US Representative Louis Gohmert Proposed Ban on Democrat Party for Supporting Slavery

makeameme.org
image_pdfimage_print
US Representative Louie Gohmert, a Republican from Texas, gave a speech on the House floor, calling on Congress to ban any political organization or party that has ever held a public position supporting slavery or the Confederate States of America, namely, the Democrat party. He made historical references to the Democrats’ support for slavery including the rejection of congressional federal control over slavery, penalizing officials for refusing to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law, voter suppression, Democrat affiliation with the KuKluxKlan and Democrat enforcement of Jim Crow laws and civil codes that forced segregation. He proposed that any political organization or party that has ever held a public position that supported slavery of the Confederacy shall either change its name or be barred from participation in the House of Representatives.

Four days after Congressman Gohmert gave his speech, there was an altercation between two groups of protesters, one was permitted for Back the Blue, in support of police, and the second was for Democrat Hank Gilbert, who is opposing Gohmert in the upcoming election. Gohmert was asked to comment and he said that he had no knowledge of the event before it took place, and that he didn’t know anything about it. He did comment that Democrat leaders paid agitators to create violence at Trump events in 2016 and then blamed the mess on Trump. He said Democrats and Marxists are doing the same thing this year.

Transcript from Real Clear Politics:

Okay. Raising a question of the privileges of the House, whereas on July 22nd, 2020, House Resolution 7573 was brought to the House floor for a vote with the purpose of eliminating four specific statues or bus from the United States Capitol, along with all others that include individuals who “served as an officer or voluntarily with the Confederate States of America or the military forces or government of a state while the state was in rebellion against the United States,” yet failed to address the most ever-present historical stigma of the United States Capitol. That is the source that so fervently supported, condoned and fought for slavery that was left untouched, but without whom the evil of slavery could never have continued as it did to such extreme that it is necessary to address here in order for the U.S. House of Representatives to avoid degradation of historical fact and blatant hypocrisy for generations to come.

Whereas the Democratic Party Platform of 1840, 1844, 1848, 1852 and 1856, states “that Congress has no power under the constitution to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several states, and that such States are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the constitution; that all efforts of the abolitionists or others made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences; and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people and endanger the stability and permanency of the Union and not to be countenanced by any friend of our political institutions.” Again, from the Democratic Party Platform of those years.

Whereas the Democratic Party Platform of 1856 further declares that new States to the union should be admitted “with or without domestic slavery as the state may elect,” whereas the Democratic Party Platform of 1856 also resolves that, “We recognize the right of the people of all the territories to form a constitution with or without domestic slavery,” whereas the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 penalize officials who did not arrest and alleged runaway slaves and made them liable for a fine of a thousand dollars, which is about $28,000 in present day value. Law enforcement officials everywhere were required to arrest people suspected of being a runaway slave on as little as a claimant’s sworn testimony of ownership.

The Democratic Party Platform of 1860 directly, in seeking to uphold the Fugitive Slave Act, states that “the enactments of the state legislatures to defeat the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Law are hostile in character, subversive of the constitution, revolutionary in their effect.” The Democratic Party Platform, again. Whereas the 14th amendment giving full citizenship to freed slaves passed in 1868 with 94% Republican support, 0% Democratic support in Congress. The 15th amendment giving freed slaves the right to vote passed in 1870 with 100% Republican support and 0% Democratic support in Congress, whereas Democrats systematically suppressed African Americans’ right to vote by the specific example in the 1902 constitution of the state of Virginia, actually disenfranchised about 90% of the black men who still voted at the beginning of the 20th century and nearly half of the white men, so they suppressed Republican voters as well.

