This bailout began in the Senate, after the House rejected the first bailout bill.
This bill should be challenged on Constitutional grounds.
Article I Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto
All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Are they arguing that since they took the shell of the house bill that it’s somehow Constitutional? Or do they just not care because they can do whatever they want?
As we await the final death throes of our charter document, here is a gift suggestion for your favorite government traitor.
They got around that by taking a bill that originated in the house, taking all the language out of it, and putting in the text of this bill.
Heads up - this could turn the tide.
FOX is rerunning “Saving the Economy...” at 2 EST this afternoon and again at 10:00pm and again at 1:00 in the morning.
They ran it 3 times yesterday.
If you haven’t seen it, you MUST. It is a TOTAL take-down on the demRats regarding the Fannie/Freddie economic debacle.
It names names, shows clips, shows how Bush sounded the alarm and tried to get it reigned it, how the republicans tried to and had hearings - to be shouted down by the demRats and defeated with all demRats voting against, all pubs voting for reigning it in - led by barney and Dodd and Shuckster, how the 2 biggest recipients of the Fannie/Freddie were Dodd and Obama - how a ‘young community organizer, years ago, in Chicago, worked with ACORN to push through these loans for even NO income people - a young community organizer named BO -
This whole program is a total and stark expose laying out who - the demRats - brought this all about and how they blocked every effort by the Republicans to reign it in.
If you have not seen this program - you must. I pray they keep airing this until Nov. It may just wake some people up.
It’s an issue that all America is paying attention to, finally. This program shows them who orchestrated the whole fiasco.
I could hardly believe my ears when I heard it last night. Incredible. So far, I haven’t heard a peep of ‘outrage’ from the left. I think this scares them to death and they hope it will just go away.
I think there’s going to be some major investigations although, if we don’t give mcC/Sarah a majority in the Senate and House to work with, it won’t matter if barney et al are found absolutely guilty - they will NOT be forced to step down. Take the case of william “cold cash” jefferson, for ex.
email everyone you know to watch this and email FOX with KUDOS - the more response, the more they’ll air it.
It is not for a Canadian to lecture Americans on U.S. constitutional niceties, but I'm going to do it anyway.OK, take your best shot!
Money bills in that country are supposed to originate in the Lower House, as they do in all civilized national jurisdictions. This one effectively originated in the Upper House.Nope. It was passed in a very different form by the House and amended and debated and passed by the Senate.
In order to disguise this irregularity, the senators had to dress the thing up as a non-money bill. That is how the "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act" became the more aptly-named "Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act" -- by taking a bill already on the floor of the Senate, stripping out its text, and substituting the text of the bailout bill.See -- her knew that. Must be a Canadian lawyer. Dufus. The House passed it, the Senate amended and passed it. The House accepted those amendments and passed it to the President who signed it. Constitutional and as legal as, well Church on a Sunday.
Constitution, what constitution, are you talking about that piece of paper the republican party and their brothers, the demorats, just wiped their collective rears on?
Swearing an oath ceases to mean anything to these cocky clowns. What they did with the bailout is illegal!!!!! Or is this no longer America?
Is there a lawyer in the house? Is there some way we can rebut the Senate on the bailout?
Unfortunately, it appears that the process by which this rotting, bloated carcass was passed into law was, in fact, legal...completely immoral and highly unethical...but, legal.
This should be the final straw for freedom loving Americans, IMO. All of these arrogant gasbags should be put out to pasture come November. Sadly, that will not likely happen, either.
Got to go. Time to clean the rest of the guns and count the ammo; got to stock up the emergency water supply, and verify the dates on the MRE’s, check the backup fuel stocks, test run the generator, fuel up the quad runners, check the perimeter alarms, and make sure the dogs haven’t eaten for a day or two (they get mean when they get hungry).
This one could get real ugly...
True.
This bailout began in the Senate, after the House rejected the first bailout bill.
The bill began in the House.
Considering who the RINO's are pushing for the Top Exec slot, I'd say even the GOP is in the DNC camp in regards to the Constitution...
It's been that way for decades.
The big question is, what are YOU going to do about it? Join the Two Party deck-chair shuffle on the USA-Titanic? Vote 3rd Party moonbat? Sit it out?
None of the above will fix a damn thing.
Anything else that might be effective is either not allowed to be spoken out loud (the 1776 option/CW2), considered futile, or any number of namby-pamby reasons to not do what we KNOW we should do.
Pitchforks and torches. Throw the bumbs out physically.
The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly referred to as RICO Act or RICO) is a United States federal law that provides for extended penalties for criminal acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. It also provides a civil cause of action for those injured by violations of the act. RICO was enacted by section 901(a) of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (Pub.L. 91-452, 84 Stat. 922, enacted 1970-10-15). RICO is codified as Chapter 96 of Title 18 of the United States Code, 18 U.S.C. § 1961–1968. It was intended to make it easier to prosecute organized crime figures, but has been applied in several other cases as well.
Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages.
When the U.S. Attorney decides to indict someone under RICO, he or she has the option of seeking a pre-trial restraining order or injunction to temporarily seize a defendant's assets and prevent the transfer of potentially forfeitable property, as well as require the defendant to put up a performance bond. This provision was placed in the law because the owners of Mafia-related shell corporations often absconded with the assets. An injunction and/or performance bond ensures that there is something to seize in the event of a guilty verdict.
In many cases, the threat of a RICO indictment can force defendants to plead guilty to lesser charges, in part because the seizure of assets would make it difficult to pay a defense attorney. Despite its harsh provisions, a RICO-related charge is considered easy to prove in court, as it focuses on patterns of behavior as opposed to criminal acts.
There is good news for “We the People”. We do not have to depend on a corrupt federal government for action. There is also a provision for private parties to sue. A "person damaged in his business or property" can sue one or more "racketeers." The plaintiff must prove the existence of a "criminal enterprise." The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise. A civil RICO action, like many lawsuits based on federal law, can be filed in state or federal court.
Now with the foundations of our economic system under attack we are entrusting those responsible to address the symptoms. The Democrats cry that this is not a time to point fingers all the while they, and their media accomplices place the entire blame on the Bush Administration and the GOP.
I am demanding that the Justice Department begin a full RICO investigation that will not exempt anyone inside or outside of government. I am encouraging those whose businesses were harmed by these culprits file numerous suits against the offending parties. If Raines, Schumer, Dodd, Frank, and the like do not end up penniless and in orange jump suits then we need to seriously reread the words of Thomas Jefferson when he said:
"Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness"
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies."
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."
“Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing [a people] to slavery.”