Just a few minutes ago Senator Susan Collins introduced her “compromise” proposal for the “No Fly No Buy” legislation that Democrats have been demanding in the wake of the Orlando shooting. A white paper on the legislation is available here, but in general it provides a mechanism for the automatic denial of any NICS checks for people whose names appear on the much smaller “no fly” and “selectee” lists compared to the combined “terrorist watchlist.” Sen. Collins crafted into the legislation a way for those who receive such a denial to appeal that decision, and any person who fights the denial and wins would have their legal fees refunded. The full proposal is still yet to be posted, but following the introduction of the legislation the Democrats ended their sit-in protest on the floor of the House of Representatives possibly telegraphing that this proposal has their approval.
Why compromise when you have the majority in the house and senate?
Because, as reported on this blog in the last few days, the Patriot Act already allows the FBI to block a gun purchase for persons on the list, but there is no mechanism, other than the standard appeal of a denial, available to challenge that denial. This bill on its face anyway, seems to be an improvement on the exiting system in that it allows for attorneys fees for a successful challenge. The only difference is that it allows the AG to stick (her) nose into the approval process.
The “improvements” are a joke and only really practical for the wealthy.
http://www.gunowners.org/alert06222016.htm
Call your senators and tell them to vote against the Collins-Ayotte amendment.
Agreed. This is not only a joke but an affront to any sensible person.
No matter how they dress this up, it is still GUILTY until proven INNOCENT. But like everything else we, as americans, have had to endure. Wrong is Right and Down is Up.
Yes, it’s an improvement but still an affront to the American Way. It’s also absurd that it’s in reaction to the Orlando incident when that dude wasn’t even on the damn list when he bought the guns in the first place.
Yes, its an improvement, in the same way that a corked hole in the bottom of a boat is an improvement. But the real problem is the shitty boat full of holes that need to go.
The problem is that anyone CAN be placed on a list with no due process, not that they can’t afford the due process to get taken off the list.
sigh now they can just put people on the no fly list then confiscate their guns damn tyrannical bull sh** only reason they want the 2nd amendment gone is cause it is the only thing that prevents them from removing the rest.
It’s all about optics. Think of what this does for the 2016 elections. The Republicans put up a “compromise” on the contentious issue of guns. “Compromise” is a positive word. If the Dems vote it down (and even better if Obama vetoes it and Shrillary opposes it), they are on the the opposite side of “compromise”. The Dems are the dangerous hard-liners who not only take your rights away, they don’t really care that terrorists are attacking American citizens! The Collins proposal is a way to take the air out of the Democrats’ stupid sit-in.
** Why compromise when you have the majority in the house and senate? **
One possible reason is because thanks to the Trumphole, the R’s know that it is a near certainty that they will lose the white house, and a very high probability that they will lose the Senate. I don’t see any credible predictions that the R’s will lose their house majority, but it’s certainly possible depending on how many more Americans the Trumphole alienates.
So the idea would be — give them something that’s not too bad, for now, in the hopes that they’ll move on to some other irrelevant subject. Stifle them now, and there will be unholy hell to pay in January.
In other words, or really just one other word, appeasement? Oh that has a great track record of success.
How about this for a compromise? If you suspect someone of terrorism and you learn that they purchased a firearm (which you would, because such a suspect would be under surveillance) in furtherance of that plot, then ARREST them!
Charged with such a felony, they’ll be ineligible to possess a firearm and will be rejected by NICS. Compromise reached, problem solved, and crisis averted.
And it didn’t even take sitting on the floor and throwing a tantrum to come up with it.
Of course. But that would involve the executive branch actually, you know, executing the laws. We all know that they practically never act on NICS denials. And, your proposal wouldn’t involve “new legislation”, so the legislators won’t be able to say they “did something”.
You do realize, I hope, that I’m not advocating that they compromise or appease. I’m just pointing out that that’s one potential reason why they might be considering doing so. But as far as I can tell, the Repubs have no intention of voting for this bill, the NRA and GOA are against it, it’s likely going to fail just like the others did.
