Biden Bits: As the Country She Hails From…

Biden Tweets Logo. Image by Lenny Ghoul.

When Biden Bits was posted for Tuesday, President Biden tweeted 3 times. He added 3 tweets giving him a Tuesday Tweeting Total of 6 tweets and 0 retweets.

On July 11th 2022, President Biden offered remarks commemorating the passage of the Safer Communities Act. The YouTube is 31 minutes and 42 seconds long.

President Biden: You know, it closes the so-called “boyfriend loophole.”  If you’re convicted of assault against your girlfriend or boy- — you can’t buy a gun.  You can’t do it.  (Applause.)

President Biden: Fort Hood, Texas, 2009: 13 dead, 30 more injured. Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, 1918 [2018]: 17 dead, 17 injured. In both places, countless others suffering with invisible wounds. In both places, red-flag laws could have stopped both those shooters.  (Applause.)

First Lady of Ukraine, Olena Zelenska is scheduled to speak before Congress this morning. On Tuesday Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) sent out a dear colleague letter:

Dear Colleague,

Tomorrow, the Congress will have the distinct honor to welcome the First Lady of Ukraine Olena Zelenska to speak to the Congress.  As we do so, Putin’s heinous war in Ukraine wages on – and it continues to take a terrible toll on women and girls.

In the course of visits from Ukrainian leaders — from members of parliament to grassroots heroes — many of us have heard horrific stories about the brutal treatment of women and girls by Russian forces.  Indeed, we have sufficient evidence of kidnappings and deportations into Russia, rape of women in front of family members and even rape of little girls. 

When I have commented to some that it is outrageous and sickening that war produces such atrocities, I have been told these barbaric crimes are being directly ordered by Putin.  Let me be clear: rape of children cannot be a weapon of war.  It is a war crime!

The brutality of Russian aggression and the treatment of women and children have horrified the American people, and these crimes have been of particular concern to the women Members of Congress.

We look forward to hearing First Lady Zelenska report on this situation, as well as offer insight on security, economic and humanitarian conditions on the ground.  Her visit to the Congress is part of her important mission here in the United States, meeting with First Lady Dr. Jill Biden and other senior Biden Administration officials.

We hope that all Members will take advantage of this important and timely opportunity to hear directly from First Lady Zelenska, to learn more about the terrible toll of the Russian invasion and to express our gratitude to the people of Ukraine for their fight for Democracy.

The presentation will be received tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. in the Capitol Visitor Center Congressional Auditorium.  All Members of the House and Senate are encouraged to attend.

Thank you for your ongoing leadership for Democracy in Ukraine.

NANCY PELOSI 

Speaker.gov. 07/19/2022.

Live Feed CBS News:

President Biden’s Public Schedule for July 20th 2022:

9:30 AMThe President receives the President’s Daily Brief
Closed Press
10:30 AMOut-of-Town Pool Call Time
Out-of-Town Pool
11:05 AMIn-Town Pool Call Time
In-Town Pool
11:45 AMThe President departs the White House en route Joint Base Andrews
South LawnOpen Press
12:05 PMThe President departs Joint Base Andrews en route Warwick, RI
Joint Base AndrewsOut-of-Town Pool
1:15 PMThe President arrives in Warwick, RI
Open Press
1:30 PMThe President departs T.F. Green International Airport en route Brayton Point
Out-of-Town Pool
1:55 PMThe President arrives at Brayton Point
Out-of-Town Pool
2:45 PMThe President delivers remarks on tackling the climate crisis and seizing the opportunity of a clean energy future to create jobs and lower costs for families
Open Press
3:30 PMThe President departs Brayton Point en route T.F. Green International Airport
Out-of-Town Pool
4:05 PMThe President departs en route Joint Base Andrews
Open Press
5:30 PMThe President departs Joint Base Andrews en route the White House
Joint Base AndrewsOut-of-Town Pool
5:40 PMThe President arrives at the White House
South LawnPress Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and National Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy will gaggle aboard Air Force One en route Somerset, Massachusetts

During Tuesday’s daily White House press briefing, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre gave an overview of President Biden’s upcoming remarks on the “climate crisis” from Somerset, Massachusetts.

It’s also why the President is committed to taking aggressive action to tackle climate change and made clear if the Senate won’t act, he will.  In fact, as many you — as many of you have seen already today, the President will travel to Somerset, Massachusetts, tomorrow.  While there, he will visit the future site of a manufacturing plant located at a former coal-fired power plant that will produce transmission cables for Massachusetts’s booming offshore wind industry.

The President will underscore the historic clean energy investments his Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will make in Massachusetts and announce additional actions he will take to tackle the climate crisis and secure a clean energy future.

The President ran on fighting the unprecedented economic and national security threat of climate change.  And he has take- — he has been taking decisive action to do so since taking office.  Tomorrow’s action will be a continuation of that work.

White House.gov. 07/19/2022.

I’ve cued the above video to where she begins her statements above. NSC Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby spoke to the press in the briefing for the first 30 minutes of the press briefing. His full remarks can be found here.

President Biden has tweeted…

He has tweeted 2 times so far for Wednesday.

I’m gonna be straight-up honest with you regarding the Dobbs decision: It was dropped on my wedding anniversary, we had warning and an idea of just how truly bad it would be, but I’m still not rational enough to read the whole thing. I’ve read parts, I did finally manage to move beyond page 2…

But alas, it’s still a work in progress.

