a smoldering fight between Ms. Pelosi and the first-term lawmakers and was simply uniting the party.

“It got in the way of a nice little meltdown the Democrats were enjoying and totally unified them,” said David Kochel, an Iowa-based Republican strategist. “I’m just concerned that he took the focus off a really interesting food fight between Pelosi and the Squad.”

On Michael Savage’s radio program on Monday, a caller named Susan dialed in to defend the president’s actions. “He’s said worse things than that, and he’s not a racist,” she said.

Mr. Savage, who was one of the earliest hosts in conservative radio to endorse Mr. Trump but has been more skeptical of late, questioned his caller’s blind faith and also expressed concern that the entire episode was unifying the Democrats.

“I’m starting to get very worried about the true believers out there,” Mr. Savage said, adding that he thought the president needed to stop being so impulsive.

“I think he needs to stop tweeting at 3 in the morning when he’s having a low-blood-sugar attack. He has set our entire cause back.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Retired Justice John Paul Stevens, A Maverick On The Bench, Dies At 99

Westlake Legal Group ap110928030961_wide-823499ac147c32f97f2f8a53a83e813b3645d8b7-s1100-c15 Retired Justice John Paul Stevens, A Maverick On The Bench, Dies At 99

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, then 91, works in his office at the Supreme Court on Sept. 28, 2011. J. Scott Applewhite/AP hide caption

toggle caption

J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Westlake Legal Group  Retired Justice John Paul Stevens, A Maverick On The Bench, Dies At 99

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, then 91, works in his office at the Supreme Court on Sept. 28, 2011.

J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Retired Justice John Paul Stevens, whose Supreme Court opinions transformed many areas of American law during his 34 year tenure, died at the age of 99 in in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., of complications following a stroke he suffered Monday.

Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed Stevens’ death in a statement from the Supreme Court.

“A son of the Midwest heartland and a veteran of World War II, Justice Stevens devoted his long life to public service, including 35 years on the Supreme Court,” Roberts said in the statement. “He brought to our bench an inimitable blend of kindness, humility, wisdom, and independence. His unrelenting commitment to justice has left us a better nation. We extend our deepest condolences to his children Elizabeth and Susan, and to his extended family.”

The court’s statement noted that “he passed away peacefully with his daughters by his side.”

Often called a judge’s judge, Stevens was something of a throwback to a less rancorous era, when, as one writer put it, law and politics were a noble pursuit, not a blood sport.

The quintessential Midwesterner, Stevens was born in Chicago and educated at Northwestern and the University of Chicago. In the Windy City, he earned a reputation as a brilliant lawyer and later appeals court judge.

In 1975, President Gerald Ford appointed him to the U.S. Supreme Court. The nomination drew instant praise from Democrats and Republicans alike, and Stevens, wearing his trademark bow tie, was confirmed in a remarkable three weeks.

‘Accident of history’

Given his lack of political ties, Stevens’ rise was, to some extent, a fluke according to his onetime law clerk, Clifford Sloan.

“It was an accident of history,” Sloan said, adding, “The stars lined up in a way that could not have been possible before that precise moment, and probably could not have been possible after that precise moment.”

A brand new president, Gerald Ford, suddenly had a Supreme Court vacancy to fill, and with the country still reeling from the Watergate scandal, the name of the game was to pick someone of unassailable credentials and no political connections.

Ford assigned his attorney general, Edward Levi, a man also chosen for his lack of political ties, to do the screening. And Levi, the onetime dean of the University of Chicago Law School, quickly fixed his eye on Stevens, a lifelong Republican with no record of political or judicial activism.

Westlake Legal Group ap751128176_custom-62b136e0e6fa1be8ff9015bb74440b17a3b75817-s800-c15 Retired Justice John Paul Stevens, A Maverick On The Bench, Dies At 99

John Paul Stevens, then 55, talks to reporters in Chicago on Nov. 28, 1975, after being nominated by President Gerald Ford to the U.S. Supreme Court. Fred Jewell/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Fred Jewell/AP

Once on the court, Stevens quickly earned a reputation for quality work, and for independence. Over time he was seen as an increasingly respected and influential justice, a man beloved by his colleagues for his decency, his unassuming nature, and his tough inner core.

