So, Judiciary has a hearing on corporation PACs where they had Ted Deutch, of Ethics and Pramila Jayapal testify as witness experts on dark money, without calling out foreign corporations running Medicaid fraud into political campaign like Bob MAXIMUS GOODLATTECUS, former Judiciary Chairman did with TEVA, under Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
No one even mentioned how MAXIMUS GOODLATTECUS tried to pull a fast one and introduce legislation to gut the Ethics Committee that was investigating this matter, that Ted Deutch did not even mention.
This was about corporate parental rights, which seems to be a concept foreign to Judiciary, because no one wants to talk about the children's trust funds.
Yes, we all know the FEC does not have a quorum, but no one wants to talk about the U.S. Treasury having superseding powers of authority over political campaign finance.
Just go through the motions because I have a sneaky suspicion that a quorum does not exist for the impeachment vote, anyway, but hey, what do I know?
I know you gotta be duly elected to vote.
So, you mind as well summon Adam Schiff, Jerrold Nadler, Jamie Raskin, Sheila Jackson Lee, Maxine Waters, and of course, Nancy Pelosi as witnesses, too.
You are going to have to definitely call Bob Goodlatte, because he showed up at the ghetto ass funeral.
Too bad you can not summon John Conyers, Jr. to be a post mortum witness...or can you?
Oh, you do know that you would be remiss not to summon Judiciary Staff.
You will figure it out.
Routing for you!
#perkinscoiesucks
#maytheheavensfall
Collins to Nadler: Make witness lineup fair and credible
“The Committee must ensure it maintains its credibility and its historically preeminent role in the impeachment of presidents by not rushing to articles of impeachment or hearing only from scholars with demonstrated animosity towards the President. Throughout this hurried and partisan impeachment process, I have consistently requested mere fairness from members of the majority. An equal distribution of experts for the December 4 hearing would be a small concession to demonstrate to the American people this impeachment inquiry is not merely political theater.”
Gather round, my dearies, for the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed shall tell the tale of Judiciary Jolly Jerry and his quest for Brett Kavanaugh's Working Papers.
Once upon a time, there were these FOX operatives, for it is impossible for me to recognize them as journalists, who peddle their wares by distracting the public with flesh, devoid of sources or intellect, which could have easily have been found with a basic internet search for the Wikipedia entry.
Brett did not just work with Ken Starr, he also was the one who worked on numerous investigations
The Ken Starr Special Counsel Team, featuring Brett Kavanaugh
of Bill Clinton's presidency, and allegedly wrote the Ken Starr Report, which unlocked the constitutional mechanisms for House Judiciary to commence impeachment proceedings.
Now, with this Wikipedia information in hand, executed through a basic Google search of the term "Brett Kavanaugh", this brings us to Monica Lewinsky.
It seems Brett worked with the former Chief of Staff for House Judiciary, Julian *Slimy Slime Slime* Epstein, of which I never queried on how he got the job, but I will just go out there on a limb and say Hillary Clinton more than likely had something to do with Julian getting hired because she worked on the Nixon impeachment proceedings.
So, now it seems Jolly Jerry Nadler is going after Brett's work product to find out how they switched out Special Counsel Bob Fiske, who supposedly was investigating the original model for stealin', which was transposed and enhanced for Detroit, recognized as the Arkansas Finance Development Authority, and replace it with #MeToo to impeach Trump.
But Doug Collins, the Ranking Member, does not like that idea of digging for a way to launch impeachment proceedings and really does not want to deal with the fact that he will not #sayhisname, nor does he want to be indicted for what happened in House Judiciary, the congressional votes, the GOP, and the children.
Doug has fear in his eyes, but only I can see it, well, maybe not just me....
Brett used to work on George Bush's campaign with John Roberts in the Florida ballot "chad" issue.
Brett also worked as a staff secretary during 911, so Brett knows stuff because he was recruiting federal judges for appointments.
Senate Judiciary knows all about this, but intentionally neglected to address this in Brett's SCOTUS confirmation hearings, and instead, pulled the old switch-o-change-o model and give the public another sex scandal, to distract the masses in another Pied Piper campaign, just like they are trying to do with the impeachment proceedings.
See, the impeachment proceedings are really not about Trump.
The impeachment proceedings are being constructed as a cover up for not having to #sayhisname, but they have no choice but to #sayhisname because I am going to make them say it.
This is sanguinely entertaining because I know Slimy Slime Slime is advising Jolly Jerry.
This is about Medicaid fraud in child welfare and we are in a Constitutional Crisis.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler is moving to bring new scrutiny to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s past, asking the National Archives on Tuesday to release a large cache of records related to his time in George W. Bush's White House.
In a letter from Nadler and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), another senior Judiciary Committee member, the lawmakers said accessing the records are essential to "the public's faith in the integrity of the judiciary."