That they don’t follow my suggestion, for all the reasons you mentioned, is proof that none of them gives a damb about legitimate law enforcement or fighting terrorists. It’s all just about power and politics. No matter who your guy is, he’s one of them, too.
It’s a frustrating period in American history we live in. It’s too late to work within the system to fix things, but too soon yet to work outside of it to fix things.
Unless Trump punches a Transgender Latino/Black Woman in the face on national television between now and November, he has a very good chance of winning.
Or if Trump were to select a Transgendered Black Latino Woman as his running mate… 😛
Why compromise? Because Repubiks and Democrats are both progressive.
Why should I have to compromise my rights that I was given by my creator? When will they compromise their “right” to armed security and a fat pension?
Vote tally underway now. —- See it live @ Senate.gov
I’m not seeing could you please spare a link?
Once at senate . gov : click ‘ floor webcast ‘ in RH column. Then hit ‘ Watch Live ‘
Set bullsh*t meter on High filter 🙂
It passed 67 to 31. Sanders and Fienstien abstained.. Manchin was the only Dem to vote NAY. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee voted YEA???)
It’s one thing to “compromise” for some sort of quantifiable ends but this is “compromise” for feelz that by every metric other than feelz is destined to accomplish nothing. That makes it sooooo much worse. Like being kicked in the balls repeatedly for wearing last seasons jeans.
Aren’t gun control laws that accomplish nothing a good thing?
To all the braindead morons tweeting last night on #nobillbnobreak that they were proud of their activist representatives, yes.
To thinking adults that realize all this is just theater (and not very good theater at that), not so much.
Gun control laws never accomplish “nothing”. Everyone is more government intrusion, and excuse for more intrusion, a justification that the central government can manage the affairs of people than can the people, who are considered, ignorant, incompetent, evil and dangerous. (the legal terms are “incompetent”, “irrelevant” and “immaterial”)
Why didn’t the Republicans at least demand that fedzilla make suppressors the legal equivalent of a firearm — available for immediate purchase and possession if someone can pass an instant background check?!?!?!?
Then both sides would get something that they want.
Arghhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
shoulda let em sit.
Looks like this cunt still doesn’t understand the concept of “Due Process” it’s supposed to happen BEFORE you deny rights, not after.
Details never stopped them before.
My compromise starts with lead flying at high velocities.
You get to start out guilty so you can prove your innocence. All you need is cash and a lawyer, just like the founding fathers would have wanted it.
Isn’t that pretty much the case with every arrest? You’re locked up under accusations, and if you don’t have the cash to make bail, your rights are deprived until you prove your innocence in court. Unless of course you also can’t afford a good lawyer, in which case you may not ever be able to prove your innocence.
So how is this any different?
That depends on the case and the defendant. Even for felonies, about a quarter of defendants are released on their own recognizance. Add in those let go on conditional release and unsecured bonds, and the percentage of felony defendants out on some kind of nonfinancial release bumps up around 40% or so.
And that’s felonies, misdemeanor percentages will be much higher because those are less serious crimes and the misdemeanor defendant population includes many with less lengthy criminal records.
Overall, the median bail for those offered it, but who neverthleless were detained through disposition of their case (couldn’t afford it or didn’t want to pay it) is about $25,000. A 10% bail bondsman fee of $2,500 and you’re out. That may be more than walking around money, true, but it isn’t a million dollars, either.
If your bail is so high that you can’t make 10% of it, it’s probably because you’re a flight risk and/or a threat to evidence and witnesses in the case. That determination is made based on your long established history of behavior, which isn’t quite the same thing as the big bad system picking on some poor, innocent minorities for the fun of it.
This is all at the federal level, has no judge, no warrant, no probable cause; just a secret unaccountable list enforced by an unaccountable attorney general with essentially no recourse .
Obama has already told the FBI to stand down and NOT PROCESS any appeals for denial under NICS. This will be no different. You’ll have to sue the government to get them to even consider processing your appeal.
“Due process” prior to arrest requires either an arrest warrant obtained before a judge, or exigent circumstances, such as being caught by police while you are robbing a place. “Due process” in the case of secret lists is a warm body entering your vitals into a database.