In his first decade, he was viewed as a center-right justice, but as the composition of the court grew more and more conservative, he found himself referred to as the court’s most liberal member, a moniker he never liked. Indeed, Stevens said forthrightly in a 2010 interview with NPR that it wasn’t he who changed. Rather, it was a court populated by new justices with a conservative ideology that he saw as quite radical.

‘Crafty and genial hand’

Over the years, Stevens authored some 400 majority opinions for the court on almost every issue imaginable, from property rights to immigration, from abortion to obscenity, from school prayer to campaign-finance reform, from term limits to the relationship between the federal and state governments.

As former Solicitor General Ted Olson put it: “The crafty and genial hand of Justice Stevens was everywhere evident.”

The decisions Stevens will likely be remembered for most, though, are those he authored on national security and presidential power. Stevens wrote the court’s 5-to-3 decision repudiating president George W. Bush’s assertion of unilateral executive power in setting up war crimes tribunals at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

And in 2004 he authored the court’s 6-to-3 decision allowing the Guantanamo detainees to challenge their detentions in the U.S. courts. Both had profound implications for the limits of presidential power.

Bush was not the first president to feel Stevens’ sting. He also wrote the opinion for a unanimous court in Clinton v. Jones, the decision refusing to postpone Paula Jones’ sexual harassment lawsuit against President Bill Clinton. In summarizing the decision from the bench in 1997, Stevens dismissed the notion that the suit would burden the presidency.

“In the entire history of the republic,” he said, “only three sitting presidents have been subjected to suits for their private actions. As for the case at hand … there’s nothing in the record to identify any potential harm that might ensue from scheduling the trial promptly.”

Critics thought Stevens’ view naïve — the view of a man who knew nothing of the venality of politics or political enemies. And, indeed, as it turned out, the Paula Jones case led directly to Clinton’s impeachment. But defenders of the decision see it as an example of the highest value in the American legal system — that no person is above the law.

A dissenting voice

While Stevens authored some of the court’s most complex and important decisions, often bringing together under one legal tent justices one might not expect to agree, he also dissented from the court’s rulings more frequently than any other justice during his long tenure on the bench. When the court struck down a Texas law that punished burning the American flag, Stevens — the Navy veteran and winner of the Bronze Star — objected, declaring that “the value of the of the flag as a symbol cannot be measured.”

When the court revived the doctrine of states’ rights, he dissented. In 1997, when the court majority ruled that a key section of the Brady gun-control law unconstitutionally conscripted local law enforcement to conduct background checks of gun buyers, Stevens took the unusual step of announcing his dissent from the bench.

“The basic question is whether Congress, acting on behalf of the people of the entire nation, has the power to require local law enforcement officers to perform certain duties,” he said. “Since the ultimate question is one of power, we have to consider its implications in times of national emergency, matters such as … the mass inoculation of children to forestall an epidemic, or perhaps the threat of an international terrorist.”

Westlake Legal Group ap050914017863_custom-ea708940cecc5735b520ccaae7badbcf22a48bb1-s800-c15 Retired Justice John Paul Stevens, A Maverick On The Bench, Dies At 99

Justice John Paul Stevens, a Chicago native, throws out the first pitch before the Chicago Cubs game Sept. 14, 2005, at Wrigley Field in Chicago. Jeff Roberson/AP hide caption

toggle caption

Jeff Roberson/AP

Stevens’ ultimate revenge came eight years later when he managed to eke out a 5-to-4 majority upholding a federal regulatory scheme under which the federal law making marijuana illegal trumped state laws legalizing it for medical purposes.

“Our case law firmly establishes that Congress has the power to regulate purely local activities when necessary to implement a comprehensive national regulatory program,” he said.

Bush v. Gore

Stevens’ angriest dissent came, without doubt, in 2000, in the case of Bush v. Gore, which effectively ended the presidential race in favor of George W. Bush.

“Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s presidential election,” he wrote, “the identity of the loser is clear. It is the nation’s confidence in the judge as impartial guardian of the rule of law.”