Having said that I can for sure say that H.R. 8404 Respect for Marriage Act, that passed the House on Tuesday, was written and introduced specifically because of Justice Clarence Thomas’ words from his concurring opinion (pdf., pg., 119) that said;

For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is “demonstrably erroneous,” Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. , (2020) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7), we have a duty to “correct the error” established in those precedents, Gamble v. United States, 587 U. S. , (2019) (THOMAS, J., concurring) (slip op., at 9). After overruling these demonstrably erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myriad rights that our substantive due process cases have generated.

Justice Thomas. pg (pdf) 119. 06/24/2022.

As I’m already going off book supplying my opinion versus just the bare bones facts; I also dislike this idea that I need to praise 47 Republicans for supporting people’s right to marry each other. The reason I dislike the idea; 157 House Republicans voted against it.

The Summary of H.R. 8404 Respect for Marriage Act:

This bill provides statutory authority for same-sex and interracial marriages.

Specifically, the bill repeals and replaces provisions that define, for purposes of federal law, marriage as between a man and a woman and spouse as a person of the opposite sex with provisions that recognize any marriage that is valid under state law. (The Supreme Court held that the current provisions were unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor in 2013.)

The bill also repeals and replaces provisions that do not require states to recognize same-sex marriages from other states with provisions that prohibit the denial of full faith and credit or any right or claim relating to out-of-state marriages on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin. (The Supreme Court held that state laws barring same-sex marriages were unconstitutional in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015; the Court held that state laws barring interracial marriages were unconstitutional in Loving v. Virginia in 1967.) The bill allows the Department of Justice to bring a civil action and establishes a private right of action for violations.

Congress.gov. 07/18/2022.

Roll Call 373: Yea’s 267, Nay’s 157, and No Vote’s 7 (again all Republicans).

Just FYI’s:

Griswold (1965): The question asked; Does the Constitution protect the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on a couple’s ability to be counseled in the use of contraceptives?

The Justices decided in a 7-2 decision said; the Court ruled that the Constitution did in fact protect the right of marital privacy against state restrictions on contraception. While the Court explained that the Constitution does not explicitly protect a general right to privacy, the various guarantees within the Bill of Rights create penumbras, or zones, that establish a right to privacy. Together, the First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth Amendments create the right to privacy in marital relations. The Connecticut statute conflicted with the exercise of this right and was therefore held null and void.

Lawrence (2003) The question asked; Do the criminal convictions of John Lawrence and Tyron Garner under the Texas “Homosexual Conduct” law, which criminalizes sexual intimacy by same-sex couples, but not identical behavior by different-sex couples, violate the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection of laws? Do their criminal convictions for adult consensual sexual intimacy in the home violate their vital interests in liberty and privacy protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Should Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), be overruled?

The Justices in a 6-3 decision said; No, yes, and yes. In a 6-3 opinion delivered by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the Court held that the Texas statute making it a crime for two persons of the same sex to engage in certain intimate sexual conduct violates the Due Process Clause. After explaining what it deemed the doubtful and overstated premises of Bowers, the Court reasoned that the case turned on whether Lawrence and Garner were free as adults to engage in the private conduct in the exercise of their liberty under the Due Process Clause. “Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government,” wrote Justice Kennedy. “The Texas statute furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual,” continued Justice Kennedy. Accordingly, the Court overruled Bowers. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, with whom Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Thomas joined, filed dissents.

Obergefell (2015) This questions was asked in two-parts: (1) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex? (2) Does the Fourteenth Amendment require a state to recognize a marriage between two people of the same sex that was legally licensed and performed in another state?

The Justices in a 5-4 decision said; Yes, yes. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy delivered the opinion for the 5-4 majority. The Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, and that analysis applies to same-sex couples in the same manner as it does to opposite-sex couples. Judicial precedent has held that the right to marry is a fundamental liberty because it is inherent to the concept of individual autonomy, it protects the most intimate association between two people, it safeguards children and families by according legal recognition to building a home and raising children, and it has historically been recognized as the keystone of social order. Because there are no differences between a same-sex union and an opposite-sex union with respect to these principles, the exclusion of same-sex couples from the right to marry violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment also guarantees the right of same-sex couples to marry as the denial of that right would deny same-sex couples equal protection under the law. Marriage rights have traditionally been addressed through both parts of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the same interrelated principles of liberty and equality apply with equal force to these cases; therefore, the Constitution protects the fundamental right of same-sex couples to marry. The Court also held that the First Amendment protects the rights of religious organizations to adhere to their principles, but it does not allow states to deny same-sex couples the right to marry on the same terms as those for opposite-sex couples.

President Biden: How many more mass shootings do we have to see where a shooter is 17, 18 years old and able to get his hands on a weapon and go on a killing spree?:

President Biden: You know, this new law requiring — requires young people under 21 to [under]go enhanced background checks before purchasing a gun. 

The press briefing will be audio only from Air Force One. It’s scheduled to start at 12:40 p.m. D.C., time.

President Biden’s remarks are scheduled for 2:45 p.m. D.C., time.

This is an Open Thread.

About the opinions in this article…

Any opinions expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this website or of the other authors/contributors who write for it.

About Tiff 1981 Articles
Member of the Free Press who is politically homeless and a political junkie.