The resolution should be redrawn for passage to censure Schiff. Once passed, other resolutions can be introduced." I'm sure the republicans would vote approvingly to censure Adam "liar" Schiff. It is most likely the heavy fine that many of the 20 republicans objected to. It can work both ways, and will be undoubtedly used to target republicans in the future.
It is most likely the heavy fine that many of the 20 republicans objected to.
I would probably object to the heavy fine on the basis of constitutionality:
1.) The authority to levy fines of this magnitude should be only in the courts, with the executive branch carrying out enforcement. Congress, with it being a legislature branch, should not have the authority to dish out punishments as they see fit and usurp the courts' duties.
2.) Massie questioned if the $16 million fine runs afoul of the 8th Amendment's probation against excessive fines and if the fine would survive Judicial review. I have to agree that the millions of dollars in fines could be argued as excessive and would have a very tough chance surviving the Supreme Court's review.
The MAGA men over at Truth Social would find my words as blasphemy, but I do think that these two items are a cause for concern that should not be dismissed to satisfy sinful bloodlust.
In this case, DC Draino needs to be called out for not providing the whole truth.
That's the question about DC_Draino (ergo, Rogan O'Handley). He reminds me of another Charlie Kirk. I just can't buy into this guy. So, it is with guarded expectations whenever I come across his posts. Even his background screams who is funding this dude?
Rogan O'Handley is a former California-based Hollywood entertainment lawyer. He left his law career to become a conservative social media influencer. Who does this unless being on the payroll or having some benefactor funding them? After gaining 80,000 followers on his account, he quit his job as an entertainment lawyer to pursue a full-time career as a social media expert and political activist.
I'm not saying I disagree with his viewpoints. I can't think of many I disagree with. However, is O'Handley paid as a provocateur of a sort? Jumping to demonize Massie and other republicans for voting against a resolution having an unconstitutional excessive fine included is indicative of O'Handley playing such a role. The net effect is dividing republicans and setting them up to not be re-elected. Maybe there's more to O'Handley than being born to outspoken Democrat parents? This is found in his biography.
I don't trust him. Be wary of those that rise to fame quickly and appear as a 'experts' of public opinion.
That is the thing with influencers. They are slaves to their audiences' demands, which prevents them from having the courage to ask the real questions or making unpopular but necessary questions to get to the real truth, least they lose their audience and their income.
I use them for news, but I will not trust them all to speak the real truth, which is sad. Not only we have to combat the lies from the MSM, we also have to combat the lies from our side as well.
The resolution should be redrawn for passage to censure Schiff. Once passed, other resolutions can be introduced." I'm sure the republicans would vote approvingly to censure Adam "liar" Schiff. It is most likely the heavy fine that many of the 20 republicans objected to. It can work both ways, and will be undoubtedly used to target republicans in the future.
The Democrats are never afraid. The Republicans live in fear.
This should be the top comment
Correct
They sign off on this fine, and guess who's next? They are!
Nobody wants that and it's unconstitutional if that matters anymore.
Yeah, Thomas Massie specifically pointed to how he's still fighting Pelosi for when she docked his pay for not wearing the face diaper.
Same with Kay Granger.
I would probably object to the heavy fine on the basis of constitutionality:
1.) The authority to levy fines of this magnitude should be only in the courts, with the executive branch carrying out enforcement. Congress, with it being a legislature branch, should not have the authority to dish out punishments as they see fit and usurp the courts' duties.
2.) Massie questioned if the $16 million fine runs afoul of the 8th Amendment's probation against excessive fines and if the fine would survive Judicial review. I have to agree that the millions of dollars in fines could be argued as excessive and would have a very tough chance surviving the Supreme Court's review.
The MAGA men over at Truth Social would find my words as blasphemy, but I do think that these two items are a cause for concern that should not be dismissed to satisfy sinful bloodlust.
In this case, DC Draino needs to be called out for not providing the whole truth.
That's the question about DC_Draino (ergo, Rogan O'Handley). He reminds me of another Charlie Kirk. I just can't buy into this guy. So, it is with guarded expectations whenever I come across his posts. Even his background screams who is funding this dude?
Rogan O'Handley is a former California-based Hollywood entertainment lawyer. He left his law career to become a conservative social media influencer. Who does this unless being on the payroll or having some benefactor funding them? After gaining 80,000 followers on his account, he quit his job as an entertainment lawyer to pursue a full-time career as a social media expert and political activist.
I'm not saying I disagree with his viewpoints. I can't think of many I disagree with. However, is O'Handley paid as a provocateur of a sort? Jumping to demonize Massie and other republicans for voting against a resolution having an unconstitutional excessive fine included is indicative of O'Handley playing such a role. The net effect is dividing republicans and setting them up to not be re-elected. Maybe there's more to O'Handley than being born to outspoken Democrat parents? This is found in his biography.
I don't trust him. Be wary of those that rise to fame quickly and appear as a 'experts' of public opinion.
That is the thing with influencers. They are slaves to their audiences' demands, which prevents them from having the courage to ask the real questions or making unpopular but necessary questions to get to the real truth, least they lose their audience and their income.
I use them for news, but I will not trust them all to speak the real truth, which is sad. Not only we have to combat the lies from the MSM, we also have to combat the lies from our side as well.