Two other dissents were barn burners, too. His 2008 dissent, when a five-justice majority struck down a local ban on handguns, ruling for the first time that there is a constitutional right for individuals to own a gun.

And his 2010 dissent, when the same five-justice majority struck down a century-old ban on corporate spending in candidate elections. Stevens dissent from the bench in that case – Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission — was passionate and long, lasting more than 20 minutes.

“Simply put,” he said, “corporations are not human beings. In the context of an election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Corporations cannot vote or run for office because they are managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interest may conflict in fundamental ways with the interest of voters. … The rule announced today that Congress must treat corporate speakers exactly the like human beings in the political realm represents … a radical change in the law.”

Behind the scenes, Stevens was often a persuasive and strategic thinker.

In 1992, for instance, he played a pivotal role in the court’s reconsideration of its landmark 1973 abortion ruling, Roe v. Wade. The court was split into three separate factions. Four justices to reverse Roe outright. Three to uphold its core but allow more regulation by the states. And two, including Stevens and Harry Blackmun, to uphold Roe entirely.

Upon receiving the draft of the three middle-ground justices, Stevens suggested a reorganization of their opinion so that he and Blackmun – the author of Roe — could join most of it. That way, he noted, there would be a single opinion that was supported by a court majority of five. The three quickly agreed, and the opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey became the new law of the land.

Just one regret

In his 2010 NPR interview, Stevens said that in his 3 1/2 decades on the court, he really had just one regret: his 1976 vote to revive the death penalty by upholding a Texas death penalty statute.

Stevens said that at the time the court had adopted many rules to limit the death penalty to a narrow category of offenders and to prevent what he called “loading the dice” for the prosecution. But over time, those limiting rules were abandoned.

And so, in his later years, Stevens opposed most death sentences, winning rare but important victories, as when he wrote the court’s opinion striking down capital punishment for the mentally retarded.

He maintained he was undecided about retiring, but in late June of 2010 his lengthy oral dissent in the campaign finance case was marred by verbal flubs. He was so distressed by his performance that he sought a complete checkup by his doctor. There was nothing wrong, but not long thereafter, Stevens, then 90, announced his retirement.

In the years afterward, he continued to be both physically and intellectually active, playing tennis and golf, and writing and speaking about the court and its work. When he thought the court in error, he lobbed critiques — as always, pointed, literate, and respectful. The very qualities that made him such a revered figure in the law.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

John Paul Stevens, Former Supreme Court Justice, Dies At 99

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who led the court’s effort to provide legal protections to prisoners held at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba, died on Tuesday. He was 99 years old. 

Raised to the Supreme Court in 1975 by a Republican president, Stevens became an outspoken critic of President George W. Bush’s efforts to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, the Bush administration argued that enemy combatants held at the off-shore prison were not entitled to access to U.S. courts because they were not U.S. citizens and they were not being held on American soil.

Stevens disagreed. In the 2004 case Rasul v. Bush, he wrote the majority opinion ruling that prisoners at Guantanamo had the right to challenge the legality of their imprisonment before a U.S. court.

Two years later, Stevens wrote the majority opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which ruled that the military commission system set up under Bush violated U.S. and international law. Prisoners at Guantanamo, Stevens held, were protected by a provision in the Geneva Conventions entitling them to “a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized people.” Stevens rejected the Bush administration’s argument that Congress had given the president the authority to convene the military tribunals when it passed an Authorization for Use of Military Force following the Sept. 11 attacks.

Westlake Legal Group 569e86d31f00005000216327 John Paul Stevens, Former Supreme Court Justice, Dies At 99

William Thomas Cain via Getty Images Justice Stevens wrote the majority opinions in two cases in the mid-2000s that checked the executive authority of the George W. Bush administration.

Even after he retired in 2010, Stevens remained a vocal critic of the U.S. government’s policy of indefinite detention without charge at Guantanamo. In 2015, he argued that the government should pay reparations to those detainees who had been approved for transfer out of the prison but remained locked up. He compared the reparations proposal to the government’s eventual decision to compensate and apologize to the Japanese Americans who were incarcerated en masse during World War II.