No Compromise! This is NOT a compromise, we get NOTHING in exchange for losing or delaying rights. Recovery of legal expenses is a sham. Government will appeal and wait you out with unlimited resources.
We want Real protection. Add personal civil and criminal liability for any gov employee who wrongly withholds or delays because of the bogus secret lists. Apply to ALL 4473 reviews, improper use, storage, or sharing of 4473 personal info. And 10x mandatory award for incorrect use of the list or any 4473 info. Start there…
DOA.
It may actually be. Apparently Collins didn’t even talk to the NRA; the NRA has opposed her proposal, and both party’s leaders have given it a chilly reception.
She’s got 8 sponsors, 4 republicans and 3 dems and 1 independent who caucuses dem.
Barbara Boxer thinks she can get all 46 Democrats to vote for it. She needs 14 republicans, and already has four.
There is more than enough RINO establishment republicans who will go for this. the ridiculous belief that the Republican Party is a conservative party is about to be shattered once again. they are not, they are Corporatist. Just like the belief that the Democrat Party is liberal. They also are not, they espouse Authoritarianism wrapped up to look like liberalism.
100% of the Repubs voted against the Democrat proposals. 100% of the Repubs voted for the NRA-backed Cornyn bill. The NRA (and GOA) have both come out against this Collins proposal, and Harry Reid has come out for it; the odds of Collins getting 10 more Republican votes are probably quite slim.
First “test vote” results are in. 52 to 45 in favor. Which means it’s still 8 votes short of passing; it needs 60 votes to pass. No idea when the “real” vote will be taken.
RealityCheck, the final vote had come in. 67-31 (2 abstained). Cruz, Paul, and Lee voted FOR IT!!!!
** RealityCheck, the final vote had come in. 67-31 (2 abstained). Cruz, Paul, and Lee voted FOR IT!!!! **
No, that was for a different bill. The vote on the Collins bill was 52-46, and Cruz, Paul and Lee all voted against it. The Johnson bill was different, it was designed to be a modified version of the Cornyn bill. And you got the vote backward, it was 67 votes to KILL it, 30 to advance it. Cruz, Paul and Lee voted to kill it.
“While the bipartisan-backed bill spearheaded by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) won a majority of support, it came eight votes shy of the necessary 60 votes to advance. The other bill, drafted by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and designed to appeal more to conservatives, won just 30 votes.” — TheWeek.com
Okay. I couldnt pull up the text and saw that collins and the dems all voted YEA on it. Damn assumptions.
These GOP pussies need to quit compromising. No gun control will ever be enough for the libtards.
These bills will do nothing, and when another shooting happens in a gun free zone (aka target rich environment), they’ll want even more gun control.
How is that a compromise when it still denies citizens the right to due process? We need to get rid of everyone one of those idiots and start over.
That will never happen because the voters are dumber than the idiots that they elect. See past two presidential elections as proof.
Oh but those old,demented and “hero’s of civil rights” movement needed a Depends break. Security theatre don’t cha know…
In a true compromise, both sides concede something. What are they giving up in exchange for the loss of due process and the right to self defense? Nothing. That is why they whine and throw tantrums like immature children who want to play before doing homework but dont want to give up dessert or go to bed earlier.
All scripted Al. Both sides. That’s what these clowns were doing all weekend. Scripting this week’s activities. And splitting up the money.
While playing the great “distraction” game.
Notice how Hillary has not been the main news talking point this week?
Also notice how “Islamic” and “homophobic” have been be completely swept under the rug in regard to Orlando?
This whole pile of sh1t is just a big game…they Dems, Murphy in particular, even openly admitted none of this would have stopped the Orlando shooter.
Theater ain’t the word for it. A good d1cking of the public is better.
Wait a minute here, shouldn’t the Government have to prove someone is a threat in front of a judge before you’re rights are denied not the other way around…Oh, wait a minute that would be “due process” and we can’t have that. And then the citizen who has had their rights denied without knowing why has to spend their money to prove the Government wrong and in the meantime if they own guns what happens to them?
