Connect with us

Published

on

In the intricate web of American politics, every vote cast by an elected representative carries significant weight. Each decision can shape the trajectory of the nation, influence public opinion, and even determine the course of a political career. Rep. Kay Granger, a prominent Republican from Texas, recently found herself under intense scrutiny when she voted against the censure of Rep. Adam Schiff, a move that drew sharp criticism from fellow lawmakers and constituents alike. This controversial stance has sparked a wave of disappointment among Texas Republicans and has raised concerns about her commitment to holding elected officials accountable for their perceived unethical actions.

The Background

The contentious move to censure Rep. Adam Schiff emanates from allegations of misconduct and a perceived lack of integrity in his handling of classified information. Furthermore, Rep. Schiff has been accused of making deliberately false public statements regarding the alleged “Russian Collusion” narrative against former President Donald Trump. Many lawmakers, both Republican and Democrat, saw the censure as a necessary step to restore ethical standards and ensure public trust in the political process.

Rep. Granger’s Opposition

Rep. Kay Granger’s decision to oppose the censure of Rep. Schiff has left many questioning her judgment, principles, and loyalty to the American people. Critics argue that by refusing to support accountability measures against Rep. Schiff, she is undermining the integrity of the House of Representatives and sending a troubling message that Congress members may believe themselves to be above the law.

One of the primary concerns raised by Rep. Granger’s opposition to the censure is the potential impact on the ethical standards expected of elected officials. The core tenet of representative democracy is that lawmakers should be held accountable for their actions and decisions. When a representative, such as Rep. Schiff, faces credible allegations of misconduct, it is incumbent upon their peers to investigate and take appropriate action. Rep. Granger’s vote against censure has ignited a fierce debate about whether elected officials should be held to the same ethical standards as the citizens they represent.

Constituents’ Disappointment

Moreover, Rep. Granger’s actions appear to be in stark contrast with the sentiments of her constituents, who expect their elected representative to prioritize ethical conduct and demonstrate a steadfast commitment to upholding high standards in public office. Serving the 12th district of Texas for an impressive 27 years, Rep. Granger has enjoyed a long and successful political career. However, her recent vote has sparked a significant demand for legislation that would enact term limits for members of Congress.

The Texas Liberty Journal contacted Mrs. Granger’s office by phone for comment. However, as of the publication of this article, she remained unresponsive. Furthermore, her official website has implemented restrictions, preventing individuals residing outside her district from contacting her directly. All emails sent to her office are directed to her assistant, who has thus far refused to provide any comment on Rep. Granger’s controversial vote.

Understanding Rep. Granger’s Position

To provide a comprehensive understanding of Rep. Granger’s position, it is essential to explore the factors that may have influenced her decision to oppose the censure of Rep. Schiff.

  1. Establishment Loyalty: In today’s highly polarized political climate, loyalty to one’s party often plays a significant role in lawmakers’ decisions. Rep. Granger’s allegiance to the establishment may have swayed her vote.
  2. Concerns about Due Process: Some argue that Rep. Granger’s opposition to censure might be rooted in a belief in the importance of due process. They may argue that allegations against Rep. Schiff should be thoroughly investigated before punitive measures are taken.
  3. Political Calculations: Elected officials often make decisions based on the potential impact on their political careers. Rep. Granger, with her extensive experience, may have calculated that supporting the censure could have adverse effects on her standing within the Establishment Republican Party, and her chances of re-election.
  4. Constituent Pressure: While Rep. Granger’s vote has disappointed many constituents, it is possible that she faces pressure from a specific segment of her district that supports Rep. Schiff and opposes his censure.
  5. Personal Convictions: Lawmakers occasionally vote against their party or popular opinion due to deeply held personal convictions. Rep. Granger may genuinely believe that censure is not the appropriate response to Rep. Schiff’s actions.

The Call for Term Limits

One unexpected consequence of Rep. Granger’s controversial vote has been a growing demand for term limits for members of Congress. Term limits have long been a topic of debate in American politics, with proponents arguing that they can bring fresh perspectives, prevent entrenched political power, and reduce the influence of special interests.

In Rep. Granger’s case, her lengthy tenure in Congress has come under scrutiny due to her opposition to the censure of Rep. Schiff. Many Texans, including those who have supported her in the past, now question whether long-serving representatives become disconnected from the needs and values of their constituents. This debate over term limits has taken center stage in discussions about the future of American democracy and the role of career politicians in shaping its destiny.

The Texas Liberty Journal’s Efforts

The Texas Liberty Journal, as a responsible and conscientious source of political news and analysis, reached out to Rep. Granger’s office to seek her perspective on the controversial vote. Unfortunately, her lack of response has left many constituents and observers disappointed. In a democracy, transparency and communication between elected officials and the public are crucial elements in maintaining trust and accountability.