But those Supreme Court victories have proved to be more theoretical than practical. Over the years, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has repeatedly sided with the government against the Guantanamo detainees. And despite a revamping after Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the military commission system remains dysfunctional.

Guantanamo detention was not the only issue on which the Gerald Ford nominee sided with the court’s liberal wing. But Stevens claimed that he never really considered himself to be left-leaning. Instead, he insisted that the Supreme Court became more conservative during his nearly 35 years there.

“I think as part of my general politics, I’m pretty darn conservative,” he told The New York Times in 2007.

Nonetheless, it’s true that Stevens moved left on several divisive issues, including capital punishment and affirmative action. In 1976, he voted to uphold the death penalty as a constitutional punishment ― something he later said he regretted. In 1978, Stevens joined with the majority in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke to rule that the use of racial quotas in a medical school admissions program was unconstitutional. But he joined the majority in the 2003 ruling Grutter v. Bollinger, which upheld the affirmative action program at the University of Michigan Law School.

Westlake Legal Group 569e878a2a00002c00030ca9 John Paul Stevens, Former Supreme Court Justice, Dies At 99

Bloomberg via Getty Images Stevens (center) attends the inauguration of President Barack Obama in 2009. Standing around him (clockwise from his immediate left) are Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia.

Stevens also wrote a strongly worded dissent in Bush v. Gore, the 2000 case that halted a recount in Florida and ultimately handed the presidency to George W. Bush. That decision would undermine confidence in the Supreme Court, Stevens predicted at the time.

“Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today’s decision,” he wrote. “One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year’s Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation’s confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.”

During his final year on the court in 2010, Stevens wrote a lengthy dissenting opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the landmark decision that allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited sums of money in elections. The majority ruled that limits on political spending infringed on the organizations’ First Amendment rights. Stevens responded that there’s a meaningful distinction between corporations and human beings:

In the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters. The financial resources, legal structure, and instrumental orientation of corporations raise legitimate concerns about their role in the electoral process. Our lawmakers have a compelling constitutional basis, if not also a democratic duty, to take measures designed to guard against the potentially deleterious effects of corporate spending in local and national races.

Westlake Legal Group 569e89051f00002300216332 John Paul Stevens, Former Supreme Court Justice, Dies At 99

Win McNamee via Getty Images Stevens, then the senior justice on the court, waits at the White House to swear in John Roberts as chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005.

Stevens was born in 1920 to a wealthy family in the Hyde Park neighborhood of Chicago. His father, grandfather and uncle were all arrested on embezzlement charges in 1933. His uncle killed himself before a trial, and his father was convicted and then acquitted on an appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court. Stevens would later say that his father’s wrongful conviction taught him that the legal system can make mistakes ― something he would keep in mind as a judge.

“It was an example of the system not working properly. And so I think every judge has to keep in mind the possibility that the system has not worked correctly in a particular case,” he said in a “60 Minutes” interview the year he retired.

In 1941, Stevens graduated Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Chicago, where he played tennis ― he continued to play into his 90s ― and worked on the school’s newspaper, The Daily Maroon. He then joined the Navy, serving as a codebreaker and earning a Bronze Star. After the war, he attended Northwestern Law School, where he graduated with the highest GPA in the law school’s history at that time. He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Wiley Rutledge for a year.

Stevens then returned to Chicago to practice antitrust law. He would also teach law at Northwestern and the University of Chicago before President Richard Nixon nominated him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit in 1970. Stevens served on that court until 1975, when Ford picked him for the Supreme Court.

Westlake Legal Group 569e89f11a00005a00ab0db6 John Paul Stevens, Former Supreme Court Justice, Dies At 99

Bill Clark via Getty Images Stevens was described as a “judge’s judge.”

Ford appointed Stevens at the recommendation of his attorney general, Edward Levi, a former University of Chicago president who knew of Stevens’ evenhanded reputation. Ford sought someone who could be confirmed by a Democratic-controlled Senate. He announced he was nominating Stevens after meeting him only once, at a White House dinner where the two men did not discuss Stevens’ judicial philosophy. Three decades later, Ford said he was willing to let historians judge his entire presidency on his selection of Stevens.

