Spin Zone: Q1, 2017

[DMH]

Name: 

Media/Outlet: 

Reason: (Ex. Why I Love Our Presidents) 

 

[Bullet points/brief outline of talking points during appearance.]

 

Due by April 12th, at 11:59 PM EST.

[David Powers]

Name: Senator David J. Stewart

Media/Outlet: Meet the Press with Chuck Todd

Reason: On the Speakership race and the future of the Republican Party

 

 

• "I think it's concerning to me and many other members of the Freedom Caucus that Cliff Fleming is out here openly insulting us and telling us to stand down when he is the beneficiary of the wave of change we're seeking. We ousted the old-guard of Mitch McConnell and elevated him to the top of our Senate leadership and now he turns his back on us? Yes, it's concerning."
• "I was proud to vote for Charles Walker in the primaries, because he represented a new Republican party. It looked up to him and was happy to see him become Chairman. He was vocally anti-NAFTA, for going after Wall Street and repatriating the jobs we'd lost due to globalization that impacted the community I grew up in - in Scranton - and those like it. He was vocally for protecting Medicare and Social Security from these supposed-high-minds who just see numbers swirling and not lives being impacted. These are things Paul Ryan has been diametrically opposed to for years! How Chairman Walker can stand down now and support this man is something I have a hard time understanding."
• "Change is hard, Chuck. But the Republican party has the opportunity to embrace what the American people are trying to tell us. They're tired of the politics of old. Listen, just two years ago I was elected to Congress. I had no intention of being a candidate in the years prior. But I found myself a part of a working-class that has been cast aside by both major political parties. So I ran, and the people of Pennsylvania trusted me. They trusted me in Scranton, my hometown, and the surrounding district and two years later the people of Pennsylvania trusted to me to go to Washington and 'Drain the Swamp'. Ironically, that's exactly what Charles Walker said he'd do and now he's embracing it. Where's the backbone, Chuck? We need a new way and I'm committed to forging it. Paul Ryan must go."

[Sovereign]

Name: Alex Fakhouri (D-MI)

Media/Outlet: The Lead with Jake Tapper on CNN

Reason: Republican Leadership Showdown

 

• Paul Ryan is far from a liberal politician. He was backed by the Freedom Caucus just a little over a year ago. How are we in a position where he's now suddenly too liberal for them? What we are seeing today is GOP lawmakers doubling down on the same tired rhetoric that lost them the presidency, lost them seven Senate seats, and lost them ten more seats in the House. Americans rejected this brand of extremism resoundingly, and they'll reject it again.

 

• Charles Walker and Cliff Fleming have fanned the flames of hatred, but are quickly realizing that the wildfire can be turned against you. Despite having the support of virtually all Republican leaders across the board, almost every member of the House leadership conference got wiped out. This kind of chaos is indicative of a total failure of leadership, and should worry everyone about their ability to govern effectively.

 

• This should be a wake up call for Paul Ryan and Republican leaders. It wasn't the Freedom Caucus that held onto the Republican majority. Those were your traditional rank-and-file Republicans. The Freedom Caucus did not contribute to your success, and they will not reward you for your success. Is this really who you want to rely on to maintain your ability to govern? There's a way out here, and the solution is moderation and compromise. 

[LoyalistPA]

Name: Senator Anne-Marie Morello

Media/Outlet: Foxs and friends

Reason: House Leadership race

 

 

• "Well, as we've seen in European politics, when a party loses an election, they often reevaluate their leadership and make necessary changes to better align with their base. I believe the GOP needs to do the same. Paul Ryan has been out of touch with the GOP base for quite some time now, and it's time for new leadership that truly represents the values of the party.
• The next House Speaker should be someone who truly understands and represents the values of the GOP base. They should be a strong leader who is willing to stand up for conservative principles and push back against the liberal agenda. We need someone who can unite the party and work towards common goals to move our country forward and I believe Andy Barr is that person.
• It's quite hypocritical of the Democrats to criticize the GOP for their leadership challenges while they themselves are facing the same issue. Not only from the left but also the right too.