The number of eligible African American voters were thereby forcibly reduced from about 147,000 in 1901 to about 10,000 by 1905. That measure was supported almost exclusively by Virginia Democrats, and whereas the Virginia 1902 constitution was engineered by Carter Glass, the future Democratic U.S. representative, senator and secretary of treasury under Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, who proclaimed the goal of the constitutional convention as follows. This Democrat exclaimed, “Discrimination? Why this is precisely what we propose. That’s exactly what this convention was elected for, to discriminate to the very extremity of permissible action under the limits of the federal constitution with a view toward elimination of every,” and I won’t use his word, but “African American voter who can be gotten rid of legally,” which was said by a Democrat and applauded by his fellow Democrats.

Whereas 1912 Democratic president Woodrow Wilson’s administration began a racial segregation policy for U.S. Government employees, and by 1914, the Wilson Administration Civil Service instituted the requirement a photograph be submitted with each employment application. And whereas the 1924 Democratic National Convention convened in New York City at Madison Square Garden, the convention commonly was known as the Klan Bake due to the overwhelming influence of the Ku Klux Klan in the Democratic Party. And whereas in 1964, the Democratic Party led a 75 calendar day filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, whereas leading the Democrats in their opposition to civil rights for African Americans was a member of the Democratic Party, Senator Robert Byrd from West Virginia, who was a known recruiter for the KU Klux Klan. Whereas Democrats enacted and enforced Jim Crow laws and civil codes that forced segregation, restricted freedoms of black Americans in the United States.

Whereas on June 18, 2020, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ordered the removal from the capital portraits of four previous speakers of the House who served in the Confederacy, saying that these portraits “set back our nation’s work to confront and combat bigotry.” The men depicted in the portraits were Democrat Robert M.T. Hunter, Democrat Howell Cobb, Democrat James L. Orr, and Democrat Charles F. Crisp. Resolved that the speaker of the House of Representatives shall remove any item that named symbolizes or mentions any political organization or party that has ever held a public position that supported slavery or the Confederacy from any area within the House wing of the Capitol or any House office building and shall donate such item or symbol to the Library of Congress, and two, that any political organization or party that has ever held a public position that supported slavery of the Confederacy shall either change its name or be barred from participation in the House of Representatives. With that, I would yield back.

News article from Tyler Paper:

A small group of people listening to Hank Gilbert of Tyler, a Democrat running for Congress against incumbent Republican Louie Gohmert, felt they were attacked Sunday by a large crowd with Trump signs and shirts. There was also criticism against the way the Tyler Police Department handled the altercation.

Tyler Police, Rep. Gohmert and Take America Back organizers explained their side of the incident on the downtown square. Images and videos of the event have made national news.

“I have no firsthand knowledge of what went on, because I was not there, did not organize it, didn’t know about it until it was taking place, and I was going to catch a plane back to Washington,” Gohmert told the Tyler Morning Telegraph. “But, what came to my mind is the violence Democrat leaders paid to create at Trump campaign events in 2016, followed by Democrats then claiming Donald Trump incited violence. They created the mess, then blamed candidate Trump. There are Democrats and Marxists doing the same thing this year as well. It is difficult to tell, from what I understand today, who started what.”

Read full article here…

Visit our Classified ads.

Check out our Classified ads at the bottom of this page.

Recent stories & commentary

Other

Minneapolis Police Warn People to Obey Criminals Amid Crime Surge

August 3, 2020 RT 0

Minneapolis Police Department issued some tips for residents to limit their risk of robbery that includes “be prepared to give up your cell phone and purse/wallet” to robbers, “do not walk alone,” and avoid fighting with criminals, “Do what they say. Your safety is most important.”

Freedom

Detroit Police Chief Explains How He Has Prevented Riots

July 31, 2020 Fox News 2

Police Chief James Craig says his city kept the peace because they decided at the beginning that “We weren’t giving up ground to the radicals.” He credited the residents of the city, who he said stood with the police. Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan has supported the city’s police department.

Classifieds

For classified advertising rates and terms, click here. The appearance of ads on this site does not signify endorsement by the publisher. We do not attempt to verify the accuracy of statements made therein or vouch for the integrity of advertisers. However, we will investigate complaints from readers and remove any message we find to be misleading or that promotes anything fraudulent, illegal, or unethical.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments