Bill Barr Indicts 8 Including Mueller Top Witness for Funneling Millions in Foreign Donations to....

Discussion in 'Politics' started by The Purge, Dec 8, 2019.

  1. The Purge
    Offline

    The Purge Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2018
    Messages:
    16,272
    Thanks Received:
    4,665
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +23,412
    Well let's see what this DEMOCRAT BILL WOULD DO....PAY ATTENTION EVERYONE, as they are going to try and LIE ABOUT what this bill does!...Written in LAWYER SPEAK, it is deliberately twisted so it sounds great by isn't!

    The new legislation politicizes and weaponizes the FEC to favor the ruling political party. Under current law, the FEC is a six-member commission, with three Republicans and three Democrats. Four votes are needed to move forward with any prosecution of alleged violations or investigations. This construction ensures that decisions made by the Commission are truly bipartisan and free from any political animus.

    H.R. 1 fundamentally changes the construction of the FEC by reducing the number of members from six to five. Advocates of H.R. 1 try to obfuscate this clear politicization by insisting that the new five-person committee must consist of two Republicans, two Democrats, and one “independent” member that is a member of a minor political party.

    By this logic, the president could appoint an independent like Bernie Sanders, who is functionally a liberal Democrat, to be the fifth member of the FEC. The new construction rigs the system to ensure total partisan control of the FEC, exactly the opposite of how the Commission is designed under current law.

    To make matters worse, H.R. 1 authorizes the president to pick the Chairman of the FEC, all but ensuring total presidential control of the Commission. Under current law, the FEC has a Chair and Vice Chair, and they must be from different parties and selected by the Commission. Not only would H.R. 1 allow the president to pick the Chair, the legislation drastically increases the power the Chair has over the committee.

    Essentially, the Chair would function as Chief Administrative Officer over the committee, and would be allowed to act on his own with regard to issuing subpoenas, compelling testimony, and controlling the FEC budget. H.R. 1 also abolishes the requirement that the Vice Chair must be a different party than the Chair, further demonstrating that Democrats want the ruling political party to have ironclad control over a historically bipartisan agency.

    H.R. 1 also changes how campaigns are funded. The bill implements a subsidy for politicians in the form of a 600 percent match for small-dollar political contributions. Any individual that donates under $200 to a candidate or PAC is entitled to a 6 to 1 match from the federal government. In effect, this provision would force taxpayers to subsidize political campaigns. This insane 600 percent match of political contributions would be another step towards campaigns funded by theft from taxpayers instead of voluntary political contributions.

    Another provision contained in H.R. 1 is new donor identification requirements that would further suppress free speech. According to the new legislation, organizations that make “campaign-related disbursements” totaling more than $10,000 during a two-year period must publicly identify all that gave over $10,000 during the two-year period. The legislation also expands the “stand by your ad” disclaimer in video advertisements, forcing organizations to identify their top five donors at the end of advertisements.

    This is obviously an egregious infringement on the First Amendment rights of every American to support causes without fear of intimidation or harassment from those that may disagree. Especially in today’s rancorous political environment, protecting the integrity of donor information is more important than ever.

    The bill also creates numerous cases where the ruling political class suppresses political speech. Specifically, the bill creates a new standard for regulating political speech called “PASO.” The PASO standard is an overly-vague standard that asks whether speech “promotes,” “attacks,” “supports,” or “opposes” a candidate or official. If political speech meets the vague PASO standard, the speech can be regulated.

    H.R. 1 also undoes the FEC’s “Internet exemption” which excludes the internet from regulation of political speech. Essentially, if the FEC deems that online communication is “paid,” it is subjected to the same regulations and donor disclosure requirements as traditional advertisements. This overbroad and overvague provision would even include content on free platforms like Twitter and Facebook, as the paid definition extends to paid staffers managing the platforms.

    Finally, this legislation contains a whole host of bad provisions that would federalize and fundamentally transform how elections are conducted in this country. If the bill was signed into law, the federal government would force the states to implement early voting, automatic voter registration, same-day registration, online voter registration, and no-fault absentee balloting. The bill would also invalidate voter identification laws all over the country by allowing voters to simply sign a statement affirming their identity instead of providing identification.

    H.R. 1 also contains language designed to block voter intimidation, which seems reasonable until you realize that it largely duplicates measures already in place all across the country. These systemic changes are a gift to campaign lawyers and their litigious clients, and it comes at the cost of our electoral integrity.

    Make no mistake about it – H.R. 1 is a dangerous piece of legislation. If implemented, the bill would suppress political speech, politicize and weaponize the FEC, fund campaigns through theft of taxpayer dollars, and implement numerous reforms that would damage our electoral integrity. This parade of horribles is a clear attempt to grab power by Democrats and to rewrite election law to benefit their cronies and lobbyists. Congress should reject this legislation.

