Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Politics

Texas Tries To Defund Planned Parenthood

Published

on

The Texas Tribune reports that the State of Texas has served notice to Planned Parenthood that it will defund the organization. The notice gives Planned Parenthood 15 days to appeal the decision to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

Planned Parenthood has indicated that their response will be through the courts rather than through state administrative channels. “Planned Parenthood continues to serve Medicaid patients and will seek a preliminary injunction in an ongoing lawsuit filed in November 2015, following the state’s original threats to take action against Planned Parenthood’s patients,” Yvonne Gutierrez, executive director of Planned Parenthood Texas Votes, said in the Tribune.

The battle over funding in Texas began in October 2015 when Texas officials first gave Planned Parenthood notice of the state’s intent to cut off funding. The original notice gave the organization 30 days to respond or a “final notice of termination” would be issued. The final notice was actually issued more than a year later after there was no formal response from Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit against the Texas defunding effort last year, but the suit lay dormant without the final notice.

The group previously received $3.1 million from Texas in Medicaid funds. About 90 percent of that figure is federal money while the remainder is paid for by the state.

The notice cited a series of undercover videos that allegedly show that Planned Parenthood officials illegally conspired to sell body parts of aborted babies. Planned Parenthood denies the charges and claims that the videos were edited.

“Your misconduct is directly related to whether you are qualified to provide medical services in a professionally competent, safe, legal and ethical manner,” Texas Health and Human Services Inspector General Stuart Bowen wrote in the letter to the group. “Your actions violate generally accepted medical standards, as reflected in state and federal law, and are Medicaid program violations that justify termination.”

Several states have attempted to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood and the group has sued to keep the public money coming in. In recent months, Planned Parenthood has won suits against defunding in Louisiana, Mississippi, Kansas, and Utah.

At issue is a portion of federal Medicare law that allows patients free choice of providers. “Longstanding Medicaid law prohibits states from restricting individuals with Medicaid coverage from receiving their care from any qualified provider,” a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services representative said in a statement in 2015. “Every year, millions of women benefit from critical preventive services, such as cancer screenings, that Planned Parenthood provides. State efforts to restrict women from using qualified providers puts these important health care services at risk.”

If state efforts to defund Planned Parenthood are stymied by federal law, then the problem might be solved by the new Republican Congress. Congressional Republicans tried to defund the group at the federal level, but were blocked by Democrats and the threat of a veto by President Obama.

Next year, President Obama will not be able to block legislation cutting off taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, but Donald Trump’s position on the issue has not been consistent. Throughout much of the campaign, Trump opposed defunding Planned Parenthood, saying the group “does do wonderful things, but not as it relates to abortion.” On several occasions, Trump supported cutting off Planned Parenthood’s funding for abortion, but not defunding the group entirely. In September, Trump did issue an unequivocal statement calling for full defunding of the group.

Under the Hyde amendment, originally passed in 1976, federal funds cannot be used for most abortions. The current version of the amendment contains an exception that does allow Medicaid funds to be used in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is in danger. Due to this law, federal funding for Planned Parenthood is already limited to providing services that are not related to abortion.

The Texas effort is unlikely to succeed due to its conflict with federal law. An effort by congressional Republicans stands a better chance, even with Donald Trump’s mixed record on Planned Parenthood.

Originally published on The Resurgent

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

David W. Thornton is a freelance writer and commercial pilot. He writes from the perspective of a conservative Christian and economic libertarian. He is a graduate of the University of Georgia and Emmanuel College. A native of Georgia, he currently lives in Villa Rica with his wife and two children. An archive of his work can found at his syndicated blog, CaptainKudzu.com. David can be contacted at [email protected]

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Politics

BREAKING!! SHE Was a Spy In The WHITE HOUSE The ENTIRE TIME!! BUSTED!!!

GET HER TRUMP!!!

Published

on

Sources say that former White House staffer and The Apprentice Contestant Omarosa Manigault-Newman may have taped confidential West Wing conversations and now has fears she may be the next one called to testify in special counsel Robert Mueller’s FBI witchhunt.

