>>8057691 (pb)
Wake Up, World.
Just coming online. Here's a little something I found that might tie in (no mention of Romney, but mention of Vin Weber):
Federal Prosecutors Probing Firms Involved in Manafort’s Ukraine Work: Report
https://www.thedailybeast.com/federal-prosecutors-probing-firms-involved-in-manaforts-ukraine-work-report
Thx Anon.
Damn, nevermind, Anons. Dated a year ago on the 5th. Did search and filtered for 'last 24 hours' (nothing came up) then 'last week' and the DB article came up. I looked at date but not year. It's 2019, so please disregard.
California Dem Introduces Bill to Make Voting in Elections Mandatory, Civil Penalties for Failure to Comply
Just when you thought the lawmakers who run the State of California could not do anything dumber than all the things they’ve done or proposed before they surprise you.
Each day seems to bring some new outrage or some new law designed to control people or strip them of their existing rights or both.
This time, a new bill, if it became law, would force citizens to vote of face a yet to be determined civil penalty, as the Los Angeles Times reports.
“The proposal, introduced in the state Assembly on Tuesday, would be unprecedented and probably challenged in court should it ultimately become law. It would place the burden for determining the civil penalty and the ultimate punishment on the secretary of state, California’s chief elections officer.
“Democracy is not a spectator sport — it requires the active participation of all its citizens,” the bill’s author, Assemblyman Marc Levine, D-San Rafael, said in a written statement. “California is a national leader on expanding voting rights to its citizens. Those rights come with a responsibility by registered voters to cast their ballot and make sure that their voice is heard by their government.”
Levine’s effort, Assembly Bill 2070, would require every Californian who registers to vote to “cast a ballot, marked or unmarked in whole or in part, at every election held within the territory within which the person resides.” AB 2070 has yet to be referred to a policy committee and is unlikely to be considered until the spring.”
This sounds just like what every dictatorship requires. Mandatory voting or face a penalty.
Given that it’s California Democrats who are pushing this bill can you guess which party they expect mandatory voting to help?
It’s not just that it will help Democrats that makes it so bad, what makes it REALLY bad is the bill would gives the government the power to make you do something you may not want to do, or face a penalty.
It also mandates those who have no interest in voting cast votes they may have little or no information about.
This is a really bad idea. One that is so bad lets hope California Democrats have enough sense to kill it.
That said, it’s highly unlikely the folks who currently run the once great state of California will do anything smart. That seems outside the realm of their ability.
So we expect this bad idea to pass, then get shot down in court. Meanwhile grab some popcorn and enjoy the show.
https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/california-dem-introduces-bill-make-voting-elections-mandatory-civil-penalties-failure-comply
Republicans Propose Making Sham Impeachments Harder in the Future
Democrats just managed to ram two ambiguous articles of impeachment through the House, with no underlying crimes, and then tie up the Senate with a long, boring trial despite the fact that everyone already knew the whole thing was going nowhere. So lots of people are now thinking the impeachment process needs to be a little bit harder, otherwise MSNBC will just spend the remainder of Trump's presidency dreaming up novel ways to remove the president from office.
On Thursday, Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) announced that he would introduce a constitutional amendment upping the simple majority needed to pass articles of impeachment in the House to a three-fifths majority instead. But unlike passing articles of impeachment, adding a proposed amendment to the Constitution is actually somewhat difficult. Ratification requires two-thirds approval by both bodies of Congress, or a convention of the states, as well as the approval of three-fourths of state legislatures.
"It should be harder – much harder – for either political party to take the process our Founders created as a last resort against a tyrannical leader and use it instead as a tool for the tyranny of a political majority," Sen. Scott said in a statement. "I look forward to all of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, joining me in this effort to protect the integrity of our nation and our constitution."
Additionally, 16 GOP senators are backing a proposed rules change by Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri. Under Hawley's proposal, the Speaker of the House couldn't sit on the articles of impeachment in an effort to extract concessions from the upper chamber. The articles would be deemed as received if the House failed to transmit the articles after 25 days of passage.
(Via The Hill)
It would also allow a senator to try to dismiss the articles of impeachment.
The rules change was sparked by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) delaying sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate after they first cleared the House late last year.