The restriction on communication via her official website, which limits contact to residents of her district, has also drawn attention. While it is customary for constituents to have direct access to their representatives, this practice has raised concerns about transparency and accountability. In an age of increasing digital connectivity, such restrictions may be viewed as an attempt to control the narrative and limit engagement with a broader audience.

The controversy surrounding Rep. Kay Granger’s decision to oppose the censure of Rep. Adam Schiff has ignited a passionate debate about ethics, accountability, and the role of long-serving representatives in American politics. While her vote may have been influenced by various factors, including party loyalty and personal convictions, it has left her constituents and the broader public questioning the integrity of their elected officials.

Moreover, the call for term limits in Congress has gained momentum, with Rep. Granger’s lengthy tenure serving as a focal point for this discussion. The Texas Liberty Journal’s efforts to seek her perspective and the limitations on communication through her official channels have further fueled the controversy.

As this debate continues to unfold, it serves as a reminder of the profound impact that individual votes can have on the perception of elected officials and the direction of our democracy. The scrutiny faced by Rep. Granger is a testament to the importance of ethical conduct, accountability, and open dialogue in the realm of American politics.

Featured

Radical Doc Ditches Her Scalpel After Paxton’s Lawsuit Exposes Transgender Hustle

Published

on

Dr. May Lau no longer a doctor

Dallas, TX – A Dallas pediatrician, once hailed as a “trusted resource” for troubled teens, has thrown in the towel on her medical career. Dr. May Lau, the UT Southwestern associate professor whose office walls likely echoed with the sobs of confused adolescents, has voluntarily surrendered her Texas medical license. This comes hot on the heels of a blistering lawsuit from Attorney General Ken Paxton, who accused her of peddling banned gender-transition drugs to at least 21 minors, all while allegedly doctoring records to dodge the law.

Let’s rewind the tape, because this isn’t just another footnote in the endless culture war skirmishes. It’s a stark reminder that in the Lone Star State, at least, the adults in the room are finally drawing a line in the sand against the medical-industrial complex’s latest fad: turning kids into lab rats for irreversible experiments.

Senate Bill 14, signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott in 2023 and upheld by the Texas Supreme Court, couldn’t be clearer: No puberty blockers, no cross-sex hormones, no mutilating surgeries for anyone under 18 chasing a “gender identity” that clashes with their biology. It’s common-sense guardianship, rooted in the unshakeable truth that children—bless their impressionable hearts—aren’t equipped to consent to life-altering alterations pushed by activists masquerading as healers.

Paxton’s office dropped the hammer on Lau back in October 2024, filing suit in Collin County and laying out a dossier of alleged deceit that would make a Watergate operative blush. We’re talking falsified prescriptions, bogus billing codes, and medical records twisted to make testosterone shots look like treatment for anything but affirming a minor’s delusion about their sex... alleges Paxton. Paxton says over 20 kids—biological females, no less—got dosed with this controlled substance, all post-ban, in direct defiance of Texas Health & Safety Code § 161.702(3). And for good measure, Paxton tacked on claims under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, painting Lau as a scofflaw who didn’t just break the rules; she gamed the system to keep the hormone pipeline flowing.

Lau’s professional bio paints her as the epitome of the caring clinician: A pediatric specialist at Children’s Medical Center Dallas and Plano, with a self-proclaimed mission to “guide my patients to make the best and healthiest decisions for them“—alongside their parents, naturally. Her Healthgrades profile boasts expertise in adolescent health, reproductive woes, and menstrual mysteries, and she’s even open to telehealth chats for the Zoom-generation youth. But peel back the polish, and the shine fades fast: A measly 2.7-star rating from patients, whispers of controversy, and now this. Affiliated with powerhouse institutions like UT Southwestern, Lau wielded privileges that let her roam hospital halls unchecked—until Paxton turned the spotlight.

The fallout? Swift and surgical. As the case barreled forward, Paxton inked a Rule 11 agreement with Lau, slamming the brakes on her patient-facing practice mid-litigation. No more stethoscope sessions, no more “guidance” sessions that could scar a lifetime. And now, the coup de grâce: Her license is toast, voluntarily surrendered to the Texas Medical Board, ensuring she can’t play white-coated wizard with Texas tykes ever again. The civil suit chugs on, with Paxton gunning for injunctions and fines up to $10,000 per violation—because accountability isn’t optional when you’ve potentially wrecked young bodies and psyches for ideology’s sake.

Attorney General Paxton didn’t mince words in his victory lap, and why should he? “Doctors who permanently hurt kids by giving them experimental drugs are nothing more than disturbed left-wing activists who have no business being in the medical field,” he thundered in a statement that lands like a constitutional thunderclap. “May Lau has done untold damage to children, both physically and psychologically, and the surrendering of her Texas medical license is a major victory for our state. My case against her for breaking the law will continue, and we will not relent in holding anyone who tries to ‘transition’ kids accountable.