 

[Hannah]

Name: Heather James

Media: This Week on ABC

Reason: Inauguration of President de la Cruz

• "Of course President-elect de la Cruz's inauguration will be an historic moment. The first woman to serve as President, the first Latina, the youngest ever President, the first sitting Mayor to be elected as President, and I'm sure the historians can dig out even more. I will be very proud when I watch her mount the dais and take the Oath of Office."
• "That said, we shouldn't get overly lost in the superlatives. The 2016 election was about more than just one woman. Women still earn only 82 cents on the dollar to men. The US slid from 66th to 73rd in the World Economic Forum's 2016 ranking on gender equality. So much for USA Number One. One of the biggest areas of inequality is in health care. The ACA did important work in improving health care equality and it's absolutely vital we defend Obamacare from Republican House attempts to defund it, but we need to also build on it and go further to ensure that health services for maintenance therapy, for example, which is more likely to affect women, are not being excluded from coverage."
• "I'm not particularly optimistic about there being much bipartisan cooperation this Congress. The Republicans are tacking hard to the right -- if Paul Ryan is a RINO then I'm struggling to think of who could be palatable to their frothing, angry base -- and I expect Cliff Fleming to live up to Mitch McConnell's legacy as obstructionist-in-chief. Of course we should try to find areas of agreement to carve out common ground on, but I don't think I'd hold my breath on a renewed spirit of bipartisanship prevailing."
• "For Democrats, it will be important to work together. Having an internecine spat over Leader Pelosi's reelection was a little embarrassing but hopefully we've moved beyond that. Holding together a coalition that spans those who consider themselves so progressive they won't even deign to call themselves Democrats, all the way over to conservative Democrats in states that are turning pretty red in their voting trend, will not be easy. I'm hopeful that in the Senate we can consolidate around a pro-growth, pro-jobs agenda that secures America's energy future and international standing. Not every Democrat will get every thing they want and every Democrat may have to compromise on the occasional vote, but when we look across at the alternative, I think there's a very big incentive towards party unity."
• "I will be attending the inauguration, yes, along with both my daughter and granddaughter. I don't think there will be many dry eyes between the three of us when we see President de la Cruz sworn into office."

Edited April 1 by Hannah

[SWMissourian]

Name: Andrew Clarke (D-MO) 

Media: CNN

Reason: Investing in Tomorrow’s Workforce Act

• The Investing in Tomorrow’s Workforce Act aims to address potential disruptions in the workforce brought about by increasing automation and artificial intelligence. We should embrace technological advancement, but we should also be prepared for how it could change life in the future so no one is left behind. 
• We’ve seen the kind of impacts automation and the resulting job loss can have on good, hard-working American communities. As technology advances, we will only see more of these stories. We should be prepared with alternatives, including robust training initiatives, alternative career paths, or any other innovative, effective solutions. 
• The ITW Act has already received bipartisan support and is up for debate in the Senate. Some Senators are trying to include bigger changes to current policy, like international trade, that they say will also support workers. While I am sympathetic to the need to renegotiate trade deals or restructure tax incentives, I believe that these are separate, if related, issues that should be debated separately. They come with their own hurdles and delays and hangups, and I don’t think that should get in the way of getting the ball moving period. 
• The ITW Act will help bring us to a future where working- and middle-class Americans can still support their families and reach for the American Dream with decent jobs and strong communities. 

[Hannah]