Democrats say the hold up allowed them to put a spotlight on their request for new witnesses and to let a slew of new reports come out about Trump's decision to delay Ukraine aid and his effort to get the country to help "look into" Democrats, including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.
But Hawley told The Hill in a recent interview that he wants to move forward with his proposed rules change so that it would be in place for any potential future trials.
"I think it's a good idea just because I think procedurally we want to make sure that basically the disjuncture between the House and the Senate rules aren't exploited in the future," he said.
While the proposed rule change could pass the Senate – Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is backing it – Democrats are unlikely to support any change to the impeachment process that concedes the past few months were nothing more than a partisan witch hunt orchestrated by House Democrats. But keeping the passage of impeachment articles to a simple majority in the House would make it easier for Republicans to give Democrats a taste of their own medicine the next time Democrats find themselves in control of the White House.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/02/06/proposed-amendment-would-make-sham-impeachments-much-harder-n2560909
Elizabeth Warren Thanked Illegal Immigrants Who Helped Her Campaign In Iowa
(See vid - 11 min. mark)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren used her election night speech in Iowa to thank the illegal immigrants who helped her Iowa campaign.
“Tonight is for every undocumented, unafraid organizer and volunteer who proudly knocked on doors to let the world know that the path to progress runs through courage, not fear,” she said February 4 to applause from her pro-migration supporters.
The illegal immigrants’ aid for Warren is rational because her immigration policy is promising a nationwide amnesty and a welcome for additional migrants:
Decriminalize migration and refocus enforcement on serious criminal activity. Entering the country without authorization has always been a violation of civil immigration law, but thanks to a former segregationist Senator, it’s also a criminal violation. This additional criminal provision is totally unnecessary for border security, and for a century, it was rarely enforced.
Raise the refugee cap. At a time when 70 million are displaced around the world, President Trump has abused his authority to lower the refugee cap for the United States, admitting just over 22,000 refugees in total last year. I’ll welcome 125,000 refugees in my first year, ramping up to at least 175,000 refugees per year by the end of my first term.
Warren’s shout-out was welcomed by Omar Parra, whose Twitter page features a Brazilian flag:
Warren is not the only Democrat who is being aided by migrants. NPR reported two migrants who are backing other Democratic candidates:
GREENE: Yeah. I mean, Denison has been far more diverse for years. It’s actually split 50-50 between whites and minorities. There are Latinos. There’s a Sudanese population. Alma [Puga], our guide, her family came from Mexico when she was a child.
PUGA: My dad had a friend that lived here. So he told him to come over here; there was plenty of jobs. And so we came.
GREENE … Bryan’s family emigrated from Mexico years ago. They run a little grocery store in Denison. Bryan remembers being in high school here in 2016. His government teacher would hold these debates in class, sometimes about immigration, and Bryan just didn’t like how some classmates spoke about immigrants.
GREENE: So Bryan Pena tonight is going to be caucusing for Bernie Sanders, and that makes our tour guide, Alma Puga, really happy. She works with LULAC – that’s the League of United Latin American Citizens – and she tries to mobilize Latino voters. The message is, if you want to control the destiny of a community like Denison, you’ve got to vote. Now, LULAC doesn’t endorse candidates, but Alma personally has been volunteering for Joe Biden. She likes his record on immigration.
For several decades, Iowa’s political and business leaders have welcomed the quiet migration of many illegals and refugees into their state, allowing the wholescale replacement of middle-class, well-paid American meatpackers with compliant, low-wage migrants.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/02/04/elizabeth-warren-thanks-illegal-immigrants-who-helped-her-iowa-campaign/
Been Lurkin? Welcome, New Anon.
From what I got from the twatter's feed, it was an event that took place at the Salt Palace Convention Center.
Read further down the feed in the link OP provided.
Anon, think hard about this. There will be a massive number of idiots who don't care voting. They will vote based on what they're told since they will be clueless. And guess who will be there to instruct them on how to vote and whom to vote for.
Dumber than a box of rocks. She's right down there with Hank (Guam will capsize) Johnson and MadMax Waters.
Chemtrails are completely different from Contrails (that of which you speak).
With all due respect please visit https://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/
You're getting defensive and spinning the topic. Not playing.
Heading to bed soon. Thanks, new baker.
Woman on the left looks like a young Angela Merkel w/ darker hair.
Looks good, Baker.
Have googled that, Anon.