The government doesn’t have to prove anything before a judge before they arrest your ass. The police officer only has to have probable cause to believe you committed a crime in his presence. Go straight to jail. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200. Your due process comes later.
Exactly what I was saying. So, again, how is this any different?
But Mark, that’s a bit of a misrepresentation and I do think you know.
Yes, and officer only needs PC to arrest. BUT…unless he happens to witness the crime (for a misdemeanor), he can’t arrest without a warrant.
Felony arrests can happen without a warrant, but even in those cases, the warrant has to be written, signed and served pretty darn quick after the arrest.
And, those warrants have have the PC shown to a judge via affidavit and the judge sign.
So…it’s a little bit disingenuous the way you worded it. PC ultimately has to be demonstrated by the time of the Preliminary Hearing or arraignment…with a day or two of arrest…right?
Okay, strictly speaking, what you said and what I said is in agreement, but I still think your wording is a bit misleading.
Yes, in some cases, arrest can happen without a judge’s involvement. But the time frame before that “due process that comes later” is pretty darn short (a day or two at most from what I recall).
And, let’s be honest here…Probable Cause is part of “due process.” The cops can’t (legally) arrest anyone they like any time they like. So, saying due process comes later while admitting PC is a requisite for arrest is not fully accurate.
Isn’t Collins one of the two or three RINOs that voted against the SHIELD Act in the first place?
How MANY Votes will they allow ??? Tell McConnel / Toomey / and Senate president …. ENOUGH !!!!!
If phones are full ….. bury the Crapweasels in E – Mail. …….. Find a way around and post it HERE. !!!
202-225-3121.
Repeal the sham 1986 machine gun bill, the 1968 GCA and the 1934 NFA law and then we can talk about new unconstitutional gun control laws. Our side has allowed way to much already. There is no interpretation of shall not be infringed. It is about as plain a statement as there could be.
Leave it to the RINOs to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
This is all part of the scripted plan. Whoever wins depends on who donated more money this past weekend, the NRA or Bloomberg.
Another day, Another mass shooting in america…
https://www.yahoo.com/news/three-dead-one-injured-quadruple-shooting-washington-state-143025390.html?nhp=1
But this can’t be right. Guns make us safe?
You mean you people lied?
And the only thing the GOP had to do was nothing and this would blow over, the Dem’s would look like idiots, but here they go again shooting themselves in the foot and betraying their base.
Democracy is the process by where you use superior numbers to screw your opponent out of what they want while simultaneously making them pay for what you want, and all at gunpoint. The dems understand this, and don’t hesitate to resort to lies, distortions, physical intimidation through street mobs, etc. This is not a rational conversation where logic, reason, and evidence carry the day. It’s not even a matter of teh feels, it’s just a matter of figuring out how to use the government to parasitize off of the productive because they are weak and pathetic and cannot survive without the government. Your guns are a challenge to that which sustains them, that’s why lefties want gun control.
For example, without government welfare subsidies there would be no inner city crime problem because the welfare populations that provide the criminals simply wouldn’t exist. Without the government they would starve and die off, or be scattered as the capable among them relocated to wherever they could find work. But the system ensures generation after generation of parasites that vote democrat for living.
If everybody on the right that bought an AR or AK in the last fifteen years would decided to use them in a way that matches our rhetoric, America wouldn’t have these problems by next week.
From the white paper:
“Due process principles require that Americans denied their right to purchase a firearm under this provision have the opportunity to appeal”
Bullsh!t. That’s only the back half of due process. They left out the “…and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, …” and “…No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed” parts.
Their uncountable secret list is exactly what’s prohibited by Article I, Section 9
This ^^^^ is the entire Goal and Construct. — Removal of ALL Due Process !! Icky gunz are only an excuse , SHAME on the N.R.A for being so willing to compromise on matters where NO COMPROMISE should EVER be considered , mush less made law. — N.R.A. needs constructive member feedback , badly , but will they listen ?
Call Chris Cox 703-267-1141 …… give him an earfull.
Er, you do know that the NRA has openly come out opposed to this bill, specifically because of due process concerns, right?
