Censure of a Member has been deemed appropriate in cases of a breach of the privileges of the House. There are two classes of privilege, the one, affecting the rights of the House collectively, its safety, dignity, and the integrity of its proceedings; and the other, affecting the rights, reputation, and conduct of Members, individually. Most cases of censure have involved the use of unparliamentary language, assaults upon a Member or insults to the House by introductions of offensive resolutions, but in five cases in the House and one in the Senate [as of 1967] censure was based on corrupt acts by a Member, and in another Senate case censure was based upon noncooperation with and abuse of Senate committees.
Iran Will Reportedly Issue Seven Demands to President Biden Before Re-Entering Nuclear Deal Talks
By Jason Dunn – Sputnik – 24.01.2021
United States President Joe Biden has expressed his support for reversing the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and officials within the new government are reported to already be holding quiet discussions with Iranian representatives.
Diplomats from Tehran have spoken to officials within the Biden administration over resuming talks on Iran’s nuclear program and have reportedly set out seven preconditions, an unnamed Iranian government source told a Kuwaiti newspaper on Sunday.
Speaking to Kuwait’s al-Jarida newspaper, the anonymous official from Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s office said that contacts began prior to President Joe Biden’s ascension to office, and implied that they are continuing but unofficial.
According to the Kuwaiti report, the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations Majid Takht Rawanji was called to Tehran to arrange contacts with the new administration in Washington before returning to New York with a series of seven conditions for Iran’s involvement in the resumption of talks over its nuclear program.
The first condition is reportedly that Iran will not accept partial sanctions alleviation, as Tehran considers the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to be indivisible. The report says that Iran will reaffirm its demands that the US maintain all aspects of the deal, including the total lifting of sanctions, as an essential precondition to returning to the agreement.
Secondly, any disagreements over the accords must be discussed within the framework of the official negotiating committees. One of these anticipated disagreements is Tehran’s demand for compensation for financial losses it incurred due to the Trump administration’s exit from the deal, notably the financial impact of the sanctions.
The third condition, according to the report, is that Tehran will not approve of using the terms of the nuclear deal to address separate issues, such as its missile program and activities abroad.
As a fourth condition, no new members will be permitted to enter into the deal aside from the existing P5+1, including any Gulf Arab countries.
Fifthly, concerns over other regional states must be discussed as a separate matter, and not included in the negotiations over nuclear enrichment. The next point is said to be that despite not being willing to discuss its missile system, Iran would find it acceptable to talk about arms control on a regional level with United Nations supervision, raising particular concern over Israel’s missiles and illegally-held nuclear stockpile.
Finally, Iran will not allow a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, and instead demands a UN referendum that includes Jewish Israelis and Palestinians over the “land” issue. No further details on the content of the potential referendum were outlined, according to the report.
Rouhani will be issuing these conditions to the Biden administration directly, the report also said.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said in a Foreign Affairs article on Friday that Iran will not accept any further demands, terms, or state signatories added to the original deal proposed by Washington in 2015. Zarif said that if Washington began by “unconditionally removing, with full effect, all sanctions imposed, re-imposed, or relabeled since Trump took office”, Iran would reverse the steps it has taken since the US withdrew its signature from the deal in 2018.
Channel 12 News reported last week that the Biden administration has already begun largely undisclosed talks with Iranian officials over a return to the agreement and has also updated Israel of their contents.
This comes amid reports that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will send Mossad chief Yossi Cohen to Washington next month to issue Israel’s demands before any new version of the Iran nuclear deal is agreed to. According to reports, Cohen will be the first senior Israeli official to meet with President Biden and is also expected to meet with the CIA director.
Even before his election last year, Biden openly expressed his desire for the US to rejoin the accord, while Israel has said that a return to the deal must include new restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program and alleged support for terror activity internationally.
The JCPOA, which limits Iranian development of uranium in return for sanctions relief, was signed by Tehran as well as six world powers in 2015. In 2018, former President Donald Trump withdrew the US signature from the deal and introduced harsh sanctions against the nation, claiming that Tehran was not in compliance with its terms, despite international observers and the European Union claiming that Tehran was acting in full accordance with the treaty.
“Aid and Comfort” To the Enemy: Speaker Pelosi Ramps Up Attacks On Republican Colleagues Amidst Calls For Expulsions
By Jonathan Turley | January 23, 2021
Speaker Nancy Pelosi ramped up the attacks on members of her own house this week, accusing them of giving “aid and comfort” to those who want to destroy the nation. The comments came after Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., denied a public accusation by Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., that she personally took rioters around the capitol for a tour before the attack on January 6th. Boebert pointed out that the “rioters” were her family members and she has never given such tours. Rather than encouraging colleagues to avoid baseless and inflammatory accusations pending review of what occurred on January 6th, Pelosi threw gasoline on the fire and accused her colleagues of giving “aid and comfort” to those who were trying to destroy the Constitution and the country. It is, in my view, another failure of leadership by the Speaker in her duties to the institution as a whole.
