#rep. Jerry nadler

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Roger Stone has contested Mediaite’s reporting this week regarding comments he made on tape floating the assassination of two members of Congress.

“I never spoke about assassinating anyone,” Stone wrote in an X post Thursday. “Fake Mediaite can’t produce the recording they claim to have.” In another post he wrote that Mediaite “has produced NO audio of me threatening 2 Dem Congressmen. Where is it? Post it !”

Mediaite is now publishing an excerpt of the audio, which was recorded in person at Caffe Europa, a public restaurant in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, weeks before the 2020 election. It has been lightly edited in order to protect our source, who requested anonymity out of fear of repercussions from Stone, whom they believe to be dangerous.

“Roger spent election day and the months prior calling for acts of violence,” the source told Mediaite.

The conversation, which can be heard above, was between Stone and his associate Sal Greco, who at the time served as both an NYPD officer and security for the longtime political operative and confidant to Donald Trump. During the discussion, Stone speaks with Greco about assassinating two prominent House Democrats, Jerry Nadler and Eric Swalwell.

“It’s time to do it,” Stone told Greco. “Let’s go find Swalwell. It’s time to do it. Then we’ll see how brave the rest of them are. It’s time to do it. It’s either Swalwell or Nadler has to die before the election. They need to get the message. Let’s go find Swalwell and get this over with. I’m just not putting up with this shit anymore.”

The source previously told Mediaite that they believed Stone was not joking around. “It was definitely concerning that he was constantly planning violence with an NYPD officer and other militia groups,” the source said.

In addition to his posts on X, Stone previously denied making the comments in a statement to Mediaite. “Total nonsense,” he said. “I’ve never said anything of the kind more AI manipulation. You asked me to respond to audios that you don’t let me hear and you don’t identify a source for. Absurd.”

Greco did not deny the claims, writing in a text to Mediaite, “I don’t think your reader is interested in ancient political fodder.”

Mediaite’s source dismissed Stone’s claims the audio was fake. The source pointed to Stone’s past comments apparently calling for violence that were caught on video by a documentary crew which he later claimed were “deep fakes.”

“Any attempts to claim this was AI or recently created would be false,” the source said. “Roger spent election day and the months prior calling for acts of violence, which can be seen on video in the film A Storm Foretold.”

The 2023 documentary followed Stone as he participated in the “Stop The Steal” movement that erupted after Trump’s loss in the 2020 election. The movement reached its bloody apogee when a horde of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 to protest the certification of the election. Some of the film’s footage was provided to the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack. In one harrowing clip, Stone said, “Fuck the voting, let’s get right to the violence. Shoot to kill.”

Stone claimed the videos were “deep fakes.”

Both Swalwell and Nadler serve on the House Judiciary Committee and have their own histories with Stone, who was convicted of federal crimes in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. His sentence was commuted by then-President Trump days before he was set to report to prison.

A few months before the Caffe Europa audio was recorded, Nadler announced the Judiciary Committee would be investigating why Stone’s sentence was commuted by Trump.

Greco, who was with Stone during the Jan. 6 riot, was eventually fired by the NYPD over his association with the infamous political operative. An NYPD spokesperson confirmed to Mediaite that Greco was terminated in August 2022.

Last week, Mediaite reported on another recording in which Stone told Greco to “abduct” and “punish” Aaron Zelinsky, the prosecutor who led the case against him as part of the Mueller probe.

[rodhalliburton]

The Disrespect For Marriage Act

The Disrespect For Marriage Act

On July 19, 2022, all Democratic members of Congress, along with forty-seven Republicans, voted to pass the Respect for Marriage Act. The fate of the bill in the Senate is uncertain. The Act, introduced by Democrat Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which defined marriage as a union only between a man and a woman. The Respect for Marriage Act seeks to…

[globalcourant]

Rep. Jerry Nadler will win the Democratic nomination for New York's 12th District 

Rep. Jerry Nadler will win the Democratic nomination for New York’s 12th District 

Democrats in Florida on Tuesday picked Rep. Charlie Crist, left, to take on Gov. Ron DeSantis in the fall, CNN projected. (Getty Images) The final pieces of the midterm puzzle are coming into focus as Tuesday primaries in New York, Florida and Oklahoma lock in key parts of the November election slate. Democrats in Florida on Tuesday picked Rep. Charlie Crist to take on Gov. Ron DeSantis in the…

[afeelgoodblog]

The Best News of Last Year

1. Belgium approves four-day week and gives employees the right to ignore their bosses after work

Workers in Belgium will soon be able to choose a four-day week under a series of labour market reforms announced on Tuesday.

