Kamala Harris "seething" and outraged? She always is. That's her shtick.
Is there an epidemic of lynchings I didn’t hear about?
Somebody ought to remind Kamala about how popular lynching was among Democrats back in the day. And how they stopped Civil Rights from being passed in 1957.
LYNCHING??? When was the last lynching?
Hasn’t been a lynching for 60+ years....but now failing to be woke is considered a lynching!!!!
Stupid bill.
When is the last time anyone was lynched?
We have laws against murders in every state already. Why do we need federal laws against lynching on top of that?
Yet another example of the left wanting to bastardize the language.
There are already anti lynching laws on the books.
There are already hate crime laws on the books.
Remember the RIOTS when Channon Gail Christian, aged 21, and Hugh Christopher Newsom, Jr., aged 23, were from Knoxville, Tennessee The grand jury had indicted four of the suspects on counts of capital murder, robbery, kidnapping, rape, and theft, while Eric Boyd was indicted in 2018 on federal charges of carjacking, but also indicted for theft, rape, and murder. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Channon_Christian_and_Christopher_Newsom BETTER HAVE A PUKE BOWL HANDY, POS STILL ALIVE, MOST GRUESOME TORTURE MURDER, PERPS BLACK. https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/crime/2017/08/24/archives-horror-christian-newsom-killings-focus-what-happened-chipman-street/597805001/
An anti lynching law at this is a political stunt which due to the image of what the law supposedly represents, daring opponents to not go along,
The fact that in every state the law is unnecessary as either murder (by any means), unlawful abduction or injury is covered in every state by various state laws. On that Rand is right.
However, the Libs are only interested in supplying the optics for their own agenda, to which they will enjoy saying “see the GOP opposes laws against lynching”. Rand should not give them that opportunity for in a legal sense, needed or not, the bill will do little harm (unless the wording has been rigged to expand the meaning of “lynching” into all sorts of different stuff - om that point I admit ignorance).
The Randstander strikes again.
Senator Paul is a real asset. Sometimes he can annoy the dickens out of me but his service has certainly had it’s pluses.
Even if it is a Rand Paul hissy fit, he is probably right about the bill. Congre$$ has proved time and again they are incapable of well thought out bills. Such as in their last attempt to provide unemployment benefits during the COVID-19 shut-down and ended up paying some folks more money than they could make working.
We don’t need another politically correct law for murder. Its already covered under well murder. Its all about expanding this hate crime chit.
Thank you, Rand Paul for saving us from these vague laws that can mean anything.
If they want a “Lynching” as in rope- around -the -neck there would be no controversy Clarence Thomas used the term for his despicable treatment. Be careful what you wish for
Anyone Notice how all these “hate” crime laws move closer and closer to white people not being able to disagree or defend themselves from violence?
No, we don’t need any more laws. The government has thousands of lawyers, they can dump a $100,000 or a $million dollar legal bill on you over night as we’ve seen plenty of since 2017. The Brown Shirts have been replaced by the White Shirts, but the end result is the same, you’re destroyed and your family is hungry.
They are trying to redefine the word “lynching”.