The future of our republic is at stake. Our nation is in danger of losing the independence of congress.

Nunes sat on the Intelligence Committee violating his oath of office and conspiring to defraud the American people.

We are at a critical juncture in our democratic process of the impeachment trial of President Trump, and the future of our republic hangs in the balance. We must have a fair and open trial in which the witnesses and evidence which have recently become public, and those withheld or blocked previously by the administration, are brought forward and examined by an impartial Senate, and the President provides his defense under oath. He will then either be cleared, censured, or impeached based upon the facts, and our republic will be made stronger by our re-commitment to the rule of law in these partisan times. The Senate Majority Leader has publicly committed himself AGAINST this very process by announcing publicly, “Everything I do during this, I’m coordinating with the White House counsel. There will be no difference between the president’s position and our position as to how to handle this to the extent that we can.” While Senator McConnell is entitled to his personal opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the President based upon the partial case so far, he can NOT be allowed to manage the impeachment process at the direction of the accused President. Leader McConnell, having repeatedly made his intentions to obstruct efforts for an open and fair-minded inquiry clear, must either recuse from any leadership role in the impeachment so that an impartial member may be appointed by the majority, or he must be expelled from the Senate for violation of his oath and blatant obstruction of justice and of the senate. Any impeachment trial conducted "in coordination with the White House Counsel" is a mockery of the rule of law, and if allowed, will mark the end of our Democracy. Please sign and share this petition to tell our senators that they must either persuade Senator McConnell to recuse himself from any leadership role in the impeachment trial of the president, or initiate an expulsion process against Senator McConnell for violation of his oath and for his blatant and self-confessed collaboration with the defendant to obstruct justice in the most important trial in our nation's history.

UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW PROTECTS CITIZENS' FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.

Housing Court judges hold immense power over the lives of New Yorkers, yet they are not subject to the same disciplinary standards as other New York state judges. Complaints are submitted to the Supervising Judge of the accused judge's relevant Housing Court, which is often like tossing a complaint into a black hole; there can be no feedback given whatsoever, which leads the public to assume that Housing Court judges are protected by their fellow judges, and there is no investigation done, let alone disciplinary action. On the other hand, most New York State judges, when accused of ethical misconduct, are investigated by the Commission on Judicial Conduct, which releases annual reports that detailing its various determinations, and at least appears to strive for some kind of transparency. According to the Commission's annual reports, legislation that would have given the Commission jurisdiction over NYC housing court judges was vetoed in the 1980s. With the newly-elected Democratic legislature having recently passed new rent laws that are fairer to New York's tenants, it is time to revisit this issue, and hold housing court judges accountable, to the same standard as other judges in New York State. Housing Court Judges should be placed under the jurisdiction of the NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct. When they are accused of unethical conduct, they can be investigated, prosecuted and sanctioned by an 11-member body composed of judges, lawyers, and non-lawyer citizens, who serve on a Commission expressly created to insure compliance with established standards of ethical judicial behavior.

Hi, I am a 73 year old retired, disabled, veteran who lives on Social Security and if you haven't guessed already, I live in an Affordable Housing Project owned by the County of Kauai. I have done everything requested of me from the first notice of violation as I cherish my home and can't afford to lose it. I requested a Grievance Hearing with the local Public Housing Authority (PHA - HCV Program) for my Section 8 housing. The Federal Register lists The Kauai County Housing Agency as the local PHA. The hearing was approved and I waited for a date and time. Then it was canceled saying that I had done nothing wrong within the program to warrant a hearing. I was referred to the Agency of Elderly Affairs who referred me to the Legal Aid Society. After providing everything asked for I was told it was believed I had a case and awaited an appointment with the managing director. Then I was told that the managing director was leaving to accept another job and the only other lawyer in the office doesn't believe these types of cases are winnable because the County makes out the contracts as month to month rentals rather than the HUD mandated year to year lease and you can't introduce the federal law in court because the HUD mandated Tenancy Addendum is not attached to your contract. Therefore HRS 521-71 applies, that basically says management can evict a tenant for no reason. A few days later I got a call from the legal assistant who was originally helping me, saying she had forwarded all my paperwork to a lawyer in Honolulu who specializes in this type of case. After spending several hours telling him the details, he kept saying that I wasn't giving him anything to work with. In his words it always ends in a he said she said even with witnesses or so called proof where the judge couldn't decide the truth, until I mentioned management cheating on the House Rules. The next day I got a call telling me that after an hour on the phone with EAH Housings lawyer he had convinced him that management could not win this case in court. Now I'm a bit vague as to what happened next even though I asked questions, but the next thing that happened was the new best way out was a Mutual Termination Agreement sent by EAH Housing's lawyer. When I asked what happened I was told, we work in teams using local lawyers, we do not have the budget to island hop for court appearances. All the members of the team must agree on a course of action. The only thing that makes sense here is the local lawyer refused to litigate the case in court. I read the agreement and refused to sign it because of all the illegal things it contained. We then spent time rewording the agreement and sending it back. Basically they were to dismiss the case and I must move in 60 days. The next hearing was on Aug 19 and the local lawyer presented the agreement to the judge. EAH Housing's lawyer was a no show and the judge refused to dismiss the case. He asked for a stipulation from EAH Housing's lawyer to dismiss. I knew at this point they were not going to live up to their agreement. I was assured that this would not happen until the time ran out on Oct 31, 2019 and it did not happen. I didn't move because they broke the agreement the day they were a no show in court. Next I get a summons to appear because they were suing me for breaking the agreement. That summons broke the state law for not giving me time to prepare. So the next summons was dated Dec 2, 2019 the same day they dismissed the original case. EHA Housing's lawyer flew in from Honolulu specifically for this hearing. The judge puts us in mediation because I do not have representation. EAH Housing's lawyer proceeds to tell me I can not win this case and he is very good at what he does. If we do not reach an agreement you will lose your HCV (Section 8 voucher) for five years and become homeless. I'm EMR Sensitive and the first problem I have in Lihue because of all the cell towers and free Wi-Fi is organizing my thoughts. Doctors do not recognize this problem yet. While the mediator was asking good questions he could not see a good end result for me. The fair housing Act gives up to 60 days for disabled people and I caved to that. The agreement was signed and the judge agreed. I have all along been looking for a place to live, desperately wanting to get away from this manager. Affordable Housing directly from the state or HUD (through the Hawaii Housing Agency) is 3 years out after you fill out the paperwork and approved you are put on a waiting list. Looking for other affordable housing, the waiting lists are not open and there are no vacancies. Looking on the retail rental market, no one accepts the HCV Program. So on Jan 31, 2020 at 4PM I will become homeless. The cost of moving into storage and out of storage and the deposit and my portion of the first month rent will put me in debt. I had a blowout on the way to a doctor's appointment and while I could get the spare out of the trunk I could no longer change the tire. I passed out on the front seat of the car and a kind woman stopped to help and found me. This made me realize that my desire to move out wade my physical ability to move. So I am here asking for help. If you think this was a long story you should hear the long version. If you agree this is wrong on multiple levels please sign my petition. Or better yet call (808) 241-4440 and ask to speak with Steven Franco and express the fact that management broke the house rules when getting a lawyer to serve a 45 day notice. When I was a kid this was called cheating, but she is also a habitual liar. This is why she hates me because I call her out. I'm not the only one here. According to the chair of Health and Human Services for the County she has had at least 4 complaints against her. She evicts people because their kids are out playing without supervision and making too much noise.