Spot on, Ken. This isn’t about cruelty; it’s about custody of the innocent. While the ACLU’s Harper Seldin wails that such enforcement is a “predictable and terrifying result,” trotting out the tired trope of politicians meddling between “families and their doctors,” let’s call the bluff. Families? Try ideologues greenlighting puberty blockers for preteens. Best medical judgment? More like Big Pharma’s profit playbook, subsidized by blue-state bureaucrats and cheered by coastal elites who wouldn’t dream of letting their own kids near the knife.

Lau’s capitulation isn’t isolated—it’s the latest domino in Paxton’s crusade. Just this year, he’s reined in three other Lone Star docs for similar sins, while states like Arkansas and Florida see their bans clobbered in court only to bounce back on appeal. Twenty-six states now stand athwart this madness, a federalist firewall against the transgender tide.

For constitutional conservatives, this saga sings the praises of federalism at its finest: States as laboratories of liberty, shielding the vulnerable from federal overreach and cultural contagions alike. Dr. Lau’s license loss? It’s not vengeance; it’s vindication. A win for wary parents, bewildered youth, and the unyielding biology that no amount of activism can rewrite. As Paxton presses on, one can’t help but wonder: Who’s next in the crosshairs? Because in Texas, the housecleaning has only just begun.

Continue Reading

Featured

Texas Braces for “No Kings” Protests on October 18 – Areas to Avoid

Published

on

George Washington sets crown on fire.

As Texas gears up for a wave of nationwide “No Kings” protests scheduled for Saturday, October 18, residents in major cities across the state are advised to steer clear of key downtown and civic areas to avoid potential disruptions, traffic snarls, and heightened security measures. The anti-authoritarian demonstrations, organized under the banner of opposing perceived executive overreach by President Donald Trump, are expected to draw crowds echoing the large turnouts seen in June. While organizers promote peaceful assembly, past events have occasionally spilled into street closures and increased police presence.

The “No Kings” movement, which frames itself as a grassroots push against authoritarianism, has ties to left-wing groups including Indivisible and, according to state officials, Antifa networks previously designated as domestic terrorists by President Trump. Protests are slated in at least eight Texas locales, focusing on central hubs like city halls, parks, and capitol grounds. Here’s a rundown of the hot spots to sidestep:

CityLocation/DetailsTime WindowNotes
HoustonMarch from Houston City Hall; Rally at Discovery Green (1500 McKinney St)Noon–2 p.m. (rally); ~2 p.m. start (march)Downtown core; expect pedestrian crowds and possible road blocks.
Houston (Suburbs)The Woodlands (Lake Woodlands Dr & Six Pines Dr); La Porte City Hall (604 W Fairmont Pkwy)10 a.m.–1 p.m. (The Woodlands); 10 a.m.–Noon (La Porte)Satellite events in suburban civic spots; lighter traffic but monitor local alerts.
San AntonioTravis Park4–6 p.m.Downtown landmark; anticipate street closures and elevated foot traffic.
DallasPacific Plaza (401 N Harwood St)Noon–3 p.m.Central business district; business commuters should plan alternate routes.
AustinMeet at Texas State Capitol, march ~1 mile to Auditorium Shores2 p.m. startTraverses downtown; riverfront park finale could draw lingering crowds.
Fort Worth501 W 7th St11 a.m.–3 p.m.7th Street corridor in downtown; entertainment district vibe with protest overlay.
ArlingtonArlington Sub Courthouse (700 E Abram St)10 a.m.–NoonCivic center area; near courts, potential for quick law enforcement response.
PlanoNE corner of Preston & Parker Rd (near Wells Fargo Bank)10 a.m.–NoonCommercial intersection; suburban but busy with shoppers and drivers.
LaredoJett Bowl North10 a.m.–NoonLocal rec landmark; public gathering spot in a border community.

These sites were compiled from announcements by organizers and local media reports. There will be many more protests in cities of all sizes. Authorities urge the public to check city traffic apps and news updates for real-time detours.


SIDELINE: Abbott Mobilizes Guard and DPS to Safeguard Austin

In a preemptive strike against potential unrest, Governor Greg Abbott has ordered the deployment of the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Texas National Guard to Austin, where the democrat run city is expected to be the hub of the most violent and extreme protesters. The move, announced Friday, targets the capital city’s planned march amid concerns over links to Antifa groups, which President Trump recently labeled a domestic terrorist organization.

Violence and destruction will never be tolerated in Texas,” Abbott stated in a release from his office. The surge includes state troopers, Special Agents, Texas Rangers, aircraft surveillance, and tactical assets, coordinated with the state’s Homeland Security Division to scan for extremist ties. This echoes a similar summer operation around the Capitol during prior demonstrations.