The judge was confirmed to the high court by a Senate vote of 98-0.

On the court, Stevens had a reputation for being a collegial, courteous consensus-builder ― and for wearing a bowtie. Instead of interrupting lawyers during oral argument to ask questions, as is the custom among other justices, Stevens would say, “May I ask you a question?” A former clerk for Stevens told The New Yorker in 2010 that Stevens often waited until his colleagues had asked questions to see how they were approaching a case and who might be the swing votes in the case. He was frequently described as a “judge’s judge.”

After retiring from the Supreme Court at age 90, Stevens kept an active schedule, appearing frequently in public and authoring several books. In one of those books, he proposed six new amendments to the Constitution involving such issues as gun rights, campaign finance, the death penalty and gerrymandering. In 2014, he suggested adding five words to the Second Amendment so that it would say, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

Stevens is survived by three daughters and multiple grandchildren.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Steelers' James Conner reveals details about cancer diagnosis: 'You had about a week left'

CLOSEWestlake Legal Group icon_close Steelers' James Conner reveals details about cancer diagnosis: 'You had about a week left'

James Conner’s journey from star college running back at Pittsburgh, to his cancer comeback, to a burgeoning NFL career has been well-documented

Last week, the Pittsburgh Steelers tailback joined rapper Mike Stud’s podcast “Ya Neva Know: You Know What I Mean?” and revealed details regarding his Hodgkin’s lymphoma diagnosis. Conner said doctors told him he would have had a week to live if the condition had remained untreated. 

“The doctor told me, ‘You had about a week left,'” Conner said. “‘You had about a week at the rate it was growing.’ I think about that [stuff] every day. Like, I got to go hard.” 

Conner, 24, said he had tumors surrounding his heart that were pressing down on the veins inside his chest.

He arrived at Pittsburgh in 2013 and rushed for 799 yards and eight touchdowns during his freshman season before breaking out during his sophomore campaign with 1,765 rushing yards and 26 touchdowns. But in the 2015 opener, he tore his MCL. Doctors discovered the cancer during his rehab. 

“I’m like, this is the worst thing in the world,” he said of his initial knee injury, before realizing that would become a minor issue. “I get some tests done. I got a tumor surrounding my heart. I got tumors growing all around it.

“I remember sitting there like ‘What you gonna do?’ What else is gonna happen at this point? The hardest thing about it was telling my [brothers].”

One of the toughest parts mentally for Conner was the consuming nature of the disease.

“It’s the first thing you think about when you wake up, it’s the last thing you think of before you go to bed,” he said.  

Shortly after being diagnosed, Conner returned to his hometown of Erie, Pennsylvania, to share the news with those close to him. But the disease followed him. He watched “Creed” in theaters, and a plot point is Sylvester Stallone’s iconic Rocky Balboa character developing cancer — non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. 

Conner, who underwent chemotherapy treatments over a six-month period, said he fought through with prayer and watching his own highlights, with the goal of returning to that level one day. He was deemed cancer-free prior to the 2016 season and returned to Pitt for his redshirt junior season the following year. He declared for the NFL draft in January 2017. 

After 32 carries that year, Conner replaced Le’Veon Bell as the Steelers’ featured back last season and rushed for 12 scores and 973 yards, while adding 497 receiving yards on 55 catches. 

Show Thumbnails
Show Captions

If you love talking football, we have the perfect spot for you. Join our Facebook Group, The Ruling Off the Field, to engage in friendly debate and conversation with fellow football fans and our NFL insiders.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Rep. John Lewis on Trump tweets: 'I know racism when I see it'

CLOSEWestlake Legal Group icon_close Rep. John Lewis on Trump tweets: 'I know racism when I see it'

House Democrats urged their Republican colleagues to join them in voting on a resolution condemning President Donald Trump’s tweets that urged four Democratic congresswomen of color to return to their countries. (July 16) AP, AP

WASHINGTON – Saying “I know racism when I see it,” Rep. John Lewis, an icon of the civil rights movement, condemned recent tweets by President Donald Trump’s that told four congresswomen of color to “go back” to their countries,

Lewis, D-Georgia, made the comment  on the House floor ahead of a vote on a resolution condemning Trump’s tweets, which invoke a racist trope. The House voted 240-187 to denounce Trump’s tweets as racist, with only four Republicans and one independent voting with Democrats.

