What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Killing Of The United States of America

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,591
Reaction score
29,559
Points
2,180
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
so you have the comply with the 15th amendment? aww. poor baby.
So the 14th & 15th amendment compliance means the "loss of everything this country has ever stood for"?
What does this bill have to do with the 15th Amendment?
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,591
Reaction score
29,559
Points
2,180
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!


Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.

.

Your lack of independent research is noted. Do you have an opinion not fed to you by the Heritage Foundation? Do you think it should be a crime to prevent or attempt to prevent someone from voting, yes or no?
Everything you post is a talking point fed to you by the Democrat Reich.

Who do you think you're fooling?
 

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
41,129
Reaction score
6,833
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!


Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.

.

Your lack of independent research is noted. Do you have an opinion not fed to you by the Heritage Foundation? Do you think it should be a crime to prevent or attempt to prevent someone from voting, yes or no?


See post 377.

.

See what, you cop out completely? What's wrong, Heritage not tell you how to answer basic questions? Can't think or answer for yourself? Not programmed to respond?


Do you think it should be a crime to prevent or attempt to prevent someone from voting, yes or no?
 

ThoughtCrimes

Old Navy Vet
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
4,255
Reaction score
947
Points
245
Location
Desert Southwest
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!


Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.
Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.
So you're reverting to your old reliable dodgy tactics and slinging nothing but ad hominem.

A lame opinion? Hell Tex, you cited two of my posts (by number) to another because your dumb ass didn't have an answer for either question because you were too empty-headed to hold the necessary facts/data/truths!!
 

dudmuck

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Messages
7,942
Reaction score
2,565
Points
345
Location
Camarillo, CA
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
so you have the comply with the 15th amendment? aww. poor baby.
So the 14th & 15th amendment compliance means the "loss of everything this country has ever stood for"?
What does this bill have to do with the 15th Amendment?
they both prevent states from denying citizens the right to vote.
But HR1 does more than voting, it also makes your vote count. Such as reducing the influence of money in politics, and anti-gerrymandering measures, and other ethics rules for elected officials.
 

Lastamender

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
12,729
Reaction score
7,710
Points
1,050
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
so you have the comply with the 15th amendment? aww. poor baby.
So the 14th & 15th amendment compliance means the "loss of everything this country has ever stood for"?
What does this bill have to do with the 15th Amendment?
they both prevent states from denying citizens the right to vote.
But HR1 does more than voting, it also makes your vote count. Such as reducing the influence of money in politics, and anti-gerrymandering measures, and other ethics rules for elected officials.
The Republicans want those citizens to have IDs.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,968
Reaction score
11,806
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!


Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.

.

Your lack of independent research is noted. Do you have an opinion not fed to you by the Heritage Foundation? Do you think it should be a crime to prevent or attempt to prevent someone from voting, yes or no?


See post 377.

.

See what, you cop out completely? What's wrong, Heritage not tell you how to answer basic questions? Can't think or answer for yourself? Not programmed to respond?


Do you think it should be a crime to prevent or attempt to prevent someone from voting, yes or no?


From legitimately voting, yes. Of course that's already illegal.

.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
71,257
Reaction score
18,844
Points
2,290
they both prevent states from denying citizens the right to vote.
But HR1 does more than voting, it also makes your vote count. Such as reducing the influence of money in politics, and anti-gerrymandering measures, and other ethics rules for elected officials.

It's all BS because no state denied anybody the right to vote who was properly registered and had valid identification.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,968
Reaction score
11,806
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!


Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.
Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.
So you're reverting to your old reliable dodgy tactics and slinging nothing but ad hominem.

A lame opinion? Hell Tex, you cited two of my posts (by number) to another because your dumb ass didn't have an answer for either question because you were too empty-headed to hold the necessary facts/data/truths!!


Poor little commie, I trust Heritage, you, not so much. LMFAO

.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: cnm

dudmuck

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Messages
7,942
Reaction score
2,565
Points
345
Location
Camarillo, CA
they both prevent states from denying citizens the right to vote.
But HR1 does more than voting, it also makes your vote count. Such as reducing the influence of money in politics, and anti-gerrymandering measures, and other ethics rules for elected officials.