    As stated, it is to make the Democratic party the DIXTATOR over free speech and a way to have their Soros funded THUGS attack YOUR CHOICES!

    NOW LET THE COMMIE SPIN BEGIN!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. OldLady
    Offline

    OldLady Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    55,541
    Thanks Received:
    9,639
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Ratings:
    +44,398
    Yeah, it's all a big conspiracy to ensure the posters at USMB are kept in the dark.
    ?
     
  3. Daryl Hunt
    Offline

    Daryl Hunt Your Worst Nightmare Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    14,966
    Thanks Received:
    871
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    O.D. (Stands for Out Dere
    Ratings:
    +5,818
    By not allowing it to be discussed by the Senate Floor, the good parts will never have a chance to be realized. It's called "Comprimize" something that isn't happening in todays Congress. Both sides need to be talking and making deals.

    The whole bill can be read at Text - H.R.1 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): For the People Act of 2019

    Now, let's look at your points.

    H.R. 1 fundamentally changes the construction of the FEC by reducing the number of members from six to five.
    Right now, the membership is chosen by the President and the Senate and it supposed to be 6 members. But currently it only has 3 members with 3 vacant seats. One Rep, One Dem and one Independent. There is no mention of changing that number in the bill. Your handler needs to learn how to read or you need a different handler. Those 3 slots that need to be filled would have to comprise of one Rep, One Dem and one Independent and be approved by the President and the Senate. Even if they dropped it to 5, it would still be 2 Reps, 2 Dems and 1 Independent which would leave neither party in control. Your charge of "Weaponizing the FEC" in favor of the ruling party is just plain BS.

    To make matters worse, H.R. 1 authorizes the president to pick the Chairman of the FEC, all but ensuring total presidential control of the Commission.
    Someone has to chair it and there has to be a method of figuring out who is in that chair. Right now, it's a Democrat with the Rep as Vice Chair. Are you saying that Rump should not be afforded the opportunity to make that choice himself? One would think that would just go with the job. What's the matter, you afraid that someone other than Rump might get to make a choice in something? Right now, with one of each, the choice of who is in the chair can't be changed. In order to do a change the FEC would first have to fill the 3 vacant seats to change from the Chair that is sitting today and that is a Democrat. Sounds to me like the President and Senate needs to stop all the BS games and get those 3 vacant seats filled if you want any change to happen. If you have balanced votes in the FEC it is possible but highly improbable that you could have the Vice of the same party as the Chairperson. And it's not a requirement anyway that the Vice has to be the opposite party now. The Position is still voted on by the commission members. Right now, there aren't enough members to have it any other way except you could have an independent filling one or the other positions. But right now, due to the lack of members and the inability to do a vote, the Chair stands as Dem and the Vice stands as Rep. Otherwise, allow the President to do it so it gets done or it just won't get done. Get over yourself. And fire that damned Handler.

    H.R. 1 also changes how campaigns are funded.
    Text - H.R.1 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): For the People Act of 2019
    “(a) In general.—Subject to the provisions of this chapter, the eligible candidates of a party in a Presidential election shall be entitled to equal payment under section 9006 in an amount equal to 600 percent of the amount of each matchable contribution received by such candidate or by the candidate’s authorized committees (disregarding any amount of contributions from any person to the extent that the total of the amounts contributed by such person for the election exceeds $200), except that total amount to which a candidate is entitled under this paragraph shall not exceed $250,000,000.”.

    Let's take a look at the current Contributions. You have one candidate that is backed by the deep pockets and gets the big donors and you have the other candidate that is backed by the grass roots with hundreds or millions of small contributors. Right now, both get the same matching amount as in dollar for dollar up to a certain amount against their total qualified donations. Under what is presented in HR.1, the grass roots (which will have the smaller dollar amount) will get the 600% help to even out the playing field. Of course, the Corporations will be totally against this since it would take their advantage of buying the election away from them.

    Another provision contained in H.R. 1 is new donor identification requirements that would further suppress free speech.
    And this is a bad thing how? If a person, Corporation or other contributes to a party or person running for office, they would have to be identified. If a person, corporation or other would contribute to a PAC where the money was used for Political Purposes then that would be made public. That's been a bi-partisan wishlist for a couple of decades. Speech would still be free but it would be transparent. If a large corporation wants to try and buy and election, they get credit for it. As it stands now, the PACs are totally anonymous in who is contributing to whom. And that scares the hell out of the large Corporations who have gotten into the habit of buying elections with no one knowing they are doing it.