The effort reopens a debate over Kavanaugh's nomination, which became the subject of fierce partisan rancor during his confirmation hearings last year after Kavanaugh faced allegations of sexual assault.
Democrats also argued they lacked access to records pertaining to Kavanaugh's government work that were important to his qualifications. Ultimately, the Senate supported his nomination along nearly partisan lines, but Democrats vowed to continue seeking records about his background.
Nadler and Johnson emphasized that the Senate only received a sliver of Kavanaugh's records from his White House tenure, which ran from 2001 to 2006, when he served in the White House counsel's office and later as staff secretary.
Then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley requested records from Kavanaugh's time in the counsel's office but later withdrew his request after the committee received some of the documents it sought.
But Nadler and Johnson say the likelihood that Kavanaugh will rule on matters like abortion rights, executive authority and other topics within the purview of the Judiciary Committee increases the urgency for them to obtain the full slate of records from his White House tenure — information they say is on track to be released in 2021 anyway under the Presidential Records Act.
In the interim, the committee members say the National Archives and Records Administration should begin producing documents that Grassley initially requested and then, on a "rolling basis," Kavanaugh's emails and any "textual records" in his office files from his time as staff secretary.
The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee ripped Nadler's push as "harassment" of Kavanaugh.
“Chairman Nadler’s request is so far outside the scope of judicial ethics, it’s harassment,” said Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.). “Senate Democrats spent months launching false accusations in an attempt to smear Justice Kavanaugh’s reputation and block his confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court, and now House Democrats want to follow suit with yet another fishing expedition to tarnish his good name.”
Ohr had no chain of command of evidence when dealing with the thumbdrive;
Ohr had no clue where the thumbdrive passed to him came from;
Ohr did not know what was on the thumbdrives he was passing to his FBI handler;
Andrew Weissman may be anOSC whistleblower;
Was Steele lobbying for Deripaska?;
Is there a second dossier?;
Ohr used WhatsApp to chat? <===Seriously???? ;
Ohr was the overseas face of the DOJ Organized Crime Drug
Enforcement Task Force ;
(obviously, he did not do a very good job.)
Daniel Jones, a former
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence staffer, works for, or is the
founder of a group called Penn Quarter Group that raised approximately
$50 million from Democratic donors to continue the Fusion GPS
investigation.
Mr. Jordan. Were you aware of the money trail, the fact that
the DNC and the Clinton campaign had paid Perkins Coie, the law
firm who then had paid Fusion, who were then paying Christopher
Steele, were you aware of that?
Mr. Ohr. I don't believe I was aware of that at the time. p185
Ms. Kavalec currently serves as Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs at the Department of State with over three decades of experience as an American diplomat. Previously, she served as the Director of the Office of Russian Affairs, Deputy Chief of Mission of the U.S. Mission to UNESCO in Paris, France, Deputy Coordinator for Assistance in the European Bureau, and Director for Conflict Prevention in the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization. Ms. Kavalec earned her A.B. from the University of California at Berkeley and M.S. from Georgetown University. She speaks French, Romanian, Ukrainian, Russian, Spanish and Portuguese fluently.
Interesting partisan line of questioning if you are trying to find out if you or your crew is part of the second dossier, but, hey, what do I know?
I know that I had better make sure I have cocktails and popcorn stocked up for everyone when they get to Detroit!
Q -- I think you said earlier that you became aware, or
Mrs. Ohr became aware that her research was intended to be about
Russia and, you know, about the potential ties between the
campaign and Russia. Is that correct? A Yes. At some point, yes. Q Okay. Are you aware of any efforts by Fusion GPS to
conduct sort of research about other politicians? A No. Q I'm --A I mean, I know Fusion GPS did research on different
topics, so I don't specifically know of research on other
politicians.
Q Okay. For example, anyone who may have been in this
room today -- A No.
Q -- or -- okay.
A Not aware of anything like that. Q Senator Grassley? A No, not -- Q Devin Nunes? A No, not that I'm aware of, no. Q Okay. Bob Goodlatte? A No. Again, not aware of any Fusion GPS research on
other Senators, Congressmen, other officials.
Georgia Rep. Doug Collins unilaterally released a 268-page transcript Friday of a deposition that Justice Department official Bruce Ohr gave to Congress in August.
Collins, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, took the unusual step by reading a statement on the House floor and providing a link to the Ohr transcript in the public record. The representative said his patience with the Justice Department “has grown thin.”
Ohr served in 2016 and 2017 as a back channel between the FBI and Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the anti-Trump dossier alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.
Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele.
Bruce Ohr was interviewed on Aug. 28, 2018 by a task force of members from the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees.
Collins said Friday that he plans to release additional transcripts from interviews conducted by the task force. Lawmakers have also interviewed Nellie Ohr and FBI and Justice Department officials such as former FBI general counsel James Baker and former FBI attorney Lisa Page.“Out of an abundance of caution, we gave DOJ an opportunity to review them for information that would endanger national security, but after many months and little progress, our patience has grown thin,” Collins said.