It's all BS because no state denied anybody the right to vote who was properly registered and had valid identification.
all they've done to degrade the right to vote:

Slow down the mail.

Speed up a Supreme Court appointment.

Shut down polling places in Black communities. Open up more in white ones.

Stop counting people of color in the 2020 Census so they have less representation in Congress and fewer federal dollars invested in their districts.

Just stop counting the actual ballots. (After all, that tactic has worked before.)


 

Lastamender

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
12,729
Reaction score
7,710
Points
1,050
they both prevent states from denying citizens the right to vote.
But HR1 does more than voting, it also makes your vote count. Such as reducing the influence of money in politics, and anti-gerrymandering measures, and other ethics rules for elected officials.

It's all BS because no state denied anybody the right to vote who was properly registered and had valid identification.
all they've done to degrade the right to vote:

Slow down the mail.

Speed up a Supreme Court appointment.

Shut down polling places in Black communities. Open up more in white ones.

Stop counting people of color in the 2020 Census so they have less representation in Congress and fewer federal dollars invested in their districts.

Just stop counting the actual ballots. (After all, that tactic has worked before.)


Anything about requiring an ID? Without ID the vote is illegal.
 

dudmuck

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Messages
7,942
Reaction score
2,565
Points
345
Location
Camarillo, CA
they both prevent states from denying citizens the right to vote.
But HR1 does more than voting, it also makes your vote count. Such as reducing the influence of money in politics, and anti-gerrymandering measures, and other ethics rules for elected officials.

It's all BS because no state denied anybody the right to vote who was properly registered and had valid identification.
all they've done to degrade the right to vote:

Slow down the mail.

Speed up a Supreme Court appointment.

Shut down polling places in Black communities. Open up more in white ones.

Stop counting people of color in the 2020 Census so they have less representation in Congress and fewer federal dollars invested in their districts.

Just stop counting the actual ballots. (After all, that tactic has worked before.)


Anything about requiring an ID? Without ID the vote is illegal.
not really, for me its just that must be registered to vote, and show up at the correct polling place.

 

Lastamender

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
12,729
Reaction score
7,710
Points
1,050
they both prevent states from denying citizens the right to vote.
But HR1 does more than voting, it also makes your vote count. Such as reducing the influence of money in politics, and anti-gerrymandering measures, and other ethics rules for elected officials.

It's all BS because no state denied anybody the right to vote who was properly registered and had valid identification.
all they've done to degrade the right to vote:

Slow down the mail.

Speed up a Supreme Court appointment.

Shut down polling places in Black communities. Open up more in white ones.

Stop counting people of color in the 2020 Census so they have less representation in Congress and fewer federal dollars invested in their districts.

Just stop counting the actual ballots. (After all, that tactic has worked before.)


Anything about requiring an ID? Without ID the vote is illegal.
not really, for me its just that must be registered to vote, and show up at the correct polling place.

Registration should include ID. Without it the vote is illegal.
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
535
Points
163
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
What SPECIFICALLY is it you don't like about HR-1?
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
535
Points
163
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.

One thing Democrats and Republicans both understand: The Democrats have no chance at winning in a fair and traditional election system the way our founders designed. With Covid they discovered a way to get the more stupid and politically ignorant to vote; more Obama phone and Obama money ladies. Of course they are going to try and make their plot mandatory in all states.
Republicans from Donald Trump to the Arizona AG have admitted in public that without EXTENSIVE voter suppression activities they cannot hope to win a fair election.

Now I know you folks want to go back the 3/5 of a person thing...
And you'd love to take back those amendments giving women and 18 yos the right to vote...
And of course you'd love to cancel the entire VRA...

The elections you want may be "traditional" but they're certainly not fair and your leaders have already defined what happens when we do fair.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
138,591
Reaction score
29,559
Points
2,180
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
What SPECIFICALLY is it you don't like about HR-1?
What do you imagine I should like about it?
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
71,257
Reaction score
18,844
Points
2,290
Republicans from Donald Trump to the Arizona AG have admitted in public that without EXTENSIVE voter suppression activities they cannot hope to win a fair election.