Sources added that the soon-to-be former assistant to President Donald Trump and director of communications for the White House Office of Public Liaison has held exploratory meetings with several high profile attorneys for potential representation in case such a request does happen. Although Omarosa did resign from her White House post last month, her last day is this Saturday.

Reports confirm she has met with Harvey Weinstein’s former attorney Gloria Allred’s daughter, Lisa Bloom and former Bill Cosby lawyer Monique Pressley, among many others. With a list like this nothing good can come of what this woman will have to say.

A recent unconfirmed report from Life & Style Weekly claimed Manigault-Newman could get upward of $10 million for a tell-all book deal about her time in the White House working with the president.

 

Both the White House and Manigault-Newman did not respond to requests for comment.

Via Fox News:

“Omarosa trying to lawyer up, may have secretly taped White House conversations

President Trump’s former spotlight-seeking staffer Omarosa Manigault-Newman might have secretly recorded private conversations in the White House, The New York Daily News reported Friday.

Manigault-Newman, who abruptly left the White House last year, purportedly “loves” to record meetings and has been lawyering up. She’s held several exploratory meetings with high profile attorneys in recent weeks, including Harvey Weinstein’s former attorney Lisa Bloom and former Bill Cosby lawyer Monique Pressley, the paper reported.

“Everyone knows Omarosa loves to record people and meetings using the voice notes app on her iPhone,” a source told the Daily News. “Don’t be surprised if she has secret audio files on everyone in that White House, past and present staffers included.”

Though White house Chief of Staff John Kelly personally told the former “Apprentice” star that her stint in the White House had come to a close last month, her official last day is Saturday.

Rumors immediately surfaced at the time that Manigault-Newman was dragged out of the White House by Secret Service in a dramatic reality-tv kind of way though the Secret Service has denied those claims.

“Our only involvement in this matter was to deactivate the individual’s pass which grants access to the complex,” the U.S. Secret Service said in a statement.

Fox News sources said Manigault-Newman was given the news of her termination in the White House Situation Room, a subterranean space under the West Wing where electronic and recording devices must be surrendered at the door.

“Where are the pictures or videos?” Manigault-Newman questioned at the time. “If I had confronted John Kelly, who is a very formidable person, it would garner someone to take a photo or a video.”

However, the nature of the Situation Room’s restrictions mean that neither Manigault-Newman nor anyone else would have been able to record her conversation with Kelly even if they had wanted to.

However, a recent ban on personal cell phones in the White House, which came after Michael Wolf’s tell-all book about Trump, was related to Manigault-Newman’s habit of recording conversations, the paper reported.

The Daily News also says the 43-year-old believes she may become a “fixture” in FBI special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Several Trump staffers have already been questioned or subpoenaed on the matter.

During her stint at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Manigault-Newman worked as an assistant to the president and director of communications for the White House Office of Public Liaison, working on outreach to various constituency groups. In that role, she enjoyed a close relationship with Trump and even held her April wedding at Trump’s D.C. hotel.

She purportedly drew the ire of Kelly and other senior staffers when she brought a 39-person bridal party to the White House for a photo shoot.

“Certainly I had more access than most, and people had problems with that,” she said on “Good Morning America.” “People have problems with my 14-year relationship with him.”

Anyone who saw this woman in The Apprentice knows she could be bad news and not to be trusted. There was no valid reason for President Trump to have brought her into his administration. Just like on The Apprentice, she was excellent at getting things done and shutting people down when they went in another direction, but she had no issue whatsoever backstabbing anyone who got in her way, and even those who didn’t. Although it made for some great TV someone like this doesn’t translate well into an atmosphere where loyalty is a must, and President Trump should have known this.

Please share if you want to see Omarosa go away.

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Politics

BREAKING News From DC!!! They Just Tried To Take Out TRUMP!!!

SEND THEM TO GITMO!!!