Name: Heather James

Media: Morning Edition on NPR

Reason: Cabinet nominations

• "I'm excited and encouraged by President de la Cruz's Cabinet nominations and executive appointments, which show every sign of a well prepared administration that has hit the ground running. Of course nominations for important federal office deserve due scrutiny, and the Senate's role to advise and consent on these nominations is integral, but I'm hopeful the confirmation process will not be held up unnecessarily."
• "Kimberly Teehee and Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall are outstanding nominees to lead Interior and Energy respectively. Ms. Teehee was instrumental in leading the White House's fight to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, to improve the Indian Health Service as part of the ACA, and to promote improvements in economic and educational opportunities in Indian country. She would be the first Native to serve as Interior Secretary - indeed, as any Cabinet Secretary, and the first in Cabinet since Vice President Curtis in 1933. Deputy Secretary Sherwood-Randall brings a wealth of experience, not just in her tenure as Deputy Secretary of Energy, but with previous service in the DoD, on the NSC, with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and across numerous nongovernmental advisory bodies. She recognizes the importance of cybersecurity to a modernized, effective, efficient national grid, and unlocking America's energy potential through all-of-the-above energy strategies. I commend the nomination of both of these outstanding women."
• "We might have to expand to 'Afternoon Edition' if I went through every single nominee but if I could just point to a couple others I'm particularly supportive of. Cybersecurity is an issue of increasing concern. It's not the subject of high concept science fiction any more, it's part of our daily lives and something we in government need to be increasingly aware of, and therefore choosing Tom Donilon as DNI is very welcome as someone who can lead a nuanced and sensitive intelligence strategy. And Mary D. Nichols is one of the most experienced and impactful environmental regulators in America, making her a superb choice to lead the EPA. She was appointed by a Republican Governor to chair the California Air Resources Board, and was an influential voice at the Paris Agreement talks in 2015."
• "President de la Cruz has announced a diverse and qualified range of nominations. Of course the most important is not a Cabinet nomination, but her nomination -- renomination, really -- of Judge Paul J. Watford to serve on the Supreme Court. Republicans blocked Judge Watford's nomination in the last session under entirely tenuous rationale, but if they wanted to make 2016 a referendum on the Supreme Court nomination, then I think they have their answer from the voters. Judge Watford deserved a hearing in 2016. He will get one in 2017."

Edited April 2 by Hannah

[micgat23]

Name: William Whitaker (R-KY)

Media: FOX News- Special Report with Bret Baier

Reason: 2016 Election Results; SCOTUS Nomination, House Leadership Race and Cabinet nominations

• "...Granted, this past election did not turn out as I, and many Americans, have hoped for. Senator McCord and General Walker were more than amazing candidates to run for the greatest office we have. Though we turned out short from our goals by losing the Senate and failing to gain the White House, I think we still did a very good job in showing what we stand for, and still made a dent. We may have not reached our goal of a red wave and reversing President Obama's disastrous policies, we still kept a hold of the House of Representatives, which in my book, is still a big win. I do want to wish President de la Cruz and Vice President Murphy good luck in this term and I look forward to working bipartisanly with them to ensure that American voices are heard..."
• "...I know this may be an unpopular opinion, but after hearing the testimony of Justice Paul Watford, I believe that he is more than qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. Though it may appear to be a midnight appointment by President Obama, I firmly believe that he chose the person based on their experience. I know I may get heat from my Republican colleagues, but I definitely intend on supporting and voting in favor of Judge Watford. Even if, I believe he still has the right to be voted on since he passed Committee and be heard."
• "...I am slightly disappointed that my fellow Kentuckian and Conservative Congressman Andy Barr lose the Speakership election, I do extend my congratulations to Speaker Ryan. Though him and I disagree on some things internally, I still believe he is a great leader to lead the people's house and, if it wasn't for him, we would've had a Democratic Trifecta..."
• "...It is the duty of the President, upon entering their term, to nominate their cabinet; and it is our duty to approve and confirm those nominations. I have yet to look at the nomination list but I believe that each nominee deserves a fair hearing for their respective position and should be heard. When it comes to nominations, each nomination deserves to be fairly heard. Just like Judge Watford; we should not alienate this process with party politics and simply confirm based on qualifications, plans and experience. I urge my fellow Republicans to listen to these nominees with an open mind and open ears and look past the letter they designate themselves as..."

[David Powers]

Name: Senator David J. Stewart

Media/Outlet: ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos

Reason: Discussing Political Corruption and Peter Orszag

 

 

• “The revolving door between Wall Street, Big Banks, and government bureaucracy and political consultancy is a danger to our middle and working classes, who’ve always been left behind as they give their hard-earned tax dollars to pay for these people to sell them out in positions of power.”
• “Robert Rubin, the former Secretary of State during Clinton’s administration, was one of the most pro-bank, pro-Wall Street treasury secretaries. After he influenced and set financial and economic policies, he went to Citigroup afterward to cash in on his dutiful work on behalf of Wall Street. Peter Orszag has followed in his place. He cashed in after his former stint at the OMB after he helped President Obama give the big banks a slap on the wrist after the financial crash, now President de la Cruz wants to invite him back into the White House with a nice $200,000 salary to do more bidding for Wall Street. And guess who’s paying for it looks at the camera - you are, the hard-working American taxpayer.”
• “We have to drain the swamp, George. We have to stop these Wall Street folks and government officials from comingling, going in and out of the revolving door of organized corruption, and enriching themselves. This kind of corruption must end, which is why I just filed legislation with Senator Roy of South Carolina to do just that. It’s called the Drain the Swamp Act, which would’ve prevented someone like Peter from being able to cash-in his government connections for a golden parachute at a Big Bank. I’m glad that this bill has received the support of the Democrat Chair, making it a strong bipartisan initiative and opposition to Orszag’s nomination.”