    The bill also creates numerous cases where the ruling political class suppresses political speech.
    And
    H.R. 1 also undoes the FEC’s “Internet exemption” which excludes the internet from regulation of political speech

    Not in there at all. It does regulate how and by whom money can be contributed. And those are quite fair. If you call that suppression of Political Speech you are being might liberal with the Supreme Court Ruling. One thing it does is make the Internet equal to the networks for political content if it's done my either a political party or a PAC. Not a bad thing unless you are trying to buy an election.

    The Internet has escaped a lot of Regulation because it's been self regulated. And until about 2014, it worked out well. Enter the GRU attacks. Other countries have learned to use the Internet to tear the US to pieces. And I am not playing Partisan on this one. Read the Mueller Report concerning this. And read what the CIA, NSA and others have reported about it. Out of all the big Content Providers, the only one that refuses to self regulate is Zuckerburg and that could be the downfall for everyone since his organization controls the lions share of the information. And it only works if the Internet is Self Regulating. Zuckerburg can stop this by self regulating. If not then the FEC must get into the act. Trust me, self regulation works much better.

    Finally, this legislation contains a whole host of bad provisions that would federalize and fundamentally transform how elections are conducted in this country
    This is hogwash. What HR1 does is allow funding the HELP the states to do a better election. Including the added cost of paper ballots if that is what the State thinks they need. It also funds post election audits that many states (mostly Red States) can ill afford to pay for. The State still makes the decisions and conducts the voting but they can request and receive federal assistance if they need it. You really need to fire that handler.

    Now, about your response. HR1 goes on for a few hundred pages. There is no way in hell you could have read it and understand it in the short time from my post to the time you posted. You are cut and posting from someone else who is making up crap to cover for Moscow Mitch. The Senate Members need to be allowed to read it, make revisions and shoot it back to the House. Let it go back and forth for a few times until they come to an agreement and then shoot it to the President for an up or down. That is how the system was designed to work. One person should never stop the system from working. There are some not so pretty things in it that needs to be ironed out but there are mostly some really positive things in it that needs to be made into law.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    18,170
    Thanks Received:
    2,651
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +6,899
    It really is not.

    Impeachment is political in nature and because of that what really matters is how the process impacts public opinion.

    A campaign finance scandal on Trump's opponent and the face of the impeachment charge will have a very real impact on that.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. The Purge
    Offline

    The Purge Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2018
    Messages:
    16,272
    Thanks Received:
    4,665
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +23,412
    Instead of crying, I recomend that the Dimwits actually work with the Republicans on a new bill that takes care of ALL instead of simply DemonRATS!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Stormy Daniels
    Offline

    Stormy Daniels Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2018
    Messages:
    4,308
    Thanks Received:
    497
    Trophy Points:
    170
    Ratings:
    +3,321
    :bsflag:
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  7. The Original Tree
    Offline

    The Original Tree Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    26,721
    Thanks Received:
    4,806
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    OHIO
    Ratings:
    +29,912
    The IG report btw, kind of glosses over FBI Corruption on one hand, and it exposes it, in another. The Bottom Line is that THE FBI is still with holding exculpatory information from Carter Page and his attorneys and from Papadoupolis, and so, with that kind of Obstruction, Horrowitz was only able to dig so far. But his report will expose some things that we need to have Public Hearings on, in The Senate and use The Senate Subpoena Power to get to the bottom of it.
     
  8. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    20,642
    Thanks Received:
    4,536
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +23,157
    Liberal Defense Mechanisim.JPG

    Ignorance is bliss on the left... You idiots think its ok for you to do but illegal for others.. there is no higher hypocrisy from people that choose to have their heads up their asses...
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  9. The Original Tree
    Offline

    The Original Tree Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    26,721
    Thanks Received:
    4,806
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    OHIO
    Ratings:
    +29,912
    Heil Schiffler!
    All this guy needs is a funny mustache. They could be twins.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  10. francoHFW
    Offline

    francoHFW Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Messages:
    61,481
    Thanks Received:
    3,494
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Location:
    NY 26th FINALLY DEM!
    Ratings:
    +16,433
    Not a single one of your propaganda machines phony scandals has ever gone anywhere in the real world and this is the same thing. Nothing but part of your propaganda.... Investigate all you want but do not blackmail foreign leaders to do it or tell China and Russia to do it. You people are just unbelievable.Everyone in the real world knows that Biden
    is like the most honest politician there is.... Google Google news right now or Yahoo news and check every story from every angle instead of being a blowhard brainwashed functional moron oops brainwashed functional blowhard moron. And that is a political insult not a personal one.
     

Share This Page