The reform package agreed by the country's multi-party coalition government will also give workers the right to turn off work devices and ignore work-related messages after hours without fear of reprisal.

"We have experienced two difficult years. With this agreement, we set a beacon for an economy that is more innovative, sustainable and digital. The aim is to be able to make people and businesses stronger," Belgian prime minister Alexander de Croo told a press conference announcing the reform package.

2. Spain makes it a crime for pro-lifers to harass people outside abortion clinics

Spain has criminalized the harassment or intimidation of women going for an abortion under new legislation approved on Wednesday by the Senate. The move, which involved changes to the penal code, means anti-abortion activists who try to convince women not to terminate their pregnancies could face up to a year behind bars.

3. House passes bill to federally decriminalize marijuana

The House has voted with a slim bipartisan majority to federally decriminalize marijuana. The vote was 220 to 204.

The bill, sponsored by Democratic Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, will prevent federal agencies from denying federal workers security clearances for cannabis use, and will allow the Veterans’ Administration to recommend medical marijuana to veterans living with posttraumatic stress disorder.

The bill also expunges the record of people convicted of non-violent cannabis offenses, which House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said, “can haunt people of color and impact the trajectory of their lives and career indefinitely.”

4. France makes birth control free for all women under 25

The scheme, which could benefit three million women, covers the pill, IUDs, contraceptive patches and other methods composed of steroid hormones.

Contraception for minors was already free in France. Several European countries, including Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway, make contraception free for teens.

5. The 1st fully hydrogen-powered passenger train service is now running in Germany. The only emissions are steam & condensed water.

Five of the trains started running in August. Another nine will be added in the coming months to replace 15 diesel trains on the regional route. Alstom says the Coradia iLint has a range of 1,000 kilometers, meaning that it can run all day on the line using a single tank of hydrogen. A hydrogen filling station has been set up on the route between Cuxhaven, Bremerhaven, Bremervörde and Buxtehude.

6. Princeton will cover all tuition costs for most families making under $100,000 a year, after getting rid of student loans

In September, the New Jersey Ivy League school announced it would be expanding its financial aid program to offer free tuition, including room and board, for most families whose annual income is under $100,000 a year. Previously, the same benefit was offered to families making under $65,000 a year. This new income limit will take effect for all undergraduates starting in the fall of 2023.

Princeton was also the first school in the US to eliminate student loans from its financial aid packages.

7. Humpback whales no longer listed as endangered after major recovery

Humpback whales will be removed from Australia's threatened-species list, after the government's independent scientific panel on threatened species deemed the mammals had made a major recovery. Humpback whales will no longer be considered an endangered or vulnerable species.

Climate change and fishing still pose threats to their long-term health.

Some other uplifting news from last year:

A Cancer Trial’s Unexpected Result: Remission in Every Patient

California 100 percent powered by renewables for first time

Israel formally bans LGBTQ conversion therapy

Tokyo Passes Law to Recognize Same-Sex Partnerships

First 100,000 KG Removed From the Great Pacific Garbage Patch

As we ring in the New Year let’s remember to focus on the good news. May this be a year of even more kindness and generosity. Wishing everyone a happy and healthy 2023!

Thank you for following and supporting this g this newsletter

Buy me a coffee ❤️

[socialjusticeinamerica]

Just wait till they get back into power and start rounding up you and yours.

[eretzyisrael]

An Israeli cafe in New York City’s heavily Jewish Upper West Side was vandalized over the weekend with fake blood and threatening graffiti, spurring local lawmakers to call for a hate crime investigation.

Red paint was doused on the facade of Effy’s Cafe, a Kosher eatery in the borough of Manhattan owned by Israelis, and the phrase “form line here to support genocide” was sprayed on the sidewalk in front of the restaurant.

“Targeting a small business because of who it’s owned by — Israeli, Palestinian, or any other group — is not only wrong, it’s self defeating,” said US Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) on X/Twitter. “The recent attack on Effy’s Cafe is a cowardly act of antisemitism that cannot, and will not, be tolerated in our community.”

New York City Councilwoman Gale Brewer said she had called on the New York City Police Department (NYPD)’s Hate Crime Task Force to open an investigation into the vandalism. Other graffiti was found nearby at Riverside Park the same day which said, “Israelism is Terrorism.”