[Bolster]

Name: Nolan A. Stokes

Media/Outlet: CNN Tonight with Don Lemon

Reason: The election has happened, now it is time to confirm Judge Watford.

• Don, last year when I was here, we were having this discussion around Judge Watford and how Mitch McConnell was obstructing the nomination all because he was hoping McCord was gonna be in the White House. He said that he wanted to let the people pick the next president and let her decide, we her is Xiomara de la Cruz and the Democrats have the majority in the Senate. So I hope republicans will now hold themselves to their vow to support Judge Watford.
• To be quite frank what happened was dangerous, the GOP has politicized the supreme courts and we must acknowlege that. I believe Judge Watford should have been confirmed last year. President Obama was fullfilling his obligations as president and the GOP politicized and blocked his nomination for political reason. That is not right and that is concerning for the future of nominations and appointments from this body especially with the rhetoric the GOP has been throwing around.
• Judge Watford is qualified, he has an impecable background and I have confidence in him serving in the role of an Assocate Justice. Watford has displayed through his time on the federal bench that he can be impartial and that he will do his duty to defend the constitution. I have no doubt he will serve the interest of our constitution.

[Sovereign]

Name: Alex Fakhouri (D-MI)

Media: This Week on ABC

Reason: Croft and Stewart Attack Jobs

 

• As we enter the new Congress, radical Republicans have wasted no time attacking blue-collar workers. Just today, in a motion that unsurprisingly blocked bills pertaining to LGBT rights and women's health, Senator Will Croft tried to sneak in a hold on a bill meant to protect millions of American jobs projected to be lost to automation. There wasn't a word on it. Thank God Democrats caught him with his hands in the cookie jar and Senator Croft ultimately rescinded the motion, but Americans should not forget the dangers of this sneaky and reckless maneuvering against their interests.
• In this same bill, we saw Senator David Stewart discuss outsourcing, which has affected a great many Americans and I'm glad to see bipartisan discussion taking place here. The problem lies a little deeper beneath the service, where Senator Stewart believes the best way to uplift American workers is by completely undoing NAFTA without a replacement. It's a strategy Republicans have employed before, and it's the political equivalent of cutting off your nose to spite your face. What this proposes is millions of jobs gone in a blink of an eye and untold inflation, and the hardest hit will be the farmers all across the Corn Belt - including Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and so on.
• Americans can't afford this wild, shoot-at-the-hip approach when their jobs are on the line - and the economy sure can't handle the instability. The challenges we face require thoughtful solutions that address the needs of blue-collar workers, while also understanding the important role these policies play in keeping consumer prices down. We've seen leadership here from Senator Clarke's job training programs and Senator Carlsen's tax credit reform for outsourcers. These are solutions. Playing chicken with the global market is not.

[Rory]

Name: Jason Roy, Senator from South Carolina

Media/Outlet: Fox and Friends/Fox News

Reason: Ending the Revolving Door of Organized Corruption/'Drain The Swamp' Act

 

