Adam Schiff has just introduced a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and stop unrestricted dark money in our elections

[Lesh]

It will die in the House, of course. As it should.

As it should?

You LIKE dark money determining our elections?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

As it should?

You LIKE dark money determining our elections?

If dark money wants to make a movie that makes Hillary look bad,
what gives you the right to stop it?

 

[dudmuck]

If dark money wants to make a movie that makes Hillary look bad,
what gives you the right to stop it?

the movie is just a front for funneling anonymous money into politics.

In 2020, there was $1.2 billion from oligarchs.

Once the money spigot is turned on, it cant be turned off.
Schiff as done this once per year for the past ten years or so; nothing new, an exercise in futility.

 

[Flash]

As it should?

You LIKE dark money determining our elections?

You mean like the money the filthy Unions give to the Democrat assholes or do you mean like the campaign money laundering that FTX did for the Democrats?

Maybe the half billion Bezos funneled to the Democrats?

Democrats are corrupt scum and get their funding from the sleaziest organizations on the planet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

the movie is just a front for funneling anonymous money into politics.

In 2020, there was $1.2 billion from oligarchs.

Once the money spigot is turned on, it cant be turned off.
Schiff as done this once per year for the past ten years or so; nothing new, an exercise in futility.

the movie is just a front for funneling anonymous money into politics.

That's awful!

So what?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It will die in the House, of course. As it should.

Why should it?
You like unaccounted funding of elected officials?

 

[BackAgain]

Why should it?
You like unaccounted funding of elected officials?

No Fakey. I like free speech.

Just because you don’t care for free speech is no reason to abandon the First Amendment.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No Fakey. I like free speech.

Just because you don’t care for free speech is no reason to abandon the First Amendment.

Freedom for whom? Of course we have no idea.

 

[martybegan]

Freedom for whom? Of course we have no idea.

What's the difference between a corporation funding a PAC and the CEO of the corporation funding a PAC?

 

[BackAgain]

Freedom for whom? Of course we have no idea.

Free speech means just that. It is not limited to just some of us.

But, of course, that would confuse a libtard like you.

 

[Lesh]

What's the difference between a corporation funding a PAC and the CEO of the corporation funding a PAC?

Everything. One is a person. The other is not

 

[Frankenstein]

It might if it had been introduced last year. I doubt it goes far in the Republican controlled house, as they are really big on corporate donations.

Which is of course why he waited.

 

[martybegan]

Everything. One is a person. The other is not

One is just a grouping of people, just like Unions, PACs themselves, and charitable organizations.

Do they get banned from political contributions as well?

 

[hadit]

This would truly return power to the American people

Poor guy must not have gotten very much of it.

 

[hadit]

BULLSHIT.

Speech is the stuff that comes out of your mouth.

Money is the stuff in your wallet.

Even a blindfolded ten year old can tell the difference.

Money is COMMERCE, it's a business transaction. You're not speaking, you're buying someone else's speech

Am I restricting your speech if I prevent you from spending money on a microphone, sound system, and a stadium to make a speech? How about if you're not allowed to spend money on TV ads during a campaign?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

What's the difference between a corporation funding a PAC and the CEO of the corporation funding a PAC?

Or a foreign govt or foreign ceo funding a PAC?

 

[martybegan]

Or a foreign govt or foreign ceo funding a PAC?

There is a difference there, although to be fair what is the real crime if a foreign government or person or company says "we like this guy"?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

There is a difference there, although to be fair what is the real crime if a foreign government or person or company says "we like this guy"?

It’s illegal for foreign money to fund elections directly. PACs are a backdoor for foreign money as there’s nothing stopping foreign money from going to American corps.

You like the idea of American politicians being beholden to foreign interests?

 

[martybegan]

It’s illegal for foreign money to fund elections directly. PACs are a backdoor for foreign money as there’s nothing stopping foreign money from going to American corps.

You like the idea of American politicians being beholden to foreign interests?

That's fine to stop them. The solution isn't banning US companies from funding speech.

Biden sucks China dick and you don't seem to have a problem with that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That's fine to stop them. The solution isn't banning US companies from funding speech.

Biden sucks China dick and you don't seem to have a problem with that.

How can they be stopped when there’s no requirement for disclosing it?