Mediaboss Marketing

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has come to Exxons defenseagain. AP Photo/Eric Gay,File

Citing Exxon Mobils right to free speech, 11 state attorneys generalall Republicansfiled in court this week to stop an investigation into the oil and gas giants decades-long history of climate denial.

The attorneys generalfrom Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsinfiled a brief to support Exxons request to stop the so-called Exxon Knew investigation, arguing that there is a public policy debate over climate change and that the investigation is an unconstitutional abuse of power.

The Constitution was written to protect citizens from government witch-hunts such as this one, where officials use their authority and the threat of criminal prosecution to try and suppress speech on a viewpoint they disagree with, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement.

This isnt the first time Texas has intervened in the investigation on behalf of the states largest company. Paxton and his counterpart from Arkansas filed on behalf of Exxon in May of last year when it challenged a Virgin Islands subpoena. Paxton has said the investigations are ridiculous.

The investigation, now spearheaded by Democratic state attorneys general Eric Schneiderman of New York and Maura Healey of Massachusetts, was prompted after the Los Angeles Times and InsideClimate News independently discovered that, as far back as the 1970s, Exxon scientists were aware of the role burning fossil fuels plays in climate change. Exxon subsequently funded organizations that publicly deny the science behind human-caused climate change.

As a publicly traded company, Exxon has a legal requirement to disclose risk; therefore, prosecutors are investigating whether the corporation knowingly misled investors over the long-term risk of climate change. The federal Securities and Exchange Commission was also reportedly investigating as of last year.

Exxon filed its lawsuit challenging the investigation in Texas last year, but recently the judge in the case opted to move the suit to the U.S. District Court in Manhattan. After challenging the New York and Massachusetts subpoena, Exxon was ordered to hand over emails and documents related to climate change communications.

Schneidermans office reached a settlement in 2015 with Peabody Coal, after a multi-year investigation found that the company had violated state law by misleading shareholders about the risk to the company of climate change and efforts to stop climate change.

A spokesperson for the New York Attorney Generals Offices said Exxons lawsuit would not deter the current investigation.

We will continue to pursue our fraud investigation under New York law, despite attempts by Exxon and Big Oils beneficiaries to delay and distract from the serious issues at hand, Amy Spitalnick told ThinkProgress in an email.

Environmental groups were not quite as diplomatic. Responding to a line in the brief suggesting that climate change is the subject of legitimate international debate, Climate Hawks Vote, a California group that has pressed the California attorney general to also pursue an investigation into Exxon, issued the following statement:

What f*cking debate?!?

Go here to see the original:
11 Republican AGs file on behalf of Exxon, claiming climate ... - ThinkProgress

As Georgia secretary of state, Karen Handel was, as Ian Millhiser reports, a real pioneer in Republican voter suppression.Handel didnt just push a voter ID law. She really explored the full range of options available to a Republican elections official who wants to keep peopleespecially possible Democratsfrom voting. She encouraged voters to challenge one anothers qualifications to vote, an intimidation tactic often employed by Republicans. She tried to purge thousands of new citizens from the voter rolls. And she didnt just go after voters, she went after ballot access for Democrats:

In the middle of an election cycle, Republican state Sen. Joe Carter decided to withdraw from his reelection race and run for a judgeship instead. Carter was slated to run unopposed, which meant that there would be no candidates for his soon-to-be-vacant seat.

According to the Atlanta-based alt-weekly Creative Loafing, Handel solved this problem by allowing new candidates to qualify to appear on the ballot but only if they were Republicans. Democrats, the alt-weekly reported, werent given the chance to field a candidate for the newly open seat.

And this was not an isolated incident. On the day before a primary election for a state house race, Handel ruled that the lone Democratic candidate must be removed from the ballot because he didnt qualify as a resident of the district. She also did not allow Democrats to submit a new candidate.

Its incredibly apt that Georgia officials aretrying to prevent newly registered votersfrom voting in the June run-off election.

Read the original post:
Karen Handel is a longtime soldier in the Republican war on voting - Daily Kos

David Goldman/AP

Democrat Jon Ossoff nearly won the US House seat vacated by Trump's Health and Human Services secretary, Tom Price, in what Mother Jones dubbed the "First Real Battle Between Millennials and Trump." Ossoff, however, fell about 2 points short of the 50 percent he needed in Tuesday's vote to avoid a runoff in the crowded Georgia race. That's a bummer for Democrats, as the runoff is expected to be a much harder battle for Ossoffin a district that was considered safely Republican. Even though Hillary Clinton nearly won the district in November, now theRepublicans will unite behind a single candidate who picked up about 20 percent of the vote.

That candidate is Karen Handel, who once served as Georgia's secretary of state and chaired a county board of commissioners. She also ran unsuccessfully for governor in 2010 and US Senate in 2014. In a campaign blog post during her 2010 campaign, Handel lauded so-called "crisis pregnancy centers," which exist primarily to convince pregnant women not to get abortions, and pledged to eliminate grants to Planned Parenthood. But Georgia Right to Life questioned her anti-abortion credentials and refused to endorse Handel because she supported exceptions for rape, incest, and instances when the mother's life is in danger. "My husband Steve and I tried for nearly ten years to have children," Handel explained during the campaign. "It is the single greatest disappointment in my life, and I can say with certainty that no one in this race cherishes human life more than I do." In response, the president of Georgia Right to Life called her "infertile" and "barren."