• "This woman, who've we've just handed the keys to the White House, took hundreds of millions of dollars from billionaires in Wall Street like Daniel Bu and Mike Bloomberg when she ran for president. What's the first thing she does when she gets in? She nominates a guy who worked for probably the worst bank in history - aside from maybe Lehman Brothers - but this bank made so many bad bets that people's pensions and investments went down the tubes. People's homes were foreclosed because of this bank. Citigroup used Peter Orszag when he worked for Obama to make sure Obama kept their financial elites out of jail. Then he left Obama and cashed-out and went to Citigroup. This bank took over $500 billion in bailout funds from the American people and no consequences from Obama and this guy helps them get off."
• "We have to start talking more about how our free markets, markets that are supposed to be free, are being manipulated by the financial elite and Wall Street. I used to run a major corporation, so I know. These corporations are spending a record amount of blood money on lobbying Washington politicians who grease their wheels while the little guy gets the short end of the stick. It's unfair. There's no invisible hand, it's the fat cat's hand controlling our economy in collaboration with these corrupt politicians."
• "This new Senator from Pennsylvania, Dave Stewart, and I have a new bill in the Senate right now focused on ending this revolving door of organized corruption. We call it the 'Drain the Swamp' Act that would prevent these politicians from being able to cash in or cash out from the time and decisions and influence they've had in Washington. Too may of these politicians have sold out their constituents to become whores to Wall Street. It's just obvious, and we need to stop it because our country is going down in flames as we speak because of it."

[Abrams]

Name: Tom Donelson (R-TX)

Media/Outlet: Fox News - Fox & Friends

Reason: House Speaker Election; 2016 election; future of GOP

 

• "I'm not going to front. I was publicly critical of Speaker Ryan, not that I have anything against the Speaker as a person, but because we lost the White House, Senate, and seats in Congress. At times, change can be good. With that being said, we have had an election for Republican caucus leader. His colleagues have supported him and he has won. Debates are good, and democracy is good and it is clear through both he has the support of his caucus. I support him as Speaker, and responsible members of our party will do the same. It is time to move on and end this public hashing out of differences
• "His winning re-election, though, does not mean we can ignore what went down in November. Our vision, our proposals are landing flat with the people. If we do not wisen up and do not come together, really ask ourselves what we're doing, what we are selling people, we are going to lose in 2018 and 2020 in beyind. It is not like the President is some grand leader with a grand mandate. She barely won and now has assembled an agenda out of Sanr Francisco or New York City, clearly not for the American people. We're going to take her to task one way or another. 
• "Our party needs to focus on real Americans, real people. People are hurting and in pain. Democrats have failed to fix this country in the wake of a terrible financial crisis, and if we keep letting them 'lead' it will only be worse. Russia and China will over take us, our nation will be less secure and we will hurt at home too. We need to have a serious reckoning and blow up the way we do business and think about policy. I think it would be great for us to have a document or slate of ideals like the Contract with America, obviously revamped, as we move forward with this new President."

[Tuna]

Name: Vice President Doug Murphy (D-WI)

Media/Outlet: CNN

Reason: Watford Nomination

• "Remember where we were last year. A vacancy opened on the Supreme Court. The Senate Republican majority established a new precedent out of thin air that the winning party should decide the next Supreme Court nominee to fill that vacancy. Let the people decide, they said. And we Democrats agreed to play by their rules. Well, the American people did decide. And their choice was President Xiomara de la Cruz and a Democratic Senate."
• "Paul Watford is a highly qualified, fair-minded judge. He is not an ideologue, he will hear all sides, and he will serve the Constitution over any fringe interests. The proof is in the pudding. Look at the dilemma it has placed Senate Republicans in. Good government Republicans, the ones who actually won and cause trouble for us Democrats come November, they're coming out in support of Watford. Meanwhile, you have chaos cronies like Cliff Fleming, the same guys who lost their party's control of the Senate, opposing Watford's nomination and grasping at straws to find any half-baked reason."
• "The American people are watching. They made their choice clear last November. And they see who in each party is honoring their vote versus who continues to ignore and marginalize their voice. Losers will continue lose, continue to whine, continue to dig themselves into a deeper hole. Meanwhile, Americans will continue to support winning and forward-minded candidates in both parties, the type of leaders who understand and will affirm that Paul Watford deserves to be on the Supreme Court." 

