Posted on 12/07/2023 8:22:29 AM PST by janetjanet998
The House voted Thursday to censure Democrat Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York for falsely pulling a fire alarm in a House office building in September.
The final vote was 214-191 with five members voting present. Three Democrats voted
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
... more street cred ... about as effective as a ‘strongly worded letter’.
I suggest 5 lashes with a cat ‘o nine out in front of the House. TV coverage of course ...
Example no. 2,950,934,965 of unequal application of justice in America.
By pulling that fire alarm when there was in fact no fire, he disrupted the lawful business of the house. INSURRECTION!! INSURRECTION!!!!
Is following the law a tenet for Democrats?
Was there a hearing before this censure vote and comparing the 2 situations how the Republicans just kicked out Santos, but Five Alarm thug gets a pass?
We’re no longer a republic.
Until that changes, the law is whatever Deep State says it is.
But those same democrats demanded jail time for a guy who put his feet up in Nanook Pelosi’s office.
“ABC uses the term “falsely”, giving credence to his lie that he was mistaken...”
I don’t agree, “falsely” implies specific improper action, not an accident. He initiated a false fire alarm and then denied it. Luckily, the end result was no effect. The vote took place, just later.
voting present should NOT be an option!!! that’s NOT why you were sent there...
Censure!!!! That pig committed a crime for which many J6’ers are rotting in jail. But reliable vote Santos had to go.
Right on, RightOn.
Agree 💯 %
If walking around the halls of the capital peacefully gets you 3 years in federal prison.. how is this guy not in jail?
Just off the top - IMO such a public reprimand is worthwhile because at a minimum, it provides an idea of the behavior a certain body will or will not endorse. It should be recognized that Jamaal's behavior at issue could be (and almost certainly is) a hint of his broader inclinations.
On top of the act itself, I think it was reported that initially he denied his involvement. You and I might suspend him or even expel him from the body, but such action just doesn't seem currently possible.
McCarthy, Pelosi, Ryan would not have allowed this vote to even go forward.
AT least we have the record of 191 supporting their fellow communist.
Republicans needed 5 democrat votes though. Who were the Deep Repubbies (DeepState, Communist) who voted against censure? Need we guess?
He should be required to where a dunce hat and sit in the corner on a stool.
You raise an interesting point.
Voting "present" is a form of non-representation, the opposite of his job description, and in the absence of an explanation could certainly be an affront to his constituents.
OTOH, the appropriateness of a "present" vote has long been recognized where it would be strategically important to a politician. I.e., congressmen and senators reserve the right to "weasel" out of an uncomfortable position.
But you and I don't think in this instance it was even a close call. The voting member should vote for what seems right or in the best interests of the body or the nation and follow that immediately with an explanation to his or her constituents, if needed.
About time.
OTOH, the appropriateness of a “present” vote has long been recognized where it would be strategically important to a politician. I.e., congressmen and senators reserve the right to “weasel” out of an uncomfortable position.
100% my point exactly
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.