“The proposed redactions have nothing to do with national security and are anathema to our goal of government transparency,” he continued, adding that “I am, therefore, today making one of these transcripts public.”
“I intend to make other transcripts public soon,” he said. “I’m willing to consider any reasonable redactions DOJ makes in a timely manner, but won’t allow these transcripts to remain shrouded in secrecy.”
Parts of Bruce Ohr’s testimony have already been leaked to the press. In the hearing, Bruce Ohr undercut several claims made by Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS, and California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.
Bruce Ohr testified that he met with Simpson on Aug. 22, 2016 to discuss information from the dossier. That contradicted Simpson’s testimony to House Intelligence on Nov. 14, 2017 that he did not meet with Bruce Ohr until after the election.
Bruce Ohr also told lawmakers that he told the FBI about his contacts with Steele in early August 2016, days after he and Nellie Ohr met the former British spy in Washington, D.C.
Schiff claimed in a memo released on Feb. 24, 2018 that Bruce Ohr did not tell the FBI about his contacts with Steele until after the election.
Ohr testified that he generally trusted Steele, who he first met in 2007, when Steele still worked for the British government. But Ohr had less confidence in Steele’s sources, since their information originated with Russians.
“I think — my impression is that Chris Steele believed his sources,” Ohr said in one exchange.
“What I should say in addition, though, is that whenever you are dealing with information from Russia, you have to be careful, because it is a very complicated place. And so even information from a good source has to be looked at carefully.”
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation has given federal prosecutors momentum to litigate alleged violations of what until last year was an obscure law governing foreign lobbying.
In the course of his now 19-month probe, Mueller has uncovered a web of alleged criminality linked to violations of a World War II-era law enacted amid concerns over foreign propaganda.
Mueller has obtained guilty pleas under the law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), from two of President Trump’s 2016 campaign aides, Paul Manafort and Richard Gates. Both pleaded guilty to charges linked to their lobbying work on behalf of pro-Russian forces in Ukraine.
Mueller has also referred cases falling outside his mandate to other U.S. prosecutors.
One of those referrals resulted in the guilty plea last summer of GOP consultant Sam Patten, an associate of Manafort’s. Patten pleaded guilty to illegally lobbying on behalf of a political party in Ukraine called the Opposition Bloc, the successor to Russia-backed oligarch Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions. Patten has been cooperating with Mueller and other federal officials and prosecutors are expected to give an update on his case by Monday.
Meanwhile, federal prosecutors in Manhattan are said to be accelerating an investigation into Washington, D.C., firms that helped Manafort lobby on behalf of Yanukovych, raising the possibility new charges could be filed in the future.
And government prosecutors in Virginia are poised to lay out their case against a former business partner of Michael Flynn, Trump’s onetime national security adviser. Flynn is expected to be a witness against his old partner, who is charged with illegally lobbying on behalf of the Turkish government.
The developments have had a chilling effect in Washington among lobbyists and consultants.
“When you become ground zero for what America is angry about ... anything can happen,” said one lobbyist who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “All it takes is a couple of scandals.”
FARA dates back to 1938, when it was passed to ensure transparency of foreign influence in the American political process as a result of fears over Nazi and communist propaganda. It has been amended twice since then but is essentially the same law.
It requires that “agents of foreign principals,” typically lobbyists or consultants who work for foreign governments or political parties, register and file regular reports with the Justice Department on their activities. They also must file copies of materials they distribute for any foreign entities and keep a record of their activities.
Criminal prosecutions under the law have been few and far between. Indeed, a Justice Department inspector general report released two months before the 2016 presidential election concluded that Justice lacked a “comprehensive” strategy to enforce FARA.
Mueller’s investigation has turned the tides, at least for the time being.
Mueller charged Manafort and Gates with acting as unregistered foreign agents in October 2017, in addition to a slew of other federal offenses stemming from their lobbying on behalf of politicians in Ukraine. Both have since pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate, though Manafort’s plea deal broke down dramatically last month as the special counsel accused him of lying.
Their cases spell potential trouble for two D.C. firms that Manafort recruited to lobby on behalf of Yanukovych in the United States. Manafort has admitted to arranging for the firms, the now-defunct Podesta Group and Mercury Public Affairs, to work for a nonprofit that claimed to be independent but was in fact under Yanukovych’s direction in order to obscure that their efforts were done at the behest of the Ukrainian government.
Mueller’s prosecutors said in September that some employees of both firms, identified only as “Company A” and “Company B” in court filings, knew that they were receiving direction from Yanukovych and not the nonprofit.
Neither firm registered under FARA for the lobbying work. Instead, they registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act. The two firms said they did so on advice from counsel, and both have subsequently registered under FARA.
FARA allows for some exemptions in which lobbyists could register under the Lobbying Disclosure Act rather than FARA. To do so, individuals or firms must represent foreign principals who are not foreign governments or political parties.