O so you can still have your Civil Rights denied for no reasaon, but the compromise is, that if you go to trail to prove your innocence, your money will be refunded?
Tell her to, “go back, and sit da fuck down!”
How is THIS not grounds for removal from office ? Prove your Innocence ? WTF…… Hell No.!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n98Urhcde_A
Yeah, um…..NO.
Seriously, not one damn inch more.
Trying to understand her logic is like fingernails on the chalkboard of your soul.
Uh yeah…they need to roll that one out to pasture and let her enjoy the sun til sweet release comes.
Put yourself on the list Feinstein and let’s see how you like petitioning.
…well, a Republican that folds.
Who knew?!
I’ve called my senators again. I guess need to put them on speed dial.
Is there even a way forward? How do we get the unilateral disarmament crowd to stand down?
Split the country. There’s no healing this rift. Read this excellent article from Dilbert creator Scott Adams to understand it.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/146307088451/why-gun-control-cant-be-solved-in-the-usa
This is an existential battle for both sides, neither will ever give in. Only way “forward” is to get a divorce, and let the two disagreeing tribes separate and quit trying to force their way of life on the other. So this either ends in a civil war, or it ends with a pleasantly-negotiated agreement of secession. A “Brexit”, if you will.
We have definitely established Alice’s Wonderland when only a cartoonist can present the political situation re guns in such a simple, compelling and accurate (and brief) monograph. All the brains, education, money and influence of politicians, lawyers, courts, and special interest groups are laid nakedly bereft of the mental capacity needed to start your average automobile.
Ok I am confused. Per the picture caption: “Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) speaks at a news conference with a bipartisan group of senators on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., to unveil a compromise proposal on gun control measures, June 21, 2016. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas – RTX2HG4B”
So this proposal is a couple of days old. Is the breaking news that McConnell is allowing a new vote now? I can’t find news about a new gun vote. HuffPo seems to think the Dems got nothing for ending the sit in:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-democrats-end-their-sit-in-protest-over-gun-reform_us_576c1760e4b0aa4dc3d4b28f?section=
Also nothing about Senate schedule about a gun vote today.
They held a “test vote” today.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/06/23/senate-poised-vote-susan-collins-gun-compromise/86288040/
It was 52 for, 46 against. Enough to warrant giving a hearing and a real vote, but not enough to pass it (it’d need 60 votes to pass).
Thanks! No wonder I couldn’t find anything on official .gov sites. This is all Kabuki to allow the Dems to save a little face after their temper tantrum.
Wow, dems demand something outrageous and the republicans (sic) cave. I’m f’ing psychic, because I can guess that the next step is the rinos trying to pass an easily vetoed amendment, just like the last 7.5 f’ing years.
” Let Them Eat Cake ” says HIPPO-Crit Rangel.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/dem-lawmaker-rangel-law-abiding-citizens-just-shouldnt-need-gun-deserve-gun-protection-video/
Wow. Another victory for gun, civil and constitutional rights !!
Tell me again how our side is in the majority, winning the argument?
Two major court losses and a senate defeat, all in about 10 days.
Rock on !
What Senate defeat? The Senate defeated all four gun control bills that were proposed, and defeated two more today.
The Collins bill is still potentially viable, yes, but the test vote already has shown it won’t pass the full Senate.
It is a defeat when Rand Paul and Ted Cruz vote to even allow discussion of preemptive suspension of human and constitutional rights. It is a defeat when Senators who hold themselves out as opponents of oppressive and intrusive government vote in favor of any legislative measure that upends the presumption of innocence for a given activity.
The Demobrat-RINO gungrabber definition of compromise: What’s theirs is theirs, what’s yours is theirs too.
The same gang of bureaucrats that reviews 501(c)3 applications will be placing names on the DNF list.
And the “appeal?” Don’t make me laugh.
For the right to be heard to mean anything, a hearing has to be meaningful and rapid. This chock-full-of-shit bill provides neither. Any denial will be rubber-stamped, and damn slowly at that.
It’s just another tool for the Big G to fvck us all. Bend over, boys.