Police said that the vandals have yet to be apprehended.

Just hours after the vandalism, dozens of local residents — some draped in Israeli flags — showed up to Effy’s to help clean the graffiti and dine-in as a show of support.

By Monday afternoon, all signs of the attack had been removed.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Michelangelo Signorile at The Signorile Report:

Yesterday, as the sensational corporate media continued to focus on campus protests, Republicans pushed through another piece of political theater in the House, the Antisemitism Awareness Act. While there has been some unacceptable antisemitic rhetoric reported at protests, often from opportunistic haters who are not students—just as there has been anti-Muslim rhetoric from some people mingled among pro-Israel counter-protesters, though it gets less reported on—the vast majority of the campus protests across the country have been civil and peaceful, and a great many of the protestors standing up for Palestinians are Jewish students themselves.

The bill that passed in Congress is a sham, as it conflates being against Israel’s leaders’ actions and its policies with being antisemitic. Democratic Congressman Jerry Nadler of New York—my representative, who is Jewish—voted against the bill, saying it would put the "thumb on the scale" in a way that could "chill" constitutionally protected free speech. The worst part of this theater is that the Republicans who spearheaded the bill, like New York’s Mike Lawler, and those like New York’s Rep. Elise Stefanik, who are attacking university presidents they claim are condoning antisemitism (all part of the GOP attack on higher education and diversity, equity, and inclusion programs), have embraced in their votes and/or their rhetoric white supremacist Great Replacement theory as they rail against policies at the border. The antisemitic, racist conspiracy theory, which, as the American Jewish Committee describes it, posits that there is “an intentional effort, led by Jews, to promote mass non-white immigration”—an “invasion”—has gone from the fringes of the racist far right to the heart of the GOP in Congress, as Republican politicians openly claim an “invasion” of migrants (Brown and Black people) is occurring, fomented by Democrats, to “replace” (White) Americans. 

[...] Trump this week also attacked the protests as antisemitic—and said Biden has abandoned Jews and Israel—while he claimed several times this week and last week that the campus protests make the white supremacist “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville in 2017 “look like a peanut.” Trump is actually embracing and promoting—once again—violent white supremacist actions in which a woman, Heather Heyer, was killed, and where racist marchers promoting Great Replacement theory and carrying torches were literally chanting, “The Jews will not replace us!” Trump also gave an interview to Time magazine this week that is not getting enough attention—as the media is laser-focused on every detail of Trump’s New York trial or the campus protests—in which he lays out many of his authoritarian plans, using the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, if he wins the presidency again. Just like at his rallies, he’s saying it all out loud.

Donald Trump's plan to deport 11M+ undocumented immigrants is based off the racist Great Replacement Theory conspiracies.

Antisemitic maniac Trump also falsely called the college protests over the Gaza Genocide "antisemitic" and baselessly accused President Joe Biden (and the Democratic Party by extension) of "abandoning" Jews and Israel.

[trickricksblog09]

TRIGGERED: Rep. Jerry Nadler wildly lashes out and calls criticism of George Soros “antisemitic” at the House Judiciary GOP's hearing on violent crime.

Newsflash: not every criticism of George Soros is antisemitic.

The criticisms deal with public policy and the matters of rising crime with Soros-backed District Attorneys.

https://truthsocial.com/@RepMattGaetz/112378066621852361

[tieflingkisser]

Why American Jews Should Oppose the Antisemitism Awareness Act

Hatred in the U.S. is real. The bill that passed the House will only make it worse.

Last week, the House of Representatives passed the Antisemitism Awareness Act. But American Jews who care about fighting antisemitism should be against it. HR 6090, the Antisemitism Awareness Act, passed 320–91. Seventy Democrats and 21 Republicans voted against it (including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who noted that she was against antisemitism but wanted to protect her Christian right to say that Jews killed Jesus). The legislation would see the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism. There are some who have long opposed codifying this particular definition because it comes with troublesome examples, most of which have to do with Israel. These include things like “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” “applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation,” and “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.” Under this definition, then, Masha Gessen’s New Yorker essay on Holocaust memory and Israeli policy in Gaza would be considered antisemitic under the law. Gessen is a Jewish descendant of Holocaust survivors and victims. There are many, including Zionist Jews, who have long warned that the IHRA standards could be used to chill pro-Palestinian speech. After the House passed the bill, Americans for Peace Now CEO Hadar Susskind warned in a statement:

Antisemitism is the hatred of Jews. Unfortunately, one doesn’t need to look far to find it these days. But the supporters of this bill are looking in the wrong places. They aren’t interested in protecting Jews. They are interested in supporting right-wing views and narratives on Israel and shutting down legitimate questions and criticisms by crying “antisemite” at everyone, including Jews, who oppose the Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir, Smotrich government.