Since that race, Handel has become a significant player in anti-abortion politics. In 2011, Handel joined breast cancer nonprofit Susan G. Komen Foundation as vice president for federal affairs less than a year before the group announced it would cancel hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of grants to Planned Parenthood. She is said to have pushed the conversation that ultimately led the organization to stop funding breast cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood clinics. The backlash against the Komen Foundation was swiftcorporate sponsors expressed concern, there was a deluge of outrage on social media, and the employee overseeing the grants quit in protest. Handel resigned shortly after the controversy surfaced and the foundation quickly backed away from the move, but the damage had already been done. Handel went on to write a book called Planned Bullyhood, in which she characterizes Planned Parenthood as "a bunch of schoolyard thugs."

The race for Price's house seat may be Handel's opportunity to finally break into higher office. Her anti-abortion advocacy and the stain she left at the Komen Foundation will likely benefit her in this race, given the eagernessRepublicans and Tom Price sharefor defunding Planning Parenthood. Republicans in both Washington and Georgia are expected to pour significant resources into the Georgia runoff in an effort to keep the seat in Republican control. "Tomorrow, we start the campaign anew," Handel said after the election results came in on Tuesday, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "Beating Ossoff and holding this seat is something that rises above any one person."

More here:
The Republican in Georgia's Runoff Election Has an Alarming Past - Mother Jones

New York Times

Jason Chaffetz, Powerful House Republican, Won't Run in 2018 New York Times WASHINGTON Representative Jason Chaffetz, the powerful chairman of the House oversight committee, told supporters on Wednesday that he would not seek re-election to Congress or run for any office in 2018. Mr. Chaffetz, 50, a Utah Republican ... Powerful Republican Jason Chaffetz says he won't run for Congress againVICE News Top Republican and Benghazi crusader Jason Chaffetz will not seek reelection in CongressRaw Story Republican ethics chairman refusing to investigate Trump says he will not seek re-electionThe Independent all 187 news articles »

See more here:
Jason Chaffetz, Powerful House Republican, Won't Run in 2018 - New York Times

A top House Republican is urging President Trump to submit to Congress a new use-of-force resolution governing the country's fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said the sustained nature of the U.S. military actions against ISIS demands that Congress grant the president the authority to conduct future operations against the terrorist group. Hes calling on Trump to take the first step.

The president ought to submit on his own a new, you know, request for the authorization and use of military force, Cole told CNNs New Day on Wednesday. We should debate it and pose the approach limits, if there are, and go from there.

Trump escalated the militarys involvement in the Middle East earlier this month, firing 59 missiles at an airfield controlled by the Syrian government. The strike was a direct response to a poison gas attack against civilians said to be initiated by Syrian President Bashar Assad days earlier.

He had the right to do that. That was a one-strike thing. I don't think that required congressional approval, Cole said of Trump.

But we're in sustained military activity against ISIS. I think that does require a new authorization, because ISIS didn't exist in 2002 and we certainly weren't fighting in Syria and didn't expect to be, he added.

So if you are fighting against a new enemy in new places, it seems to me you need a new authorization for the use of military force.

Following the recent strike on Syria, a number of Republican leaders, including House Speaker Paul RyanPaul RyanChaffetz decision stuns Washington House GOP to hold Saturday conference call Ryan: GOP putting 'finishing touches' on healthcare bill MORE (R-Wis.), have urged Trump to confer with Congress about what should come next in the fight against ISIS. But they havent gone as far as Cole in calling for a new resolution authorizing the use of military force, known as an AUMF.

It is now appropriate for the administration to consult with Congress as it considers next steps to resolve the long-running crisis in Syria, Ryans office said following the strike.

Democrats have been much more aggressive. Behind House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), theyve been pushing Ryan to bring an early halt to Congresss current recess so lawmakers can start debating the future of military operations in Syria. By ignoring the issue, they argue, Congress is shirking its responsibility to protect the separation of powers dictated by the Constitution.

Congress last passed an AUMF in 2002, which authorized the post-9/11 fight in Iraq. A year earlier, lawmakers had passed another AUMF to govern the battle against al Qaeda in Afghanistan and beyond. Those calling now for a new resolution say the existing AUMFs are outdated and no longer apply to the expanded fight against terrorism, which is focused largely in Syria.

Trump had criticized Obama in 2013, suggesting any military actions in Syria would require congressional clearance.

The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria big mistake if he does not! Trump, then a reality TV star, tweeted at the time.

In 2015, Obama had proposed a new AUMF designed to dictate the terms of U.S. military involvement in Syria and other Middle Eastern hotspots. But many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle opposed the measure, and GOP leaders, who controlled both chambers of Congress, never considered it.

Cole on Wednesday took a jab at Obama for not proposing an AUMF sooner, but also acknowledged the political difficulties facing leaders of both parties when it comes to voting on new military campaigns more than 15 years after 9/11.

Frankly, the leadership of both parties in the House has not wanted to have a vote on the use of military force. And the reason [is] they want to try to protect their members, Democrats and Republican leaders, Cole told CNN.

[But] the reality is we're paid to vote. And the Constitution is pretty clear on this, he added. So I don't think there is any excuse for Congress not taking this up.

Congress is scheduled to return to Washington on Tuesday.

The rest is here:
Top Republican presses Trump to submit war authorization - The Hill