Like many, I support a commission to look into how these rioters gained such rapid entry into the Capitol Hill. However, Democratic members have claimed that Republican members were actual co-conspirators in the riot in supplying access to the building to plan out the attack. Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D., N.J.) went public with an extraordinary allegation against some of her colleagues that they conducted secret surveillance in a conspiracy with rioters at the Capitol. Sherrill stated in a Facebook live address to her constituents that she witnessed the surveillance personally. She said unidentified members of Congress “had groups coming through the Capitol” in “a reconnaissance for the next day.”
Sherill has still not supplied any of the names of her colleagues to who worked as inside co-conspirators. As noted earlier, this is an unambiguous allegation of criminal conduct against colleagues. Either members were conspiring in a crime or Sherill unfairly defamed her colleagues. Article I, Section 5, the Constitution says, “Each House (of Congress) may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.” The House may discipline members for violations of both unlawful conduct as well as any conduct which the House of Representatives finds has reflected discredit upon the institution. In re Chapman, 166 U.S. 661, 669-670 (1897). A House Select Committee in 1967 stated:
If members did conspire as alleged by Rep. Sherrill, they could be expelled for that criminal act. They would also face prosecution. It would be a betrayal of not just Congress but the country.
One would think that this rising level of acrimony would prompt a Speaker to calm her members and call for an investigation. Speaker Pelosi however proceeded to ramp up the rhetoric. She started out well by stating, “You have to have evidence for what has happened.” She then took a shot at Republicans and stated “There is no question that there were members in this body who gave aid and comfort to those with the idea that they were embracing a lie — a lie perpetrated by the president of the United States that the election did not have legitimacy.” The language comes from the treason language in the Constitution Article III, Section 3 states: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or, in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
In the context of alleged criminal conspiracy by members, the use of this language clearly suggested members were more than just politically at fault for their positions. It suggested that they were traitors.
These attacks are coming as some members are calling for the possible expulsion of members for challenging the electoral votes, an act expressly allowed under federal law and repeatedly done by Democrats in prior elections. It is an example of the rage-filled politics that continues to build in our country, including calls for blacklists and punitive measures against anyone deemed supportive of Trump. As I noted in today’s column, it is a crisis of leadership in this country when we desperately need leaders who can unite us rather than capitalize on our divisions.
Sen. Rand Paul Challenges Big Money Media’s Defining People with Differing Opinions as Liars
By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | January 24, 2021
One of the most disturbing developments over the last few years in big money media in America is the blanket characterization of people who disagree with the big money media’s narrative on important matters as liars.
We have seen this approach in action with the repeated dismissal of people challenging any of “the science” proclaimed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or prominent government bureaucrats such as Anthony Fauci in regard to coronavirus. So bad has been this tendency that the media even followed right along to reverse its absolutist declarations regarding mask wearing when the CDC, Fauci, and others in the US government’s coronavirus message team turned on a dime regarding the matter.
Another of many areas we have seen the phenomenon is in big money media interpretation of the 2016 and 2020 presidential election results. The 2016 election results that brought Donald Trump into the presidency were repeatedly declared by big money media as undeniably tainted by Russian interference. Yet, it turned out after much investigation there was no “there” there in this accusation. Plus, a major effort within the US government to do whatever it took to peg Trump with “Russian collusion” was uncovered.
Skip forward to the 2020 presidential election and the big money media suddenly says questioning the declared results is beyond the pale, repeatedly dismisses any allegations of election wrongdoing leading to Joe Biden’s victory. That is the line host George Stephanopoulos pushed at the beginning of his Sunday This Week interview with United States Senate member Rand Paul (R-KY) at ABC. Stephanopoulos started off the interview with the following:
Senator Paul, let me begin with a threshold question for you. This election was not stolen. Do you accept that fact?
In response, Paul mentioned several apparent election problems that ‘we should get to the bottom of.’ What proceeds from there was relentless badgering by Stephanopoulos in an effort to make Paul declare the media mantra about the election. Stephanopoulos even declares to Paul, “Can’t you just say the words ‘this election was not stolen’?”
Commendably, Paul stood his ground against the berating throughout the seven-minutes interview and even discussed more reasons to suspect there were significant problems in the 2020 presidential election. Paul also, in the interview, stood up to and exposed the disturbing transition in big money media over the last few years that Stephanopoulos was demonstrating. Paul stated:
Hey, George, George, George, where you make a mistake is that people coming from the liberal side like you, you immediately say everything is a lie instead of saying there are two sides to everything. Historically, what would happen is, if I said that I thought there was fraud, you would interview someone else who said there wasn’t. But, now you insert yourself in the middle and say, ‘The absolute fact is that everything I am saying is a lie.’