Congressman Jerry Nadler of New York also opposed the bill:

I will take lectures from no one about the need for vigorous efforts to fight antisemitism on campus or anywhere else. I am also a deeply committed Zionist. … But while this definition and its examples may have useful applications in certain contexts, by effectively codifying them into Title VI, this bill threatens to chill constitutionally protected speech. Speech that is critical of Israel—alone—does not constitute unlawful discrimination. By encompassing purely political speech about Israel into Title VI’s ambit, the bill sweeps too broadly.

I agree with all of this. I think a bill that effectively restricts speech on the country’s foreign policy has no business being passed in the United States. This bill would be a problem if it only restricted Palestinian Americans from describing their families’ histories or present realities. That codifying this definition in a bill fighting antisemitism would also deem many Jews antisemitic—including the quarter of American Jews who in 2021 said Israel is an apartheid state—undercuts its stated reason for being. But I also think you do not have to disagree with the IHRA—you can, in fact, feel that this definition is a sound one—to believe that this law is a mistake. All you have to do is remember that, as a minority in the United States, American Jews have been as safe and secure as we are because of liberalism, pluralism, and civil rights. American Jews take pride in American Jewish participation in the Civil Rights Movement, and for good reason. But it isn’t just that some American Jews have stood up for civil rights, though that is true. Protection of civil rights has also helped American Jews. When American Jews stood up for freedom of expression and the right to be full political participants, they were also standing up for their own rights. In 1963, speaking before the March on Washington, Rabbi Joachim Prinz said, “America must not become a nation of onlookers. America must not remain silent. Not merely Black America, but all of America. It must speak up and act … not for the sake of the Black community but for the sake of the image, the idea, and the aspiration of America itself.” He might have added “for the sake of every minority community.” Freedom of religion and the right to express that religion in public by, say, freely speaking out against prayer in schools has long protected Jewish equality in American life. The same goes for the freedom to protest American domestic or foreign policy—against, for example, the Vietnam War (as many American Jews did). These fundamental rights are a large part of why American Jews are free to participate in public life as both Americans and Jews.

[keep reading]

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

A top House Democrat has reintroduced a bill to federally legalize, tax and regulate marijuana, with provisions to expunge prior cannabis convictions.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, refiled the Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act on Wednesday. There are 33 initial cosponsors—all Democrats.

The comprehensive legalization legislation has passed the House twice in recent sessions—but this marks the first time it’s being introduced with Republicans in control of the chamber, raising serious questions about whether it will move. The Judiciary Committee, which is the primary panel of jurisdiction, is chaired by anti-cannabis Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH).

Even the prospects of a modest marijuana banking bill that’s set for committee action in the Senate next week are uncertain in the House under the GOP majority. That said, a GOP-led House panel did advance legislation on Wednesday to prevent the denial of federal employment or security clearances based on a candidate’s past cannabis use.

In any case, advocates have long touted the MORE Act as an example of the type of wide-ranging cannabis reform legislation that would not only end prohibition but take steps to right the wrongs of prohibition and promote social equity.

Here are details about the key provisions of the MORE Act:

“Nadler’s MORE Act would deschedule marijuana by removing it from the list of federally banned drugs under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). However, it would not require states to legalize cannabis and would maintain a level of regulatory discretion up to states.

Marijuana products would be subject to a federal excise tax, starting at 5% for the first two years after enactment and rising to 8% by the fifth year of implementation.

Nobody could be denied federal public benefits based solely on the use or possession of marijuana or past juvenile conviction for a cannabis offense. Federal agencies couldn’t use 'past or present cannabis or marijuana use as criteria for granting, denying, or rescinding a security clearance.'

People could not be penalized under federal immigration laws for any cannabis related activity or conviction, whether it occurred before or after the enactment of the legalization legislation.

The bill creates a process for expungements of non-violent federal marijuana convictions.

