|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 registered members (pvillehunter, Exhoosier, OlTimer, Johnal3, Todd1700, Jtide, wareagle22, oakachoy, 2 invisible),
630
guests, and 0
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Patel and Schiff
#4290104
02/22/25 03:20 AM
02/22/25 03:20 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 6,880 F L A
Tree Dweller
OP
14 point
|
OP
14 point
Joined: Jul 2020
Posts: 6,880
F L A
|
|
|
|
Re: Patel and Schiff
[Re: Tree Dweller]
#4290118
02/22/25 07:01 AM
02/22/25 07:01 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 11,555 northport
deadeye48
Booner
|
Booner
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 11,555
northport
|
If Kash follows through then there will be quite a few people in serious trouble
When I need expert advice I tend to talk to myself The older I get the better I used to be
|
|
|
Re: Patel and Schiff
[Re: RidgeRanger]
#4290498
02/22/25 09:32 PM
02/22/25 09:32 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 6,315 Vancleave, Ms
BobK
12 point
|
12 point
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 6,315
Vancleave, Ms
|
Listening to that piece of schiff talk about issues like integrity and protecting the people makes me want to throw up. He needs to be tried and end up at the end of a rope. I agree.
|
|
|
Re: Patel and Schiff
[Re: Red Fox]
#4290695
02/23/25 11:31 AM
02/23/25 11:31 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,427 Saraland, Al
BamaFan64
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,427
Saraland, Al
|
Was Shifty given a pre emptive pardon by Brandon? If so, there was a reason. He was. I don’t know everything that the pardon covered, but there’s probably plenty of illegal things he’s been involved in that’s illegal. If nothing else, they can revoke any security clearances he has to limit what committees he sits on.
|
|
|
Re: Patel and Schiff
[Re: Red Fox]
#4291346
02/24/25 01:38 PM
02/24/25 01:38 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,558 Sumter County
sumpter_al
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,558
Sumter County
|
Was Shifty given a pre emptive pardon by Brandon? If so, there was a reason. Only for the J6 stuff. He is still wide open for the Russia Gate stuff. I am hoping his is the first person to be made an example of. He is probably also on the Epstein list so hopefully that will get him and all these other "elites" what they have coming.
I love my country, but don't trust my government.
|
|
|
Re: Patel and Schiff
[Re: Tree Dweller]
#4291366
02/24/25 02:22 PM
02/24/25 02:22 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,849 B'ham
Goatkiller
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,849
B'ham
|
however this falls out this inner circle of lying Democrats needs to be eliminated from our future politics.
I can make a list of Republicans that someone ought to take a look at just the same....
No government employees were harmed in the making of this mess.
|
|
|
Re: Patel and Schiff
[Re: Tree Dweller]
#4291423
02/24/25 05:41 PM
02/24/25 05:41 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,794
abolt300
Booner
|
Booner
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,794
|
Nothing will happen to him, because Congressmen can say whatever they want, truth or lie, without any fear of prosecution. Here is a copy and paste.
"The Constitution has a clause that protects Congressmen and Senators from having the Executive Branch claim that their speech is criminal. From Article I, Section 6, speaking of Senators and members of the House:
… for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
There is however, accountability for lying in an open hearing, at least theoretically. From Article I, Section 5:
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
So, in particular, if a Congressman is proven to have been lying in his opening remarks in each of the recent depositions, he cannot be prosecuted for it. He could, however, be censured or even removed by the House for it. However, removal would require 2/3 of the House to vote for it, and that is not likely, even if it is shown that he or she was paid by Russia to do so."
Basically, they can say and do anything they want and are accountable to only themselves and their peers. Outright lying has been allowed on the floor and in chambers for so long, that nobody even thinks twice about doing it, as long as it advances a point or moves the needle politically. While we are fixing government, this needs to be changed, as well as adding strict term limits and maximum age requirements.
Last edited by abolt300; 02/24/25 05:44 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Patel and Schiff
[Re: abolt300]
#4291768
02/25/25 12:38 PM
02/25/25 12:38 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,558 Sumter County
sumpter_al
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,558
Sumter County
|
Nothing will happen to him, because Congressmen can say whatever they want, truth or lie, without any fear of prosecution. Here is a copy and paste.
"The Constitution has a clause that protects Congressmen and Senators from having the Executive Branch claim that their speech is criminal. From Article I, Section 6, speaking of Senators and members of the House:
… for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
There is however, accountability for lying in an open hearing, at least theoretically. From Article I, Section 5:
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
So, in particular, if a Congressman is proven to have been lying in his opening remarks in each of the recent depositions, he cannot be prosecuted for it. He could, however, be censured or even removed by the House for it. However, removal would require 2/3 of the House to vote for it, and that is not likely, even if it is shown that he or she was paid by Russia to do so."
Basically, they can say and do anything they want and are accountable to only themselves and their peers. Outright lying has been allowed on the floor and in chambers for so long, that nobody even thinks twice about doing it, as long as it advances a point or moves the needle politically. While we are fixing government, this needs to be changed, as well as adding strict term limits and maximum age requirements. That is only the case for speech made on the floor. When he is being interviewed outside the chamber or on in a TV studio he has no such protection.
I love my country, but don't trust my government.
|
|
|
Re: Patel and Schiff
[Re: sumpter_al]
#4291813
02/25/25 02:34 PM
02/25/25 02:34 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,794
abolt300
Booner
|
Booner
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,794
|
Nothing will happen to him, because Congressmen can say whatever they want, truth or lie, without any fear of prosecution. Here is a copy and paste.
"The Constitution has a clause that protects Congressmen and Senators from having the Executive Branch claim that their speech is criminal. From Article I, Section 6, speaking of Senators and members of the House:
… for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
There is however, accountability for lying in an open hearing, at least theoretically. From Article I, Section 5:
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
So, in particular, if a Congressman is proven to have been lying in his opening remarks in each of the recent depositions, he cannot be prosecuted for it. He could, however, be censured or even removed by the House for it. However, removal would require 2/3 of the House to vote for it, and that is not likely, even if it is shown that he or she was paid by Russia to do so."
Basically, they can say and do anything they want and are accountable to only themselves and their peers. Outright lying has been allowed on the floor and in chambers for so long, that nobody even thinks twice about doing it, as long as it advances a point or moves the needle politically. While we are fixing government, this needs to be changed, as well as adding strict term limits and maximum age requirements. That is only the case for speech made on the floor. When he is being interviewed outside the chamber or on in a TV studio he has no such protection. Agree, but show me just one house or senate member, in the last 100 yrs, that has been prosecuted for lying, defamation, or knowingly and intentionally spreading false propaganda, for political benefit, outside of the chamber. There aren't any and there should be hundreds, if not thousands in just the past 75 yrs. This "get out of jail free speech exemption" has be construed by all to be another blanket immunity type deal. That needs to change immediately, with formal prosecutions of those found guilty of it, repub or dem. Duly elected senators and representatives should face severe legal repercussions for intentionally lying to those that elected them.
Last edited by abolt300; 02/25/25 02:39 PM.
|
|
|
|