The Associated Press reported earlier this month that prosecutors in Manhattan, on Mueller’s referral, had in recent weeks interviewed witnesses to probe the lobbying done by the Podesta Group and Mercury, a sign of the investigation accelerating. Neither firm has been charged with wrongdoing.
Mueller’s referral also reportedly included Greg Craig, who worked as White House counsel under former President Obama and whose law firm Manafort hired to produce a report that defended the Ukrainian government’s imprisonment of former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, Yanukovych’s political rival.
Separately, Mueller’s investigation has contributed to prosecutors bringing charges against Bijan Kian, a co-founder of Flynn’s lobbying group who was indicted alongside another associate in mid-December on charges of conspiracy and acting as an unregistered agent of the Turkish government.
The charges came roughly a year after Flynn pleaded guilty in connection with Mueller’s investigation and admitted to making false statements in filings to the Justice Department about the Flynn Intel Group’s lobbying work related to Turkey.
Kian has pleaded not guilty and his trial is slated to begin in February in Alexandria, Va., where Flynn is expected to testify.
Lobbyists who do work with foreign governments insist they comply with FARA, and some have suggested that the recent charges give the false impression that the industry is characterized by shady dealings.
“One bad lobbyist can tarnish the whole industry,” said one lobbyist, who likened the latest controversy to the Jack Abramoff scandal, which resulted in the former D.C. power player spending four years in prison and spurred congressional action to regulate lobbying.
Regardless, Mueller has thrown a spotlight on foreign lobbying activities that is unlikely to wane even after his investigation has concluded. Some lawmakers have pushed for legislation they argue would strengthen FARA and prevent individuals from exploiting loopholes in the law.
Lobbying shops may also start to turn away foreign clients if they haven’t already, given that Russian interference and other recent developments have cast a shadow over the work. A handful of firms, for instance, have recently dropped Saudi Arabia as a client in light of journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s murder.
“I think that even those who have been following the rules are going to think twice about this because I think there are probably ample numbers who have not been following the rules,” one lobbyist told the Hill.
“Even those that register appropriately, the question is going to be why are you working for an oppressive regime? Why are you trying to bolster a foreign government over the U.S. government?” the person continued.
New bills are expected to be introduced in the coming year and House Democrats will likely push to get a bill that tackles foreign lobbying regulations out of the lower chamber.
“I think there is definitely more focus. People are more engaged,” said Steven Cash, a D.C.-based lawyer at Day Pitney and former chief counsel to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).
“I think there is more to come that is going to spin out of Mueller, and I suspect there is more to come generally, because we’re going to be more attentive to this,” Cash added.
Washington, D.C. –Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, released the following statement after President Donald Trump nominated William Barr to serve as Attorney General:
“I have a number of very serious concerns regarding William Barr’s nomination as Attorney General, including, but not limited to, his criticism of Special Counsel Mueller’s team, his defense of the firing of former FBI Director Comey, and his support for launching yet another investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. Against the context of the firing of Attorney General Sessions because of his failure to recuse himself from the Russia investigation, Mr. Barr must lay out a series of steps he will take to ensure the independence of Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation, including pledging that he will not terminate Mr. Mueller absent “extraordinary improprieties” and promising to release any and all of the Special Counsel’s reports to Congress.”
“Beyond that, I need to be clear that this nomination does absolutely nothing to alleviate the concerns I have with Mr. Whitaker’s designation as Acting Attorney General, absent any Senate review of his qualifications. I continue to have a number of additional concerns regarding his appointment, including whether it is lawful, his public statements questioning Mr. Mueller’s investigation, and a myriad of ongoing and unresolved ethics-related issues relating to Mr. Whitaker. These concerns and questions are noted in the many letters we have sent to Mr. Whitaker and the Department of Justice, which remain unanswered.”
On November 7, 2018, Ranking Member Nadler issued a statement condemning the firing of Attorney General Sessions as consistent with “a clear pattern of interference from President Donald Trump.”
On Nov 8, 2018, Ranking Member Nadler led House Judiciary Committee Democrats in sending letters to Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) regarding the firing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions by President Donald Trump in what appears to be a clear effort to change the supervisory structure for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s ongoing criminal investigation.
On November 8, 2018, Reps. Nadler, Schiff, and Cummings and Sen. Feinstein sent letters to top Administration officials demanding the preservation of all documents and materials relevant to the work of the Office of the Special Counsel or the firing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
On November 12, 2018, Ranking Member Nadler and other top House Democrats joined Senate Democrats on a letter to the Department of Justice’s Chief Ethics Official, Assistant Attorney General Lee J. Lofthus. In the letter, they outline the number of serious ethical considerations that should preclude any involvement by President Trump’s handpicked Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker with the Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation, and that require Mr. Whitaker’s immediate recusal. In the letter, the Democrats also request that the Department of Justice’s chief ethics officer immediately notify them whether he has advised Mr. Whitaker to recuse himself from supervision of the special counsel’s investigation.