Tax revenue from cannabis sales would be placed in a new 'Opportunity Trust Fund.' Half of those tax dollars would support a 'Community Reinvestment Grant Program' under the Justice Department, 10% would support substance misuse treatment programs, 40% would go to the federal Small Business Administration (SBA) to support implementation and a newly created equitable licensing grant program.

The Community Reinvestment Grant Program would 'fund eligible non-profit community organizations to provide a variety of services for individuals adversely impacted by the War on Drugs…to include job training, reentry services, legal aid for civil and criminal cases (including for expungement of cannabis convictions), among others.'

The program would further support funding for substance misuse treatment for people from communities disproportionately impacted by drug criminalization. Those funds would be available for programs offering services to people with substance misuse disorders for any drug, not just cannabis.

While the bill wouldn’t force states to adopt legalization, it would create incentives to promote equity. For example, SBA would facilitate a program to providing licensing grants to states and localities that have moved to expunge records for people with prior marijuana convictions or 'taken steps to eliminate violations or other penalties for persons still under State or local criminal supervision for a cannabis-related offense or violation for conduct now lawful under State or local law.'

The bill’s proposed Cannabis Restorative Opportunity Program would provide funds 'for loans to assist small business concerns that are owned and controlled by individuals adversely impacted by the War on Drugs in eligible States and localities.'

The comptroller general, in consultation with the head of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), would be required to carry out a study on the demographics of people who have faced federal marijuana convictions, 'including information about the age, race, ethnicity, sex, and gender identity.'

The Departments of Treasury, Justice and the SBA would need to 'issue or amend any rules, standard operating procedures, and other legal or policy guidance necessary to carry out implementation of the MORE Act' within one year of its enactment.

Marijuana producers and importers would also need to obtain a federal permit. And they would be subject to a $1,000 per year federal tax as well for each premise they operate.

The bill would impose certain packaging and labeling requirements.

It also prescribes penalties for unlawful conduct such as illegal, unlicensed production or importation of cannabis products.

The Treasury Secretary would be required to carry out a study 'on the characteristics of the cannabis industry, with recommendations to improve the regulation of the industry and related taxes.'

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) would be required to 'regularly compile, maintain, and make public data on the demographics' of marijuana business owners and workers.

Workers in 'safety sensitive' positions, such as those regulated by the Department of Transportation, could continue to be drug tested for THC and face penalties for unauthorized use. Federal workers would also continue to be subject to existing drug testing policies.

References to 'marijuana' or 'marihuana' under federal statute would be changed to 'cannabis.' It’s unclear if that would also apply to the title of the bill itself.”

Some advocates say that the MORE Act’s time has passed, however, and that it doesn’t realistically grapple with the need to enact truly justice-focused legalization through a fair and equitable market.

“The MORE Act was never meant to be a bill to address the real needs of federal regulations,” Shaleen Title, founder and director, Parabola Center for Law and Policy, told Marijuana Moment. “It was a historic bill when it was first introduced to address systemic racial disparities and demonstrate that social justice must be addressed in federal reform, but has never fully addressed the economic justice side of the equation.”

“We’re in a period of rapid corporate consolidation, with a real possibility that big pharmaceutical corporations will be entering the industry in the near future,” she said. “Outdated legalization bills like this would quickly allow for monopolization, putting small farmers and mom-and-pop shops out of business and undermining the public health and racial equity goals of most state cannabis programs. They should all be updated with an intentional regulatory structure and a thoughtful plan to transition to a national market.”

[beardedmrbean]

Last Wednesday, House Republicans passed the Born Alive Act—a piece of legislation that would require physicians to care for infants who are born alive following an attempted abortion. The bill passed the House 220-210. The overwhelming majority of House Democrats, many of whom support abortion on demand, voted against it, even though abortion itself wasn't at issue. Their extreme reaction to the bill showcased just how out of step they still are with the majority of Americans' views on protecting the most vulnerable members of society.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would require that a health care professional who is present for a failed abortion perform life-saving "professional skill, care, and diligence," including by making sure the baby winds up at a hospital. This seems like a common-sense legal requirement to fulfill the Hippocratic Oath: "First do no harm." It likely won't go anywhere in the Senate, but Republicans' support for it relays a strong message about life; Democrats' response does the opposite.