[SWMissourian]

Name: Senator Andrew Clarke (D-MO)

Media/Outlet: MSNBC

Reason: SCOTUS Nomination of Paul Watford

• The Supreme Court is supposed to exist outside of ideological purity tests and partisan agendas. The Supreme Court exists to faithfully interpret the Constitution and federal law, regardless of the political preferences of any individual Justice. This is a proposition that most Americans absolutely agree with, and it is fundamental to our republic. Judge Watford has repeatedly expressed the importance of that during his hearing so far.
• This means that, whatever you think of Judge Watford's career before his time in the judiciary, his past is not that relevant. He has said that the precedent of the Court, including in cases that Republicans typically support like Heller v. D.C., is more important than his personal ideological opinions. That's how it should be. On top of his commitment to judicial impartiality and the rule of law, he has stellar professional qualifications, a sharp mind, and strong personal moral integrity.
• The American people were given a chance to speak on who they wanted to select the next Supreme Court nominee--and they even had a prospective candidate already named! In their wisdom, they chose President de la Cruz. I think we should respect their choice, and barring anything drastic, respect the process and tradition and confirm Judge Watford.
• I hope Republicans do not intend to hold this seat open for four or eight years or however long it takes until they have the White House and Senate. That is irresponsible and childish. It is behavior beneath the U.S. Senate and the standards expected of us by the people. We need a full, capable Supreme Court.

[Ollie]

Name: Charles Walker 

Media/Outlet: CNN

Reason: Watford Nomination

 

• Paul Watford, a nominee baked in from the Obama administration, is an activist. And he'd be an activist from the bench. We saw his activism on illegal immigration where he defended sanctuary cities on behalf of the ACLU. We know he would aid in the assault on the right to life, our second amendment rights, and our religious liberties. 
• Here's the facts: President de la Cruz presented herself as a moderate when she ran for President. She told the American people she wanted to work with Republicans and her intention was to work with both parties to achieve more for them. But the first thing she does is appoint a dozen Obama alums to her cabinet and then appoint Obama's Supreme Court pick. The President should do the right thing, withdraw Watford from consideration, and submit a moderate, consensus candidate in line with the values she presented to the American people during the election. That would be a big step in proving she is actually serious about the promises she made during the campaign, and most recently, at the inauguration. 
• Any comments made about Judge Watford's race are abhorrent and not in line with the values of the Republican Party. We aren't worried about the color of Judge Watford's skin: we're worried about his plans if he replaces Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. And many Republicans, rightfully so, believe those plans to be in line with an extremist vision of the far left. 

[Tuna]

Name: Doug Murphy

Media/Outlet: Meet the Press

Reason: Watford Nomination

• "Some Republicans are trying to make Watford's support for affirmative action a disqualifier. In that case, Ronald Reagan owes them all an apology.  Because in Grutter v. Bollinger, two of the Gipper's own Supreme Court appointments defended affirmative action with Justice Scalia signing on to O'Connor's majority opinion. If Republicans want to use affirmative action as a litmus test, they should know Scalia would have failed. And they might as well cancel the 2020 GOP presidential debate at the Reagan library."
   
• "Even the National Review agrees that the Republican cop-killers talking point is crap. They admitted Watford's amicus brief only objected to Kentucky's protocols for performing executions. They have failed to produce even one shred of evidence, one filing, or one sentence that Paul Watford gives even a ha'penny's worth of leniency to co-killers."  
   
• "Bringing up Arizona S.B. 1070 is also a bizarre attack. Nevermind the fact that it was a Republican-appointed Justice on the Supreme Court who wrote the majority opinion striking down parts of S.B. 1070, or that both a Reagan and Bush appointee sided with the majority. What a select few Senate Republicans are saying is that they have no idea how to secure the border, other than locking up people who aren't white. Now I know 90% or more of my conservative friends don't believe that crap. So it's beyond me why Senator Stewart is making his colleagues look so bad with an argument so unfounded." 
   
• "Paul Watford is a highly qualified judge with an unquestionable commitment to bridgebuilding and working across the aisle. There is a reason the Republicans have spent more than a year and have been able to do nothing but grasp straws: it's because Watford has a pristine record and is the right man for the job. If he were an extremist, he sure hid it well if we haven't found one example of it in over a year's worth of time."
   
• "Now it is time to see whether Republicans have the same type of honor and character of Paul Watford. Will they honor their word to let the American people decide? Or are they just going to keep looking for manufactured excuse after excuse to continue playing ponyloaf games with our legal system?" 