Guilty before proven innocent? Clearly we are living in a post Constitutional America.
as we all agree using a gun for evil and criminal actions is an afront to good Americans, how about just adding mandtory minimum scetences to those who make these bad choices. There is an appeal process in place already, and you will eliminate a significant ammount of criminal gun use, as FBI has already shown day in and day out the vast majority of gun violence is done by reapeat offenders. the fact is we are not tough enough on those that abuse the 2A for evil, so only way to fix this is be tougher.
The answers to what you’re asking can be seen by looking at Chicago. They’ve already identified that 1300 people are responsible for the overwhelming number of murders and attempted murders there (“gun violence”). But they can’t do what you say, they can’t arrest them, they can’t keep them in jail, because … well, racial issues, dontchaknow. It is more important for them to “appear” to be fair, than it is for them to stop the bloodshed on their streets. Or, alternatively, these 1300 drugselling gang members have some sort of payola arrangement with the police and/or city officials, which prevents them from taking the simple, common-sense action you propose.
how about just adding mandatory minimum sentences to those who make these bad choices.
Adding to RealityCheck’s valid point, what effect would minimum mandatories have on a suicide jihadist?
I’m contacting my representatives and asking for censure, and more protections of the Constitution. If they’re not going to uphold it, than I certainly don’t have to, and they’ve then dissolved the very means by which they claim to govern, in which case, they can all pack their sh_t and go back home quietly.
So much for the 10th amendment….wtf is wrong with these people?
10th was superceded by 14th, and subsequent SC rulings that the federal constitution constrained states in the same manner as the central government. States have rights to act differently from the central government whenever the states do what the central government cannot do, so long as the leftist agenda is reinforced.
And the 5th, 6th, and 9th amendments too.
Anything acceptable to the Democrats is unacceptable to me. They are anti constitutionalist and they are trying to destroy not only the Second Amendment but the 4th 5th and 14th as well.
Gun owners have been compromising for nearly 100 years without receiving ANYTHING in return.
I will support this compromise when the democraps TRADE SOMETHING WE WANT.
Make national right to carry or national reciprocity part of your damn ‘compromise’ and I’ll be right behind this!
For any “list” that will or could be used to deny someone of their right(s), it should require a court order to be placed onto the list.
It’s all Horse $#!t !!! It all comes down to these again ! For the Historically impaired!
*******************************************
Fifth Amendment: An Overview
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
No offense, but to be completely crass, “blah, blah, blah….” Each and every proposition in the constitution is subject to “reasonable” regulation, controls, constraints. Are these modifications “constitutional”? If the courts say so. If we are to have a nation of laws, then courts not individuals determine what is “constitutional”.
So, what would be proof that what I wrote is valid? Find a case where anyone went into court with a copy of the constitution, presented their case as entirely and only wording taken directly from the constitution, and then rested their case. Once you find that case, look at the verdict. How did that go?
The basis for the entire civil rights act (regardless if you are pro or con) was that the federal government did have actual power to enforce such regulation on the individual states. The defining court case was Heart of Atlanta Motel, where the feds declared that since toothpicks used in the motel restaurant traveled over roadways controlled by the Interstate Commerce Commission (via the commerce clause of the constitution), individual states were subject to federal regulation regarding matters within the borders of the states. No one attempted to challenge whether the commerce clause could overcome enumerated rights in the constitution. But the courts held that the commerce clause was superior.
Fact is the constitution is whatever the courts say it is. You can ignore it, hate it, refuse to comply with any non-amendment modification of the constitution, but when they put you in prison, the cuffs and chains and bars are real. And your life as you knew it is over.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Susan Collins is not a republican any more than the Olympic Snowjob was.
And, what a coincidence, both were the Maine GOP’s contribution to the US Senate.
WTF is wrong with that state?
Actually, they are very astute. Having the same kind of politician with different labels removes the appearance of impropriety that would come from having two declared liberal demoncrats as senators,
Great to hear from Nick Leghorn again!
And, as usual, we get nothing in this supposed comprise.
Comments are closed.