“Let’s have an open debate,” said Paul later in the interview. Yes, let’s.
Watch the complete interview here.
Experimental COVID Injections – How Long Will We Continue to Allow Mass Murder by Lethal Injection?
181 Dead in the U.S. During 2 Week Period
By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | January 23, 2021
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a U.S. Government funded database that tracks injuries and deaths caused by vaccines.
A 2011 report by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) stated that fewer than one percent of all vaccine adverse events are reported to the government:
Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or slow the identification of “problem” drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed. (Source.)
Currently, data from the two experimental mRNA COVID injections that have been voluntarily reported is available for a two week period from the end of December through January 13, 2021.
The data covers 7,844 cases, including 181 deaths.
The largest amount of deaths occurred in people over the age of 75.
There was at least one death recorded of an unborn baby dying just after the mother received an experimental mRNA Pfizer shot while pregnant:
I was 28 weeks and 5 days pregnant when I received the first dose of the COVID19 vaccine. Two days later (12/25/2020 in the afternoon), I noticed decreased motion of the baby.
The baby was found to not have a heartbeat in the early am on 12/26/2020 and I delivered a 2lb 7oz nonviable female fetus at 29 weeks gestation. (Source.)
As we have previously reported here at Health Impact News, the guidelines for emergency use of the experimental mRNA Pfizer injection in the UK warned pregnant women, and women planning to soon become pregnant, to NOT get the experimental jab.
But the FDA guidelines issued in the U.S. for the same experimental Pfizer injection did not include such warnings. See:
Unlike UK, U.S. FDA Allows Pregnant and Nursing Women to Receive Experimental Pfizer COVID Vaccine
When reading the accompanying notes from these cases that were reported to VAERS, it is clear that many healthcare professionals are reluctant to report these cases, probably fearing repercussions for doing so.
In some cases, family members filed the report because the healthcare facility refused to do.
Some examples:
(VAERS ID # 913733) My grandmother died a few hours after receiving the moderna covid vaccine booster 1. While I don’t expect that the events are related, the treating hospital did not acknowledge this and I wanted to be sure a report was made.
(VAERS ID # 914621) Resident in our long term care facility who received first dose of Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine on 12/22/2020, only documented side effect was mild fatigue after receiving. She passed away on 12/27/2020 of natural causes per report. Has previously been in & out of hospice care, resided in nursing home for 9+ years, elderly with dementia. Due to proximity of vaccination we felt we should report the death, even though it is not believed to be related.
(VAERS ID # 914895) Injection given on 12/28/20 – no adverse events and no issues yesterday; Death today, 12/30/20, approx.. 2am today (unknown if related – Administrator marked as natural causes)
Since so few reports are actually recorded in the VAERS reporting system, what is the true number of people being killed by these lethal injections? For those who are not killed, how many will be crippled or suffer autoimmune diseases for the rest of their lives?
If during pre-COVID times less than 1% of all vaccine injuries and deaths were reported to VAERS, let’s make a conservative estimate and say that because it is widely known that the COVID injections were fast-tracked to market and have not yet been approved by the FDA, that a greater percentage are being reported, like 10% of the adverse reactions, including deaths.
We are looking at a pace of nearly 1000 deaths per week by injection due to non-FDA approved mRNA injections among nearly 40,000 cases a week of injuries due to these injections.
This is a public health crisis that is 100% avoidable and 100% caused by Big Pharma and the U.S. Government!
While Almost ALL Deaths in 2020 Were Recorded as COVID Deaths, Here’s Why NO Deaths in 2021 Will be Recorded as Vaccine Deaths
It is well known now that due to federal funding for COVID in 2020 that nearly all deaths were recorded as “COVID” deaths, even in cases where the death occurred by traffic accident, shooting, heart attack, etc.
Now we are seeing the exact opposite happen with the roll-out of the COVID experimental injections. NONE of them are being recorded as vaccine deaths. Why?
Because the CDC does not provide a category for “vaccine deaths” to be used on death certificates. To learn more about this, see an article we published in 2018 from a Death Certificate Clerk whistleblower who revealed the politics behind listing “cause of death” on death certificates.
She wrote:
Our current system for capturing mortality rates can and does provide a mostly uninvestigated and inaccurate picture of what causes a death. The process for creating and registering causes of death for public records is a complicated, convoluted, politicized, completely open to both ignorance and the manipulations of personal, professional, and governmental interests.
I’m the one creating these statistics and I offer you this: If you take one thing away from this, take away a healthier skepticism about even the most accepted mainstream, nationally reported, CDC or other ‘scientific’ statistics.
What most people don’t know is that doctors are not allowed to attest to anything that is not a strictly NATURAL cause of death. (Full article.)