Now I know you folks want to go back the 3/5 of a person thing...
And you'd love to take back those amendments giving women and 18 yos the right to vote...
And of course you'd love to cancel the entire VRA...

The elections you want may be "traditional" but they're certainly not fair and your leaders have already defined what happens when we do fair.

Voter suppression is as fake as the Easter Bunny. They use that lie because they can't tell the truth, and that is most of their lowlife voters are politically ignorant, and wouldn't take the time or energy to vote like real Americans. They'd sooner just stay home. Now the commies are trying to get automatic registration even if you don't vote or want to. They want mail-in to every American to get more stupid people to vote because that's the only way they could have an advantage.
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
535
Points
163
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.

One thing Democrats and Republicans both understand: The Democrats have no chance at winning in a fair and traditional election system the way our founders designed. With Covid they discovered a way to get the more stupid and politically ignorant to vote; more Obama phone and Obama money ladies. Of course they are going to try and make their plot mandatory in all states.
Republicans from Donald Trump to the Arizona AG have admitted in public that without EXTENSIVE voter suppression activities they cannot hope to win a fair election.

Now I know you folks want to go back the 3/5 of a person thing...
And you'd love to take back those amendments giving women and 18 yos the right to vote...
And of course you'd love to cancel the entire VRA...

The elections you want may be "traditional" but they're certainly not fair and your leaders have already defined what happens when we do fair.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
What SPECIFICALLY is it you don't like about HR-1?
What do you imagine I should like about it?
So, you don't really know what you don't like about it, you've just been told you need to not like it.

Understood.
 

Dadoalex

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2021
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
535
Points
163
Republicans from Donald Trump to the Arizona AG have admitted in public that without EXTENSIVE voter suppression activities they cannot hope to win a fair election.

Now I know you folks want to go back the 3/5 of a person thing...
And you'd love to take back those amendments giving women and 18 yos the right to vote...
And of course you'd love to cancel the entire VRA...

The elections you want may be "traditional" but they're certainly not fair and your leaders have already defined what happens when we do fair.

Voter suppression is as fake as the Easter Bunny. They use that lie because they can't tell the truth, and that is most of their lowlife voters are politically ignorant, and wouldn't take the time or energy to vote like real Americans. They'd sooner just stay home. Now the commies are trying to get automatic registration even if you don't vote or want to. They want mail-in to every American to get more stupid people to vote because that's the only way they could have an advantage.
No, your denial is simply a lie.
What you don't like about voting by mail is that your ability to do your traditional voter suppression activities won't work.
Move the polling spots...no problem already mailed in the ballot;
Not enough working polling machines...no problem already mailed in the ballot;
Fake cops at polling places...no problem already mailed in the ballot;

So now your leaders are having to come up with more creative strategies than your Neanderthal tactics of the past.

BUT...You've pissed them off
Your stuff didn't work in 2018
Didn't work in 2020
Won't work in the future.

Stacy and AOC will see to that.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
71,257
Reaction score
18,844
Points
2,290
No, your denial is simply a lie.
What you don't like about voting by mail is that your ability to do your traditional voter suppression activities won't work.
Move the polling spots...no problem already mailed in the ballot;
Not enough working polling machines...no problem already mailed in the ballot;
Fake cops at polling places...no problem already mailed in the ballot;

So now your leaders are having to come up with more creative strategies than your Neanderthal tactics of the past.

BUT...You've pissed them off
Your stuff didn't work in 2018
Didn't work in 2020
Won't work in the future.

Stacy and AOC will see to that.

I know they will, and so will Piglosi and Whorris after they pass this voting bill. I have no idea why you people didn't leave this country and move to North Korea or Cuba where their government and society is more to your liking. We had a great country until liberalism ruined it for us. Now they are trying to fix it so Republicans can never have power again. When any country has a single-party government, tyranny takes place.

Now we will quickly slip into Socialism, and then Communism which are just about the same thing. The Great Experiment is ending, and it's ending because of people like you who support the Communists.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$20.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top