On November 13, 2018, Ranking Member Nadler sent a letter to acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker and FBI Director Christopher Wray notifying them of his expectation, when Democrats take the Majority in the new year, that the Department of Justice and the FBI will have already addressed the backlog of unanswered requests that have been made concerning legitimate oversight matters under the Committee’s jurisdiction. Over the last two years, House Judiciary Committee Democrats have written over one hundred letters to the Administration.
On November 14, 2018, Reps. Nadler, Cummings, Frank Pallone, Jr., and Schiff sent seven letters requesting information relating to Acting Attorney General Matthew G. Whitaker’s involvement with World Patent Marketing, a company that allegedly bilked millions from consumers and suppressed criticism of their activities.
On November 15, 2018, Ranking Member Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member Schiff released a statement criticizing the Office of Legal Counsel opinion that attempts to justify the appointment of Matthew Whitaker.
On November 20, 2018, Ranking Members Nadler and Cummings had a joint call with Acting Attorney General Whitaker. In the course of the call, the Acting Attorney General committed to appearing before the House Judiciary Committee in January and affirmed that he was and will continue to follow all of the regulations, policies and procedures of the Department of Justice, including with regards to the Special Counsel investigation.
On December 6, 2018, Ranking Member Nadler and other top House Democrats joined Senate Democrats on another letter demanding an in-person briefing from the Department of Justice’s Chief Ethics Official, Assistant Attorney General Lee J. Lofthus.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Friday outlined an ambitious overhaul to the way government operates — including legislation to strengthen voting rights protections.
Pelosi, widely expected to be elected the next House Speaker, vowed to make it the first order of business when Democrats realize their newly won majority next year.
The goal, Pelosi said, is “to reduce the role of money [and] advance fair elections, and one part of that is having the Voting Rights Act early on the agenda.”
The effort would come following a midterm election that included a number of closely fought elections, including a tight race for governor in Georgia that was shadowed by accusations that black voters were being disenfranchised.
Rep. Terri Sewell (D-Ala.), who has sponsored legislation to restore voting protections lost when the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, said the issue will be “our first order of business” in the next Congress.
“That means starting work, on Day One, to restore the Voting Rights Act of 1965,” said Sewell.
“We believe that no matter what state you live in — whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican — you should have a fair voice in our elections,” she said. “Your vote is your voice.”
The issue of voting rights protections has been on the Democrats’ radar for years, particularly among members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC). And it’s only gained steam this cycle, following reports of voting irregularities — and in some cases, allegations of outright suppression — in states like Georgia and Florida, where black Democrats vying for governor fell by razor-thin margins.
In Georgia, a group backing Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams sued the state this week, alleging the elections were rigged to disenfranchise black and other minority voters. In North Carolina, officials are investigating allegations of a fraud scheme targeting Democratic voters. Several of the complaints, in that ongoing probe, came from African American seniors.
At issue is a section of the Voting Rights Act that had required a number of states with a history of racial discrimination at the polls — most of them in the south — to get federal approval before changing their voting rules.
In a 5-4 decision in June 2013, the Supreme Court eliminated that requirement. Behind Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court's conservative majority found that the formula dictating which states are subject to the extra hurdles — defined by Section 4 of the law — is outdated and therefore unconstitutional.
The Court did not invalidate Section 5 of the law, which empowers the federal government to require pre-clearance for certain states and localities. But without a formula to determine which regions are subject to the extra scrutiny, Section 5 was effectively neutered.
Roberts invited Congress to “draft another formula based on current conditions” — which is what Sewell has done in her proposal.
Outgoing Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has said he supports strengthening the Voting Rights Act. But he’s deferred the decision to move legislation to Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who’s adamantly opposed to restoring the protections.
The issue resurfaced in September, when the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, a bipartisan panel, issued a damning report finding that minority voter protections in certain parts of the country were severely weakened by the Supreme Court’s decision. The group urged Congress to intervene.
Goodlatte responded by issuing a five-year-old statement explaining why Congress has no role to play. He has said congressional action is unnecessary because other parts of the Voting Rights Act, which were left intact by the Supreme Court, provide sufficient protections against race-based discrimination.
Asked about the appropriateness of releasing a five-year-old statement in response to a new report, a spokeswoman said, “The Chairman’s position has remained the same since the 2013 statement.”
Democrats, and a number of Republicans, have a decidedly different view, pointing to a long list of states that have adopted higher hurdles to voting since the 2013 ruling took effect, including photo-ID requirements, shorter windows of early voting and the elimination of same-day registration.
“It’s ridiculous that it’s an obstacle course to get to the ballot box, still, 240 years into this Republic,” said Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.). “So we have to make it easier — not harder — to register, to vote and people have to have confidence that when they exercise their franchise, that vote will be tabulated and it will be protected.”
