Who is she?
Trump Sunday School
Yea, my lazy butt looked it up…
Matt GAETZ is still under investigation for ethics violations…
Statement Regarding the Matter of Representative Matt Gaetz
Jun 18, 2024 Press Release
Pursuant to Committee Rule 7, the Committee on Ethics (Committee) determined to release the following statement:
On April 9, 2021, the Committee announced it had initiated a review into allegations that Representative Matt Gaetz may have engaged in sexual misconduct and/or illicit drug use, shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, misused state identification records, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or accepted a bribe, improper gratuity, or impermissible gift, in violation of House Rules, laws, or other standards of conduct. The Committee deferred its consideration of the matter in response to a request from the Department of Justice (DOJ). In May 2023, the Committee reauthorized its investigation after DOJ withdrew its deferral request.
There has been a significant and unusual amount of public reporting on the Committee’s activities this Congress. Much of that reporting has been inaccurate. The Committee’s investigations are conducted confidentially, but the Committee’s confidentiality rules do not prohibit witnesses from disclosing information about the Committee’s requests or conversations with Committee investigators. The Committee is confident in the integrity of its process.
Representative Gaetz has categorically denied all of the allegations before the Committee. Notwithstanding the difficulty in obtaining relevant information from Representative Gaetz and others, the Committee has spoken with more than a dozen witnesses, issued 25 subpoenas, and reviewed thousands of pages of documents in this matter. Based on its review to date, the Committee has determined that certain of the allegations merit continued review. During the course of its investigation, the Committee has also identified additional allegations that merit review.
Accordingly, the Committee is reviewing allegations pursuant to Committee Rules 14(a)(3) and 18(a) that Representative Gaetz may have: engaged in sexual misconduct and illicit drug use, accepted improper gifts, dispensed special privileges and favors to individuals with whom he had a personal relationship, and sought to obstruct government investigations of his conduct. The Committee will take no further action at this time on the allegations that he may have shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, misused state identification records, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or accepted a bribe or improper gratuity.
The Committee notes that the mere fact of an investigation into these allegations does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred. No other public comment will be made on this matter except in accordance with Committee rules.
https://ethics.house.gov/press-releases/statement-regarding-matter-representative-matt-gaetz
We are not prophets…
PDJT is especially Orange 🍊 today!
Orange Man Bad…Trolling Lamestream Media after ‘Nazi Rally’ where, Jews, blacks, Hispanics, Hindu, Slovenian and many others spoke, attended or entertained…
Isn’t that more like The Rule of 72?
Great song By Danny!
The Art of The Surge
PDJT is so Great at Merch!!
Trump Tower LV Gift Shop Over Flows…
I want a few of their Christmas Ornaments!
1803
1803
Aug 03, 2018 2:02:36 AM EDT
Q !CbboFOtcZs ID: 33feae No. 2425781
How do you safeguard the integrity of our elections from domestic & foreign criminal actors?
How do you utilize the Russia Russia narrative to knock out decades old election corruption?
https://mobile.twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1025191775756079104
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-strengthening-security-elections/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wh
Why are D’s opposed to cleaning up voter rolls?
Why are D’s opposed to imposing VOTER ID LAWS to further safeguard our elections?
Why oppose basic ‘common sense’ methods that are currently deployed WW?
Logical thinking.
Corruption.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/04/trump-sounds-call-for-voter-id-laws-to-fix-rigged-system-after-nixing-fraud-panel.html
Q
Virginia asks Supreme Court to allow voter rolls purge before election
Virginia election officials on Monday asked the Supreme Court to block a ruling by a federal judge that would bar them from reviving a program put in place in August by the state’s Republican governor intended to remove suspected noncitizens from the state’s voting rolls.
U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles on Friday ordered the state to restore the registration of more than 1600 people whom it had taken off the rolls as part of the program, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit on Sunday turned down the state’s request to step in.
In an executive order on Aug. 7, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin ordered state election officials to expedite the use of data from the state’s department of motor vehicles to identify and cancel the voter registration of suspected noncitizens unless they could verify their citizenship within 14 days.
A federal court found that that the database flagged and canceled the registration of at least some eligible citizens and that those voters were unaware of the fact that they were no longer able to vote.
The Biden administration, along with civic and immigrant rights groups, went to federal court in Alexandria, Va., on Oct. 11 to challenge the voter-purge program. They argued that it violated the National Voter Registration Act, a 1993 law that generally bars states from “systematically” removing ineligible voters within 90 days of a federal election.
In an order on Oct. 25, Giles barred the state from “continuing any systematic program intended to remove the names of ineligible voters from registration lists less than 90 days before the November 5, 2024, federal General Election,” although she left open the possibility that the state could still remove some voters on a case-by-case basis – for example, those with criminal convictions and those who have died. She also ordered the state to restore the registration of voters whom it had removed from the rolls as part of the program.
The state went to the 4th Circuit, asking it to put Giles’ order on hold. But a three-judge panel made up of two Obama appointees and one Biden appointee denied (as relevant here) that request on Sunday, writing that it was “unpersuaded” that Virginia’s program complied with the NVRA.
Virginia then came to the Supreme Court on Monday morning, asking the justices to put Giles’ order on hold by Tuesday.
Erika Maley, the state’s solicitor general, told the court that Giles’ order rests on “a misinterpretation of the NVRA,” because the law’s “quiet period” provision does not prohibit the removal of noncitizens, who were never “eligible” to vote in the first place. “States are free to systematically remove noncitizens, as well as minors and fictitious persons, at any time, including within 90 days of an election, without running afoul of the NVRA.”
But even if the “quiet period” provision did prohibit a “systematic” program that removed noncitizens, Maley continued, its program still would not violate the law because it is based on an “individualized process” that “begins with a personal attestation of noncitizenship” on forms filed with the Virginia DMV and “ends in the removal of that person from the voter rolls only when he is sent two individualized letters offering opportunities” to correct any mistakes about citizenship status.
The state and the public will be permanently harmed if Giles’ order is allowed to remain in effect, Maley insisted, both because the state will be unable to enforce its election laws and because of the prospect that noncitizens will be allowed to vote in the upcoming election. By contrast, Maley argued, any U.S. citizen who is erroneously removed from the rolls can still cast a provisional ballot on election day.
Giles’ order, Maley contended, also violates the Purcell principle, the idea that courts should not change election rules during the period just before an election. That principle, Maley wrote, “applies to eleventh-hour injunctions under the NVRA, particularly where, as here, they order mandatory retrospective relief of adding numerous individuals to a State’s voter rolls past the State’s deadline for doing so and imminently before an election.”
https://amylhowe.com/2024/10/28/virginia-asks-supreme-court-to-allow-voter-rolls-purge-before-election/
The Johnson Amendment is a provision in the U.S. tax code, since 1954, that prohibits all 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations from endorsing or opposing political candidates. Section 501(c)(3) organizations are the most common type of nonprofit organization in the United States, ranging from charitable foundations to universities and churches. The amendment is named for then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas, who introduced it in a preliminary draft of the law in July 1954.
In the early 21st century, some politicians, including former President Donald Trump, have sought to repeal the provision, arguing that it restricts the free speech rights of churches and other religious groups. These efforts have been criticized because churches have fewer reporting requirements than other non-profit organizations, and because it would effectively make political contributions tax-deductible.[1] On May 4, 2017, Trump signed an executive order "to defend the freedom of religion and speech" for the purpose of easing the Johnson Amendment's restrictions.[2][3]