The Muslim Ban is a racist and xenophobic policy dividing families and targeting refugees from Muslim nations. This latest expansion is nothing then more of the same.

The American public are entitled to know the facts.

He most likely will never receive a subpoena and he can change the course of the impeachment proceedings. Either way we will have his truth.

Declaring war on a social media platform is an outrage. The actions this President is taking circumvents all forms of checks and balances and directly affect the mental health of millions of users worldwide.

If this campaign is really about “Us”, I'd like to see the Bernie campaign bring more leadership in this regard. I don’t want this campaign to be about one 78-year-old white man (as awesome as he is). I want this campaign to be about the strong, diverse, deeply passionate, visionary LEADERS (emphasis on the plural) we need to get us out of this giant mess and into a bright future. Show us that future. Show us the strength of our diversity. Show us what a Sanders Administration would look like, sound like and act like. Introduce America to these people and help us get to know them.  Help us build trust in that broad coalition and not just in one man.  Help these leaders become household names as well. Help us clearly see the diverse coalition of leaders who could represent our hopes and our future. Don’t wait for the nomination to figure this out. Be different. Show me the “Us”! Show me women and people of color in the top leadership of your administration. Show me worker's rights leaders, indigenous leaders, LGBTQ leaders, immigrant-rights leaders. Show me youthful next generation leaders, please.  Show me small business leaders for local living economies and strong communities.  Show me advocates for farming, local livelihoods and functional ecosystems. Show me advocates for uplift of the poor. Show me environmental and climate justice leaders. You get the idea. Build me this coalition. Show me the "Us"! There are so many reasons why this would be a smart strategy: 1. This would be a powerful demonstration of this campaign’s most prominent value. It’s right there on the home page. 2. If the campaign is able to demonstrate its ability to a gather a diverse coalition of progressive leaders (in which women and people of color are strongly represented), don't you think that might help the campaign appeal to those communities? Just a thought! 3. This is not a traditional political strategy and that is GOOD.  This is a way to diversify the power of an American presidential campaign. This is also a powerful opportunity for the Sanders campaign to differentiate itself and show the American people that it is no ordinary political campaign. 4. A broadly-based coalition of leaders is more difficult to destabilize. 2020 is not an ordinary campaign year and Trump and the Republicans have demonstrated a zeal for foul play. To win, the Sanders campaign will need to be prepared for dirty tricks of all sorts. 5. Bernie is 78 years old. The wise and responsible course of action for such an elder leader is to use his name recognition to build a coalition of next-generation visionary leaders and introduce these leaders to the American people, pronto. America’s (and perhaps the world's) future should not depend solely on the heart health of one 78-year-old man. Let’s build a strong, resilient coalition of progressive leaders for a livable future. 6. By featuring a diverse coalition of leaders at the heart of his campaign, Bernie would be directly manifesting the democratic revolution that he claims to represent. Show me that revolution. Show me the “Us”!

As can be seen by the Presidential elections of 2000 and 2016, the current Electoral system can elect a candidate who receives a smaller portion of the popular vote. While this seems inherently unfair, there are those that feel that without the protection of the Electoral College, larger, more populous states would have the ability to dominate the smaller states and render their voices mute. This new proposal keeps the current protection of the smaller states. They receive the same number of votes, but it eliminates the inherent unfairness of the current winner-take-all system. This ensures that a conservative voter in a conservative district in an otherwise liberal state (or vice versa, a liberal in a conservative state) would actually have a voice in the presidential election, it would matter how they vote. Since every vote would matter, it would encourage more people to vote.