Sewell proposed a March 3 deadline for passing their reform package — a date marking the 54th anniversary of the “Bloody Sunday” civil rights march that nearly ended the life of Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and led directly to adoption of the Voting Rights Act.
The issue has emerged amid the ongoing saga over Pelosi's future on Capitol Hill. Pelosi, facing a group of insurgents fighting to block her rise to Speaker, has been huddling with her detractors in an effort to win them over. She won an early victory last week when she enticed Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio), former chairwoman of the CBC, to her side by offering to revive a defunct voting rights committee and give Fudge the gavel.
"Our party should reflect the diversity of our changing nation and guarantee all our citizens the unfettered right to vote and to have every vote count," Fudge said at the announcement.
The push for stronger voting rights protections is just one part of a larger package Democrats are promising to tackle immediately when they take control of the House next year. That bill — to be introduced as H.R. 1 — will also feature provisions promoting tougher ethics rules for lawmakers, as well as efforts to limit the role of money in politics.
Democrats think adopting those reforms will send the message to voters that they have the public’s interest in mind, thereby easing passage of the other items on their legislative wish list.
“If we are going to accomplish the bold, aspirational things that everybody wants in America, … we have to have a government that they can trust. And this is the first step to building a government that they can trust,” said Rep.-elect Veronica Escobar (Texas).
“Once we pass this, we can then get on to tackling all of the big-picture issues that the American public expects us to tackle,” she said.
Democrats will likely face strong resistance to all of those reforms in the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has shown no appetite for moving such legislation.
Pelosi suggested the power of public sentiment would eventually force the hand of Republicans.
“Our best friend in this debate is the public,” she said. “We believe that it will have great support and that message won’t be lost on the Senate or on the president of the United States.”
Rep.-elect Tom Malinowski (N.J.) said Democrats will have no trouble winning over voters in his district, regardless of their political leanings.
“A lot of us who supported this ran in districts where we have to get Republican support to be here,” Malinowski said. “And I can tell you, I did not meet a singe Republican voter who thought its was a good to allow, say, a foreign government to channel money through nonprofit organizations to a Super PAC in the United States to influence the outcome of our elections.
“This is bipartisan when it comes to the American people.”
Washington (CNN) An attorney for former FBI Director James Comey said Thursday his client will fight a subpoena to privately testify before Congress next month about FBI actions in the 2016 campaign.
House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte officially issued subpoenas for Comey and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch after the committee signaled their intention to do so earlier this month.
Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican who is retiring, is requesting private depositions from Comey on December 3 and Lynch on December 4. The investigation will end when Democrats take over the committee in January.
Soon after the subpoena was issued, Comey reiterated his call for a public hearing.
"Happy Thanksgiving. Got a subpoena from House Republicans," Comey tweeted. "I'm still happy to sit in the light and answer all questions. But I will resist a 'closed door' thing because I've seen enough of their selective leaking and distortion. Let's have a hearing and invite everyone to see."
Happy Thanksgiving. Got a subpoena from House Republicans. I’m still happy to sit in the light and answer all questions. But I will resist a “closed door” thing because I’ve seen enough of their selective leaking and distortion. Let’s have a hearing and invite everyone to see.
David Kelley, an attorney for Comey, said Thursday that his client will fight the order in court.
"While the authority for congressional subpoenas is broad, it does not cover the right to misuse closed hearings as a political stunt to promote political as opposed to legislative agendas," Kelley said.
Lynch has not yet commented publicly about the subpoenas.
Before the committee officially subpoenaed Comey and Lynch, Rep. Jerry Nadler, the Democrat who is expected to chair the panel next year, criticized the move as "unfortunate."
"Months ago, Director Comey and Attorney General Lynch both indicated their willingness to answer the Chairman's questions voluntarily. My understanding is that the Republicans have had no contact with either the director or the attorney general since," Nadler said last week.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein remains another potential witness hanging over the GOP-led investigation. Conservatives on the panels demanded that Rosenstein appear to answer their questions about his reported remarks about wearing a wire to record the President and efforts to recruit Cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office. A scheduled meeting with Rosenstein last month was postponed and has not been rescheduled.
Hatch-Goodlatte Music Modernization Act to be Signed into Law
Washington, D.C.(H.R. 1551), bipartisan legislation that updates several key provisions of U.S. copyright law regarding music licensing. This consensus legislation is a product of the House Judiciary Committee’s comprehensive copyright review and was introduced by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Subcommittee Vice Chairman Doug Collins (R-Ga.), Representative Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Subcommittee Ranking Member Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), former House Judiciary Committee Chairman and current Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), and Representative Ted Deutch (D-Fla.).
Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Nadler applauded today’s vote in the statements below.
Chairman Goodlatte: “Today’s House passage of the bipartisan Hatch-Goodlatte Music Modernization Act is a major victory for American music creators, music distributors, and the music listening public. This legislation, which modernizes our music copyright laws so music creators are fairly compensated for their works, finally brings our music laws into the digital age.
“I appreciate the hard work of the many House and Senate Judiciary Committee Members who came together on this legislative package. Music has such an immense impact on all of our daily lives and with this important legislation headed to the President’s desk, we will help ensure the sustainability of the evolving American music industry for decades to come.”
Ranking Member Nadler: “I am proud that the Music Modernization Act will now head to the President’s desk. This bill will update the law to better serve both creators and digital music providers. Virtually all of the major industry stakeholders came together to support this bill. I am particularly pleased that this bill includes several measures included in the Fair Play Fair Pay Act, which I introduced the last two Congresses. Under the leadership of Chairman Goodlatte, we have joined together on a bipartisan basis to modernize the music licensing system. We have seized this historic opportunity to resolve some longstanding inequities in the music marketplace by helping digital services more efficiently license and distribute musical works, while ensuring artists, songwriters, and other music creators receive fair market value for their work.”
Key Provisions of the Hatch-Goodlatte Music Modernization Act include:
Title I – Music Modernization Act
Reflects how modern digital music services operate by creating a blanket licensing system to quickly license and pay for musical work copyrights
Discourages music litigation that generates legal settlements in favor of simply ensuring that artists and copyright owners are paid in the first place without such litigation
Ends the flawed U.S. Copyright Office bulk notice of intent system that allows royalties to not be paid
Implements uniform rate setting standards to be used by the Copyright Royalty Board for all music services
Shifts the costs of the new licensing collective created by the bill to those who benefit from the collective – the licensees
Updates how certain rate court cases are assigned in the Southern District of New York
Title II — Compensating Legacy Artists for their Songs, Service, and Important Contributions to Society (CLASSICS) Act
Provides that performers who recorded songs before 1972 can finally be paid for their works (currently, only performers who recorded songs after 1972 are paid for their works)
Title III — Allocation for Music Producers (AMP) Act
Ensures that record producers, sound engineers, and other creative professionals receive compensation for their work
Nothing about Corporate Shape Shifiting on the Royalties but that it is a matter for a different jurisdiction.
The Music Modernization Act was signed into law on Thursday by a clearly exuberant President Trump. "I've been reading about this for many years and never thought I'd be involved in it, but I got involved in it," he said of the historic legislation, which passed with unanimous support in both chambers of Congress after years of efforts by the music industry and lawmakers.
At the signing ceremony, Trump was surrounded by a smattering of supportive artists including Kid Rock, John Rich and Mike Love, along with the two Republican lawmakers whose names are officially attached to the law, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah and Rep. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia.
While Trump did thank members of the industry in attendance, he only mentioned one executive: Recording Academy Neil Portnow, whom he referred to as "big stuff." Short speeches were delivered by several of the artists, including Rock, Rich, Love and soul legend Sam Moore.
Here are the official reactions to the new law from key execs and organizations:
Mitch Glazier, RIAA president: "The Music Modernization Act is now the law of the land, and thousands of songwriters and artists are better for it. The result is a music market better founded on fair competition and fair pay. The enactment of this law demonstrates what music creators and digital services can do when we work together collaboratively to advance a mutually beneficial agenda. It's a great day for music. We hope fans across the country will join with us in celebration and PLAY IT LOUD."
David Israelite, NMPA president & CEO: "The Music Modernization Act is finally the law of the land. We are incredibly grateful for the Members of Congress who passed the MMA and the President for signing it. Songwriters have for too long labored without seeing fair rates and receiving all that they deserve, and for the first time in history, the music industry has partnered with the tech industry to fix these systemic problems. As we embark on supporting and helping build the critical structures within the MMA, we are humbled by the extraordinary progress propelled by compromise and the unprecedented political involvement of music creators. Today is about their future and this bill stands as a great statement on what can be done when we work together."
Neil Portnow, Recording Academy president and CEO: "As we celebrate the harmony and unity that got us here, we applaud the efforts of the thousands of performers, songwriters, and studio professionals who rallied for historic change to ensure all music creators are compensated fairly when their work is used by digital and satellite music services," he said in a statement. "We thank the members of Congress who championed this issue throughout the past several years to bring music law into the 21st century."
Elizabeth Matthews, ASCAP CEO: "Thanks to the unrelenting efforts of our ASCAP music creator and publisher members, industry partners and champions in Congress, a more sustainable future for songwriters is finally within reach. The MMA's unanimous passage in the House and Senate proves that the power of music is a great unifier. ASCAP is proud to have stood alongside creators, music publishers, and many more to make this dream a reality."
Paul Williams, ASCAP chairman of the board and president: "A young songwriter once wrote, ‘You give a little love and it all comes back to you; You’re gonna be remembered for the things that you say and do.’ Decades later, this could not be more true. Songwriters across this country now and in the future will remember those who fought so hard for the Music Modernization Act—both in Congress and across the music industry. On behalf of the music community, we are so thankful for the love and will return the favor with music for generations to come."
