WASHINGTON, DC – House Judiciary Chairman Representative Jerry Nadler reportedly denied the request brought up by Representative Matt Gaetz where the Republican representing Florida had asked to have the Judiciary Committee start each session with the Pledge of Allegiance.
I offered an Amendment to add the Pledge of Allegiance to our Judiciary Committee procedures in the spirit of national unity.
Every Democrat voted “no.”
Several mocked me for making the suggestion.
— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) February 5, 2021
The reasoning behind the request being denied was that Representative Nadler cited that the House already starts their day with the Pledge of Allegiance and that once is essentially enough.
When crafting the request, Representative Gaetz noted that, “in the spirit of national unity and pride,” the Judiciary Committee should start each meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Representative Gaetz explained that with the divisiveness present in modern politics and discourse, the Judiciary Committee engaging in the Pledge of Allegiance prior to each meeting could serve as a, “great unifying patriotic moment.”
I proposed that we begin each meeting of the House Judiciary Committee by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
Democrats just said "no."@RepJerryNadler said it's "unnecessary." pic.twitter.com/TquNSxqJzv
— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) February 4, 2021
Representative Nadler responded with the following:
“It’s unnecessary. The House begins every day with the Pledge of Allegiance, we are covered by that.”
To Representative Nadler’s credit, the House does indeed recite the Pledge of Allegiance at the onset of their endeavors each day – and said practice has been ongoing since becoming a part of the House daily order of business in 1988.
The House Judiciary Chairman’s take on the request continued from there, noting that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance additionally throughout the day is, “not in our practice to do so.”
From there, Representative Nadler reiterated once more that the Pledge is already “covered”:
“I appreciate the gentleman’s suggestion, but we are covered by the House. We all say the Pledge of Allegiance every day.”
The response online to Representative Gaetz after he tweeted out a video clip showcasing some of the interaction between himself and the House Judiciary Chairman hasn’t exactly been the kindest.
Numerous responses alleged that Representative Gaetz was trying to drum up outrage or that he was essentially “virtue signaling”.
I believe this is what some might call "virtue-signalling". https://t.co/LAzs7CnC2S
— Cody Johnston (@drmistercody) February 4, 2021
Furthermore, pretty much anyone within the comments section chiming in with sentiments that approved of Representative Gaetz’s request to Representative Jerry Nadler were effectively dogpiled on with snide remarks.
One Twitter user wrote:
“Representative Gaetz, I agree that the pledge of allegiance should be given at the beginning of the committee meeting. It would be a way of building a bridge…what happened to healing and bringing the country back together Dem’s didn’t even last a month.”
They pledge allegiance at the beginning of each day. Reciting the pledge repeatedly does seem unnecessary. Actions speak louder, saying something over & over does not make it true. Just showboating for the gulible.
— RA (@rosa_alba) February 5, 2021
To which another user responded with:
“They pledge allegiance at the beginning of each day. Reciting the pledge repeatedly does seem unnecessary. Actions speak louder, saying something over & over does not make it true. Just showboating for the [gullible].”
While some comments levied toward Representative Gaetz, and his supporters, were a bit more crude and reaching – the general notion featured in many of the comments criticizing Representative Gaetz’s request was that an additional reciting of the Pledge isn’t really necessary.
Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters? Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you. Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories. Click to check it out.
There’s been ongoing vitriol between the two political parties lately, specifically with some of their biggest pundits.
Back in January, we at Law Enforcement Today reported on comments delivered by Senator Bernie Sanders where he stated that Democrats shouldn’t be “indefinitely” reaching out to Republicans over certain matters.
Here’s that previous report.
WASHINGTON D.C. – On January 22nd, Senator Bernie Sanders decided to share a clip of his recent appearance on “Late Night with Seth Meyers”, in which the Vermont senator spoke about how Democrats cannot continue to “indefinitely” reach out to Republicans on certain matters – with Democrats now having recently taken control of the White House and the Senate.
*Once* would be nice. https://t.co/nKOAaxb7qF
— Joel Pollak (@joelpollak) January 24, 2021
As former President Donald Trump noted back in September of 2020, “elections have consequences – we have the Senate, we have the White House.” And a remarkably similar sentiment was seemingly expressed recently by Senator Bernie Sanders.
Taking to Twitter, Senator Sanders shared a video clip of his recent appearance on “Late Night with Seth Meyers”, where he was asked by the show host the following:
“Do you think there is some sort of bipartisan work that can be done in the Senate, or are you sort of expecting a sort of McConnell-inspired gridlock?”
Sanders then responded with:
“Look I think we should do our best to reach out to Republicans, who represent communities that are suffering terribly in terms of unemployment, lack of health care, and other very serious problems. But I don’t think our reaching out should go on indefinitely.”
“This country today is hurting – and people are hurting really, really badly. We’re looking at people who cannot feed their kids literally, who are worried about being evicted, can’t afford to go to the doctor even when they’re sick. We have got to move and move quickly.”
“So, I think we should reach out to Republicans. If they choose not to come on board, which I suspect will probably be the case, we have the majority. We should use that majority in a very aggressive way.”
We cannot reach out to Republicans indefinitely.
If they choose not to come on board to help the American people now, we have the majority. We should use that majority. pic.twitter.com/qMlc59Lw9F
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) January 22, 2021
The referencing of “the majority” mentioned by Senator Sanders during the interview was pertaining to Democrats holding a de facto majority within the Senate – namely due to the Georgia runoffs creating a 50/50 spilt between the Republicans and Democrats and Vice President Kamala Harris serving as a Senate tie breaker.
After mentioning “the majority” hold of the Senate, Senator Sanders continued with the following:
“Now I’m going to be chairman of the Budget Committee which handles what we call reconciliation and that as the Senate process by which you can pass, not all kinds of legislation, but a whole lot of very important legislation with a majority vote, not 60 votes.”
“And it is my view, we should make sure that we address the needs of the American people in that reconciliation bill, and if we pass it with 51 votes, we’ll pass it with 51 votes.”
Essentially, Senator Sanders is saying that while the Democrats have a newfound control of the Senate – and having maintained their control of the House – then the Democratic party should make use of these held majorities to push through what can be pushed through.
These comments shared by Bernie Sanders on Twitter also happened to be on the same day in which Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer took to Twitter to share the three “essential items” among the Senate’s priority agenda.
Those essential items being confirming President Biden’s cabinet, doling out more pandemic relief, and tackling the second impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump.
We have three essential items on our plate:
Confirming President Biden’s cabinet and key officials.
Providing desperately needed COVID relief.
The second impeachment trial of Donald Trump.
The Senate must—and will—do all three.
— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) January 22, 2021
A single article of impeachment is slated to be delivered on the evening of January 25th against former President Trump, which said article of impeachment alleges that he was instrumental an inciting the riot that transpired on January 6th at the Capitol Building.
While there’s been some scrutiny over whether a former office holder can be impeached after they already left office, the president has seemingly already been established in May of 1876 with the impeachment trial of President Ulysses Grant’s War Secretary William Belknap – who resigned from office on March 2nd of 1876 once he knew an impeachment trial was impending.
Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.