Published

on

Democratic Congressman Al Green from the great state of Texas took it upon himself to bring forth articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump Friday morning. Although six Democrat congressmen had already previously listed many charges against the president in December articles, including obstruction of justice, a violation of the Constitution’s foreign emoluments clause, a violation of the Constitution’s domestic emoluments clause, undermining the federal judiciary process and undermining the press.

None of these accusations have any basis in kind of reality. Green described the president as a racist and a bigot on Friday, which he said is further proof of the divisiveness of the Trump White House. House lawmakers voted to postpone the impeachment effort for up to two legislative days, as the debate to avert a government shutdown rages in the Senate.

They can postpone all they want. The truth is that they have nothing going on and they know it.

Is Congressman Green wrong? President Trump is not a racist or a bigot. He was not ever called that during very his long career. He’s in his early 70’s and the first time he was called racist was when he began defeating Republican candidates for the Presidency. Democrats utilize the “racist” tactic as a means of battling right-wing believers.  If being racist was illegal then Obama may have been in prison years ago for purveying, indirectly, hatred towards white people, particularly police officers. President Trump is putting Americans first, and that doesn’t necessarily require someone to be racist, it just means they love their country, and ALL of the wonderful, beautiful, legal people who contribute, pay taxes and work hard.

The Democrat party faces an uphill battle with the impending release of the FISA memo. It’s understandable that they desperately grasp at straws to deflect from the fact that it was their party, Barack Hussein Obama, and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who may be tried for treason against our great nation.

 

 

Time Reports:

Critics would need to settle on one argument

The Constitution states that a president can be impeached if convicted of “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Those looking to impeach Trump would need to show he has done something that falls into one of those categories — which requires more evidence.

While treason and bribery are defined by the Constitution and by federal law, “high crimes and misdemeanors” is a less specific charge. Gerhardt said the framers intended it to refer to “political crimes,” including abuses of power or other offenses against the United States. “They don’t have to be technically criminal things — things for which someone could go to prison — but they do have to reach a certain level of seriousness,” he said.

Some of Trump’s critics have argued that his business dealings are in violation of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which prohibits the President from accepting gifts from foreign leaders or governments. Others, including Waters, have argued that the ties between Russia and Trump’s team are signs of wrongdoing. Christopher Peterson, a University of Utah law professor, maintains that the Trump University lawsuits provide grounds for impeachment and thinks there’s already a “fairly solid” case to be made.

But for Trump’s opponents to realistically pursue impeachment, they would likely need to focus on investigating one offense and making a specific, formal accusation of wrongdoing.

There would need to be more evidence
Right now, arguments for impeachment are resting on potentially flimsy claims. 

While there are mounting questions about potential coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russian interests, no concrete conclusions have been reached.

“So far there hasn’t been a clear smoking gun,” Peterson said.

The House would need to decide there are grounds for impeachment
Impeachment proceedings begin in the House of Representatives, where lawmakers can introduce an impeachment resolution or a resolution authorizing an investigation into whether grounds for impeachment exist. If a House committee determines that there are grounds for impeachment, a resolution with a formal accusation of misconduct is presented to the full House for a vote.

In order to impeach a president, that resolution must pass the House by a simple majority. When the President’s own party has control of Congress — as Republicans do now — that’s a difficult bar to clear. If a vote were to take place today, when there are five vacancies in the House, all 193 Democrats and 23 Republicans would need to vote for impeachment in order for it to pass.

“Impeachment is always difficult. It’s designed to be difficult,” Gerhardt said. “That’s the nature of the process, the nature of the constitutional design.”

Only two presidents in U.S. history have been impeached: Clinton in 1998 on charges of lying under oath to a federal grand jury, and Andrew Johnson in 1868 on charges of violating the Tenure of Office Act by firing the Secretary of War. 

The Senate would need to find the President guilty
In order to actually be removed from office, the President must then be convicted by a two-thirds vote in the Senate.