The bill sparked bizarre, even ghoulish, reactions from multiple politicians.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) apparently thought it would be wrong to tell health care professionals to bring a baby who's just survived a botched abortion to the hospital. "The problem with this bill is that it endangers some infants [born alive] by stating that that infant must immediately be brought to the hospital," he said on the House floor.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) echoed Nadler's talking point. She said the bill "requires immediately taking a struggling baby to a hospital. That hospital could be hours away and could be detrimental to the life of that baby." So, following a botched abortion, the baby should be allowed to suffer and die because a hospital may be some distance away?

Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Or.) said the bill was "extremist, dangerous and unnecessary."

House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) said the bill was "deliberately misleading and offensive to the women who face pregnancy complications and the doctors and nurses who provide their care."

Opinion polling on abortion varies, but has consistently found that, while half of Americans identify as pro-choice, many who favor abortion also support numerous restrictions. Most Americans do not support abortion up to birth or partial-birth abortion, for example. One survey found 79 percent of adults did not support late-term abortion, and "80 percent opposed day-before-birth abortion." Thus, it's hard to imagine most Americans would reject a bill that favors saving—or trying to save—the life of a baby who survived an abortion, in states where late-term abortions are still legal. It's hardly a pro-life measure, just a humane one.

Whether Democrats can acknowledge it or not, a culture of life is taking hold in the United States. Abortions were steadily declining before Dobbs, from nearly 1.6 million in 1990 to just 620,327 in 2020. This decline cannot be credited to Democrats, who have partnered with behemoth organizations that not only market abortion as the best choice for scared women, but encourage women to brag about their abortions. Even so, the number of abortion providers has declined too. With the Dobbs decision, empowering women to have abortions, especially late-term ones, should be as unpopular as it is uncommon. Surely bashing a bill that guarantees proper medical care for babies who survive the heinous act of an abortion is even more outlandish than applauding women for their abortions.

A bill that demands such care for the most vulnerable in society is a litmus test for how willing an incoming House of Representatives is to support life. One would think Democrats would fall in line with their constituents' views and be quietly supportive, or at the very least, not so vocally opposed to the bill. But that isn't how they reacted. It's disappointing to see after all that's happened on the abortion issue, including a dramatic decline in abortions in many states since the Dobbs v. Jackson decision last June, some Democrats still don't support a culture of life, even when the babies are born alive.

[globalcourant]

Rep. Jerry Nadler will win the Democratic nomination for New York's 12th District 

Rep. Jerry Nadler will win the Democratic nomination for New York’s 12th District 

Democrats in Florida on Tuesday picked Rep. Charlie Crist, left, to take on Gov. Ron DeSantis in the fall, CNN projected. (Getty Images) The final pieces of the midterm puzzle are coming into focus as Tuesday primaries in New York, Florida and Oklahoma lock in key parts of the November election slate. Democrats in Florida on Tuesday picked Rep. Charlie Crist to take on Gov. Ron DeSantis in the…

[joliepasproductions]

Angelina was on Capitol Hill today to talk about the Justice For All Act.

“It was great to meet with the talented Angelina Jolie this morning to discuss the Justice for All Act, which enhances protections for crime victims while preventing wrongful convictions. I voted for the bill in 2004 and hope that we can reauthorize it soon.”- Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler

[maswartz]

Good. Put republicans on record as being against the border deal.

[berlinini]

March 8 2023

Spotify officially announced that it has expanded access to Discovery Mode, a contentious program that gives artists the chance to gain more algorithmic exposure on the platform — through Spotify Radio and autoplay — in exchange for a lower royalty rate. (...)

“To ensure the tool is accessible to artists at any stage of their careers, it won’t require any upfront budget,” Spotify wrote in its blog post. “Instead, labels or rights holders agree to be paid a promotional recording royalty rate for streams in personalized listening sessions where we provided this service.” Last year, managers told Billboard that the royalties they received on plays from Discovery Mode were 30% less than the royalties they received from plays elsewhere on Spotify.

In 2021, Representatives Jerry Nadler (D-NY) and Hank Johnson Jr. (D-GA) expressed their concerns about Discovery Mode, noting in a letter to Spotify that it could “set in motion a ‘race to the bottom’ in which artists and labels feel compelled to accept lower royalties as a necessary way to break through an extremely crowded and competitive music environment.” Last year, Reps. Yvette D. Clarke, Judy Chu and Tony Cardenas also wrote to Spotify, worrying that Discovery Mode “preys on unwitting” listeners who aren’t aware they’re being served a song thanks in part to a promotional program with a back-end cost. (...)