Mike O'Neill, BMI president and CEO: "This is truly a historic moment for the music industry, especially for the American songwriters and composers at its core, who will see significant and deserved benefit from this legislation. Passage of the Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act was a hard-fought process that hinged on tremendous collaboration and unprecedented support among diverse stakeholders who ultimately united to safeguard the future of music. We are gratified by this extraordinary outcome that recognizes the essential contributions of creators and streamlines the use of their music across businesses. While BMI will keep advocating to protect the livelihood of music creators in the digital age, we thank Congress and the President for taking this important step in implementing the most meaningful music licensing reform in decades."
John Josephson, chairman/CEO of SESAC: "Today, President Trump signed the bi-partisan Hatch-Goodlatte Music Modernization Act (The MMA), which will finally bring music copyright laws into the digital age. We applaud everyone's hard work and tireless efforts on this legislation, especially the Senators who worked diligently to get the bill passed then adopted by the House. We're grateful for our committed songwriting and publishing community whose focus and passion have strengthened our industry for generations to come."
Michael Huppe, SoundExchange president and CEO: "With today's signing of the Music Modernization Act, we mark a historic accomplishment. But more importantly, we mark what it means. For creators, it means getting paid more fairly. For those who recorded music before 1972, it means assurance you'll get paid for your work. For songwriters, publishers and producers it means making the digital economy work for you. SoundExchange's 170,000-member community was a driving force in getting the bill from the halls of Congress to the White House. When the music industry speaks with one voice, Congress listens. I urge you to stay active because there is much more work to be done before we can truly say all music creators are treated fairly."
Michelle Lewis and Kay Hanley, Songwriters of North America (SONA) executive directors: "SONA and its membership of working songwriters would like to express heartfelt thanks to Congress and to our fellow music business stakeholders for accomplishing what everyone thought was impossible: Compromise, consensus, and passage of the Orrin G Hatch - Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act. As President Trump signs our bill into law, today marks another momentous event in the rich history of music and the people who create it."
Dina LaPolt, founder/owner, LaPolt Law: "Music’s unifying power helped opposing communities reach across party lines to pass the Music Modernization Act with unanimous congressional support. The President’s final signature now enshrines the MMA in U.S. law, protecting music creators for generations to come. I couldn’t be more proud of SONA and all the songwriters who engaged the entire music creator community to help get this over the line! Now the real work begins!"
Horacio Gutierrez, Spotify general counsel: "One of our core missions at Spotify is to enable a million artists to make a good living from what they love: creating and performing music. The Music Modernization Act is a huge step towards making that a reality, modernizing the outdated licensing system to suit the digital world we live in. The MMA will benefit the music community and create a more transparent and streamlined approach to music licensing and payment for artists."
Keith Kupferschmid, Copyright Alliance CEO: "The Copyright Alliance appreciates the President signing the MMA into law today, and commends and thanks members of Congress, numerous Copyright Alliance members, and friends of the music community for their support of this critical legislation. It's truly remarkable for any cause or bill to bring everyone together in a bipartisan fashion, especially a bill as complex and lengthy as this one. But that's just what happened with the Music Modernization Act. The willingness to compromise, and work with others who may have competing or different interests, in the singular effort to get this important copyright legislation passed was laudable and inspiring."
Michael Eames, Association of Independent Music Publishers (AIMP) president; Alisa Coleman, AIMP New York Executive Director; and John Ozier, AIMP Nashville Executive Director: "Today marks a historic step forward for independent music publishers, songwriters, and the entire music industry, as President Trump has signed the Hatch Goodlatte Music Modernization Act (MMA) into law. This marks the first significant federal legislation since 1998’s Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to address the needs of rights-holders in today’s online age. We can look forward to a variety of long-overdue reforms that will make it easier to negotiate for and collect fair royalty rates while also establishing once and for all that digital services must pay for the use of pre-1972 recordings. In addition, it ensures independent publishers and songwriters a seat at the table for the new mechanical licensing collective. The AIMP is committed to ensuring that the independent publishing community and songwriters are represented fairly in the implementation and enforcement of the MMA, and we look forward to working with our partners across the music and technology industries as we move ahead in this new era. We offer our sincere gratitude to David Israelite and his team at NMPA, to the NSAI and SONA, to Senator Orrin Hatch and Congressmen Bob Goodlatte and Doug Collins, and to all parties from all sides who fought to provide a balanced outcome for all involved."
James Donio, Music Business Association president: "The Music Business Association applauds and congratulates its members and valued partners across the industry on their extraordinary and unprecedented efforts to bring the groundbreaking Music Modernization Act to fruition. What an amazing achievement for creators and their commercial partners to have come together in solidarity, and joined with Congress, to make long overdue copyright reform a reality. This is the start of an exciting new era for the entire business of music. Bravo!"