An impeachment trial could backfire. During Clinton’s impeachment proceedings, public opinion of Republicans fell, while Democrats and Clinton experienced a surge. When asked whether they wanted Clinton or the GOP “to have more influence over the nation,” Americans were evenly split between the two in September 1998, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll. But by the time Clinton was impeached in December of that year, the gap had widened significantly. While 60% said they wanted Clinton to have more influence, just 31% said the same for the GOP.

The proceedings also had the unintended effect of sending Clinton’s approval ratings to an all-time high.”

One year into Trump’s presidency and the left wing complaints continue. The leftists often refuse to accept the President and move on to more productive things. Please share if you want this anti-Trump movement end and people can be more productive in politics.

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Politics

BREAKING: THIS IS IT! They’re About To Be Exposed!!!

TSUNAMI OF INFORMATION!!!

Published

on

Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch echoes statements he made on the Fox News program “Hannity” last week. He warned that a “tsunami of information” exposing “Obama, Clinton and their ties to Deep State scandals,” will soon be released and there will be no going back from letting the hands of justice take their course. It seems like the deep state is getting blasted on all fronts these days.

Judicial Watch also announced that a federal judge had ordered the State Department to speed up the release Hillary Clinton’s 72,000 pages of email records. Although these emails were expected to be released in 2020 after the presidential election, they now have a release date of September 28th, 2018. This is before the midterm elections. This is huge.

Sara Carter, who is an investigative reporter, recently confirmed to Fox News host Sean Hannity that the Inspector General’s report on the emails will be released sometime in January, but now believes the deadline may have been quietly pushed back.

 

Via Judicial Watch:

“Judicial Watch: Court Orders State Department to Speed Up Production of Clinton Email Records
JANUARY 11, 2018

State Department Must Complete Review and Release of 72,000 Pages of Records by September 28

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that a federal court judge ordered the State Department to speed up processing and production of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails. U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg recently ordered the State Department to complete processing the remaining documents that were recovered by the FBI in its investigation into Clinton’s illicit email server by September 28, 2018. The Court’s latest order accelerates State’s production rate which would have continued until 2020.

Last year, the FBI uncovered 72,000 pages of documents Clinton attempted to delete or did not otherwise disclose. The State Department had been processing the documents at a rate that would have required Judicial Watch and the American people to wait until at least 2020 to see all the releasable Clinton material.

Prior to the FBI investigation, Clinton repeatedly stated that the 55,000 pages of documents she turned over to the State Department in December 2014 included all of her work-related emails. In response to a court order in another Judicial Watch case, she declared under penalty of perjury that she had “directed that all my emails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or are potentially federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.” Clinton failed to turn over at least 627 emails in that 55,000-page production, further contradicting a statement by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails had been turned over to department.

Judge Boasberg’s November 30 order came in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00687)) seeking:

All emails sent or received by former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in her official capacity as Secretary of State, as well as all emails by other State Department employees to Secretary Clinton regarding her non-“state.gov” email address.

The court also ordered the State Department to identify and explain the basis for all documents withheld in full from both the 55,000 pages of emails turned over by Clinton and the 72,000 pages of records recovered by the FBI which have been processed thus far by April 6, 2018.”

Gateway Pundit‘s Jim Hoft also reported that the Department of Justice turned over some of the 1.2 million documents requested by lawmakers this past week. The documents are related to the Obama Justice Department’s activities during the 2016 election where the Top Secret FISA Memo is now pointing to the fact that the Obama administration did, in fact, try to tamper with our election process in favor of Crooked Hillary Clinton.

According to several other news sources, Congressman Nunes and the House Intel Committee reviewed all FBI and DOJ docs on the dossier including the FISA apps. So we can now say the whole puzzle is finally coming together. Let’s hope Barack Hussein Obama and Crooked Hillary Clinton pay for their crimes and we show the whole world that lawlessness won’t be tolerated in the United States of America.

Please share if you want to see Obama and Crooked Hillary behind bars.

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Subscribe to our newsletter

Become An Insider! Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop on the top breaking news of the day.

Trending