> “The two-thirds of the Republican party that voted for this bill in March have indicated they are going to vote against it now,” Mr. [House Majority Leader ]Hoyer said. “I am told they are doing so at the request of the President. I believe this to be against the security interest of the United States and the safety of the American people.”
A win for civil rights is a win for civil rights though. I hope.
Have it focus on the issues and not the parties.
That's what they have to do anyway if they want to be effective. At any given time more often than not -- including right now -- the same party doesn't control both houses of Congress and the whitehouse, so anything you want to do needs bipartisan support anyway.
What's really happening here is that organizations that are supposed to be about issues are getting coopted by partisans -- which makes them less effective at their stated purpose, but more useful to the partisans who can then remove support from the opposing party members who actually support that issue.
As for how "you" can do it, don't support "issue organizations" that are really partisan organizations, and instead support actual issue organizations. You can tell the difference because you can see real issue organizations regularly working with both parties and supporting candidates who support their issues regardless of which party they're in.
https://www.aclu.org/other/fix-fisa-end-warrantless-wiretapp...
They don't give a fsck about the political inclination of those speaking. They even fought for the rights of Nazis to march in Skokie:
https://www.aclu.org/other/aclu-history-taking-stand-free-sp...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-aclu-retreats-from-free-exp...
There is an overlap in membership, but that doesn't always extend to policy: the ACLU sued the Obama administration over immigration, and they have backed up Rush Limbaugh, Oliver North, and the KKK in the past.
(There is also something on healthcare that appears similar, but I'll freely admit I don't understand enough about the background there and can't get past the paywall without giving up data: https://www.wsj.com/articles/wheres-the-aclu-when-you-need-i...)
This isn't quite right. One or more people on Trump's campaign and/or transition team were heard on wiretapped calls that included Russian diplomats and other people who were already under surveillance.
In any other time or western country, an existing administration wiretapping the opposition party and/or leader would be a scandal meriting resignation.
I'm quite shocked at the things partisan politics in America has come to normalize - on both sides.
No, Trump was never wiretapped.
This fear mongering is so pathetic.