“I know racism when I see it. I know racism when I feel it. And at the highest level of our government, there’s no room for racism,” Lewis said ahead of that vote.

More: House votes to condemn Trump’s racist tweets with support from only 4 Republicans

More: House GOP leaders refuse to denounce Donald Trump’s racist tweets, say the uproar is ‘all about politics’

Over the weekend, Trump told four Democratic congresswomen to “go back” to their own countries. Although he did not name the lawmakers, many believe the president was talking about Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.

Since then, Trump has repeatedly doubled down on his attacks on the four Democrats and denied his tweets were racist. The four congresswomen, known as “The Squad,” held a press conference Monday and called Trump’s remarks “racist,” “xenophobic,” and “bigoted.” 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also called the remarks racist.

Lewis, who –as a young man — helped organized the March on Washington in 1963, said the world is “shocked and dismayed” by Trump’s comments. He added, that some have been victim of “the stain, the pain and the hurt of racism.”

More: Donald Trump to GOP: Don’t show ‘weakness’ by siding with Democrats on condemnation of tweets

More: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez welcomes New Jersey Democrat to ‘The Squad’

“In the 50s and during the 60s, segregationists told us to go back,” he said. “We protested for our rights. They told ministers, priests, rabbis and nuns to go back. They told the innocent, little children, seeking just an equal education, to go back. As a nation and as a people, we need to go forward and not backwards.”

“With this vote, we meet our moral obligation to condemn hate, racism and bigotry in every form,” he concluded.

Like what you’re reading?: Download the USA TODAY app for more

CLOSEWestlake Legal Group icon_close Rep. John Lewis on Trump tweets: 'I know racism when I see it'

Four congresswomen reacted to President Donald Trump seemingly suggesting they “go back” to the countries they “originally came from”. USA TODAY

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/16/john-lewis-trump-tweets-i-know-racism-when-see-it/1751089001/

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Harry Styles Might Play Prince Eric In Disney’s Live-Action ‘Little Mermaid’

Westlake Legal Group 5d2e47e93b00003700dac977 Harry Styles Might Play Prince Eric In Disney’s Live-Action ‘Little Mermaid’

Fresh off the success of his solo album, Harry Styles could soon be making a (literal) splash on the big screen. 

Variety reported Tuesday that the former One Direction singer is being courted by Disney to play Prince Eric in the live-action reboot of 1989 animated classic, “The Little Mermaid.” 

If Styles is cast, he’ll star opposite Halle Bailey as Ariel, a curious mermaid who gives up her singing voice for human legs. According to reports, Melissa McCarthy is being considered for the role of sea witch Ursula, while Jacob Tremblay and Awkwafina are linked to the project as Ariel sidekicks Flounder and Scuttle, respectively. 

And while Styles’ involvement has yet to be made official, his fans responded to the prospective casting with great enthusiasm on social media. 

Styles made his acting debut in 2017’s “Dunkirk,” directed by Christopher Nolan. That World War II drama also starred Kenneth Branagh and Tom Hardy and received eight Academy Award nominations, winning three. 

Until recently, the 25-year-old was in the running to star in director Baz Luhrmann’s as-yet-untitled Elvis Presley biopic. On Monday, it was announced that Presley will be played by Austin Butler, who also beat out contenders Ansel Elgort and Miles Teller for the part.

The new “Mermaid” will feature the classic songs “Part of Your World” and “Under the Sea,” as well as new tunes written by Alan Menken and “Hamilton” creator Lin-Manuel Miranda. 

Given Styles’ well-honed musical chops, it seems likely the team will add a song or two for Prince Eric, who did not sing in the 1989 original.  

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com