Local law enforcement will collaborate on arrests for any acts of violence or property damage, emphasizing deterrence over confrontation. Austinites near the Capitol or Auditorium Shores should prepare for a visible security footprint.


Behind the scenes, the “No Kings” push has drawn scrutiny for its funding streams, with reports pointing to deep-pocketed backers like George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (nearly $8 million to Indivisible since 2017), the Arabella Advisors network (over $114 million to affiliates from 2019–2023), and billionaire donors such as Hansjörg Wyss and Walmart heiress Christy Walton. While much of this support flows through dark-money channels for broader civic engagement, critics argue it amplifies protest logistics and messaging.

As the sun sets on these gatherings, it’s worth a final nod to the movement’s own rallying cry: There are no kings in America. And Donald Trump doesn’t see himself as one—for if he did, he wouldn’t allow protests like this to occur in the first place. Stay safe, Texas.

Continue Reading

Featured

ICE Nabs “Worst of the Worst” in Texas Despite Democrat Shutdown

Published

on

Even as the Democrats’ government shutdown drags on in Washington, federal law enforcement officers in Texas are still doing their jobs — without pay — to protect American communities. Over the holiday weekend, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced a series of arrests across Texas targeting what officials described as “the worst of the worst” criminal illegal aliens.

According to a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) press release issued October 14, 2025, ICE officers continued operations throughout the shutdown, apprehending repeat offenders and violent criminals across the Lone Star State. The arrests occurred in multiple Texas cities including San Antonio, Waco, Austin, Georgetown, and Brackettville.

“While many Americans enjoyed the holiday weekend, our brave law enforcement worked without pay because of the Democrats’ government shutdown and continued to arrest the worst of the worst criminals—risking their lives to arrest murderers, pedophiles, and other serial criminals,” said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin.
“We will not allow a government shutdown to stop us from making America safe again.”

Among those arrested in Texas were several repeat offenders, each with serious criminal histories:

  • Yuliana Fernandez-Ledezma, a Venezuelan national, was arrested in San Antonio. She has been convicted of abandoning or endangering a child, a crime that put a minor’s life in danger.
  • Gregoria Salaz-Beltran, a Mexican national, was taken into custody after multiple convictions in both San Antonio and Waco. Her record includes four DWIs and two convictions for kill/poison/serious bodily injury animal cruelty.
  • Ruth Gonzalez-Salazar, also from Mexico, was arrested in Brackettville for smuggling aliens, contributing to the ongoing border security crisis in South Texas.
  • Omar Andrade-Galvez, a Honduran national, was apprehended in Austin, convicted of unlawful restraint—a serious offense involving the restriction of another person’s freedom.
  • Mario Godinez-Lopez, another criminal illegal alien from Mexico, was arrested in Georgetown following a conviction for theft of property.

Each of these individuals had previously been convicted in U.S. courts and were identified as priorities for removal due to their threat to public safety. ICE referred to the group as part of a nationwide effort to locate and detain criminal aliens who continue to reoffend while in the country unlawfully.

Texas Communities Breathe Easier

Local residents across Central and South Texas are expressing relief that these dangerous individuals are now off the streets. The arrests highlight the daily risks ICE officers take—often under political pressure and, in this case, without pay due to the ongoing shutdown.

Critics of the Biden administration have long argued that lax border policies and the failure to secure the southern border have allowed repeat offenders to slip through the cracks, endangering Texas families. The recent arrests show that, despite federal dysfunction in Washington, frontline law enforcement continues to fulfill its mission.

Shutdown Politics, Real-World Consequences

The current government shutdown—sparked by Democrat opposition to a clean spending bill—has left federal employees without pay, including ICE agents and Border Patrol officers. Yet, despite political gridlock, enforcement operations have not ceased. DHS officials emphasized that agents remain committed to national security and community safety, even as many face uncertainty over when they’ll next receive a paycheck.

In many Texas communities, especially along the I-35 and I-10 corridors, illegal immigration remains a top public concern. The presence of repeat offenders—often released under sanctuary or lenient policies—has fueled growing frustration among citizens who see law enforcement as the last line of defense.

Protecting Texas Despite Washington’s Inaction

ICE’s continued success in arresting criminal aliens sends a clear message: Texas will not wait for Washington to act. The agency’s determination during a federal shutdown underscores what many Texans already know—public safety is not a partisan issue, but the consequences of inaction are political.

The DHS statement concluded with a firm reminder that border enforcement is a 24/7 mission.

“We will not allow a government shutdown to stop us from making America safe again,” McLaughlin reiterated.

For now, at least, Texans can rest a little easier knowing that these violent and repeat offenders are behind bars, thanks to the perseverance of federal agents who continue to do their jobs—paycheck or not.

Continue Reading