[Dak]

Name: Edgar Villanueva (D-IL)

Media/Outlet: Anderson Cooper 360 (CNN)

Reason: Watford Nomination to SCOTUS

 

• "I am of the belief that Judge Watford is an esteemed jurist who deserves fair consideration devoid of the misleading labels and unfair representations that have been made of him. His nomination should not be reduced to identity politics. Any reference to the contrary is outright uncalled for and dismissive of his judicial experience and qualifications. Here are some real facts about Watford. He has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for over a decade, and in that time he has authored thoughtful opinions that demonstrate his deep understanding of the law and a commitment to upholding constitutional principles. He's also demonstrated as much in his Senate confirmation hearing. Let me also bring up an interesting fact that Republicans have so interestingly left out of the conversation. In United States v. Aguila-Montes De Oca (2013), Watford authored a majority opinion that rendered the defendant removable from the United States as the crime they committed was one involving 'moral turpitude.' His track record on the bench exhibits that his judicial approach is balanced. Deliberate misconceptions spread by some Republican politicians calling Watford an 'activist' or 'extremist' are baseless and unfounded. There are many cases on which he has ruled that demonstrate that his decisions are rooted in legal precedent and an impartial application of the law. Period."
• "I think the attempt to vilify Mr. Watford's association with organizations like the ACLU as 'radicalism' is extremely misguided. In case Republicans have forgotten, the ACLU plays a critical role in actually safeguarding Americans' civil liberties and holding those institutions which violate them accountable. Watford's legal work shows that he is dedicated to defending the constitutional rights of Americans and ensure equal justice under the law. While Republicans are attempting to dogwhistle Mr. Watford by bringing up the 2007 case in which he filed an amicus brief in Kentucky, they fail to educate Americans on the entirety of that complex case. Mr. Watford never advocated for either defendant's sentence to be appealed; rather, he, and a group of Kentuckian doctors, opposed Kentucky's protocol for execution by lethal injection. When you add that lens to the context of the story, I believe it changes the audience's interpretation of what his intent and purpose was by filing that amicus brief. But it certainly wasn't for the reason those out there are falsely claiming it to be."
• "What sets Watford apart is not just his impressive resume but also his judicial temperament and commitment to the rule of law. He approaches each case with impartiality and integrity. He has demonstrated that he carefully weighs competing arguments to reach well-reasoned decisions that are grounded in legal principle. I believe that is what Americans want out of any potential Supreme Court justice. Anderson, simply stated, I believe he is more than eminently qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. Watford's nomination represents an opportunity to strengthen public trust in the judiciary and ensure the highest court in the land continues to uphold the ideals of justice and equality for ALL Americans."

[Bolster]

Name: Nolan A. Stokes (D-MD)

Media/Outlet: Politics Nation with Rev. Al Sharpton

Reason: Watford Nomination to SCOTUS

 

• The point of the matter is this Rev., Republicans have no real opposition the Judge Watford's nomination to the Supreme Court. They have gone as far as using identity politics to discredit Judge Watford, they have delayed his first nomination over the hopes to tip the courts in their favor following the election. They have over politicized the Supreme Court setting dangerous standards of how the check and balance on our government is managed. Republicans have ultimatly obstructed the process for which the Constitution has outlined. And now that their first plan failed, they are using anything and everything to throw out and discredit Judge Watford.
• Judge Watford is qualified. There is no question or doubt about that. He has a long resume of legal work in private practice, he has had two cases that were appealed to the Supreme Court result in decisions agree with his opinions that have cited judicial precident. To put it in plain and simple terms, he has been an impartial judge, he has always followed what was outlined in the constitution and has held stadfast to upholding the legitimacy of our judicial process.

[LoyalistPA]

Name: Senator Anne-Marie Morello

Media/Outlet: Local Idaho Right wing talk radio

Reason:The Federal Grant Data Transparency Act

• The Federal Grant Data Transparency Act aims to increase transparency and accountability in federal grant spending by requiring agencies to publicly disclose detailed information about grant awards, recipients, and outcomes
• This legislation will enhance oversight and ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used effectively and efficiently by providing stakeholders, policymakers, and the public with access to comprehensive grant data.

• By promoting transparency and data-driven decision-making, the Federal Grant Data Transparency Act will help identify areas for improvement, reduce waste and fraud, and ultimately strengthen the impact of federal grant programs on communities and individuals across the country.