So the entirety of your OP doesn't matter? Why did you make a thread for it then?
Thanks for the immediate demonstration of what I just said.
GREAT JOB!
Topic: "Virginia Governor Issues SECRET EXECUTIVE ORDERS to TAKE TOTAL POWER..." (Read 306 times)
February 13, 2020, 11:48:41 AM
Thanks for the immediate demonstration of what I just said.
GREAT JOB!
February 13, 2020, 11:22:56 AM
So the entirety of your OP doesn't matter? Why did you make a thread for it then?
February 13, 2020, 11:18:49 AM
Its a total power grab for whoever wins the popular president vote, not governor vote. This also includes Donald Trump, should he win the popular vote. So in no way were you right. You were just spreading misinformation, I suppose because you've sunk to the depths of becoming a full-on troll. Hard to explain otherwise.
So wait, you agree it is a power grab. You now admit these are more than just bills but actual passed laws as I warned was likely as you dismissed them as only bills. Because it "could also be Trump" now my argument is invalid? Cool story bruh.
This is what I had a problem with:
"Virginia Governor Issues SECRET EXECUTIVE ORDERS to TAKE TOTAL POWER while everyone was watching GUN BILLS!"
Literally none of that is true.
Yes, we are all well aware of your focus on anything other than the facts of the matter. You know the content. What is important is you can find something, ANYTHING, to dismiss the rest of it. Thanks for playing Nutilduhhhhhh. Back to your walled garden where only people who don't hurt your feels can talk.
February 13, 2020, 11:07:21 AM
Its a total power grab for whoever wins the popular president vote, not governor vote. This also includes Donald Trump, should he win the popular vote. So in no way were you right. You were just spreading misinformation, I suppose because you've sunk to the depths of becoming a full-on troll. Hard to explain otherwise.
So wait, you agree it is a power grab. You now admit these are more than just bills but actual passed laws as I warned was likely as you dismissed them as only bills. Because it "could also be Trump" now my argument is invalid? Cool story bruh.
This is what I had a problem with:
"Virginia Governor Issues SECRET EXECUTIVE ORDERS to TAKE TOTAL POWER while everyone was watching GUN BILLS!"
Literally none of that is true.
February 13, 2020, 11:04:08 AM
Its a total power grab for whoever wins the popular president vote, not governor vote. This also includes Donald Trump, should he win the popular vote. So in no way were you right. You were just spreading misinformation, I suppose because you've sunk to the depths of becoming a full-on troll. Hard to explain otherwise.
So wait, you agree it is a power grab. You now admit these are more than just bills but actual passed laws as I warned was likely as you dismissed them as only bills. Because it "could also be Trump" even though removing the electoral college is absolutely a democrat goal, now my argument is invalid? Cool story bruh.
February 13, 2020, 10:16:55 AM
Its a total power grab for whoever wins the popular president vote, not governor vote. This also includes Donald Trump, should he win the popular vote. So in no way were you right. You were just spreading misinformation, I suppose because you've sunk to the depths of becoming a full-on troll. Hard to explain otherwise.
February 13, 2020, 10:11:14 AM
Do you ever find it odd how some people can have such an austere, one-sided belief system to the point where they just ignore obvious lies in order to keep espousing their initial viewpoint? I enjoy entertaining opposing viewpoints for the sake of actually bettering my understanding of the reality of any given situation.
TS missed the real news that Virginia actually passed the bill about awarding all electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote, amid certain conditions of course. It's a total power grab -- for which ever president wins the popular vote, provided the commonwealth of states signing similar laws into practice is active.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/482766-virginia-house-passes-bill-to-award-electoral-votes-to-whoever-wins-the
TS missed the real news that Virginia actually passed the bill about awarding all electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote, amid certain conditions of course. It's a total power grab -- for which ever president wins the popular vote, provided the commonwealth of states signing similar laws into practice is active.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/482766-virginia-house-passes-bill-to-award-electoral-votes-to-whoever-wins-the
That is a pretty convoluted way to say I was right.
February 13, 2020, 09:34:45 AM
[I post a bill]
[you flip out and post a source for the bill I didn't even use and claim it discredits it as you project your imagination on me as usual]
Thanks for more evidence of your mental illness. Now I am responsible for sources I didn't even use when I post directly from the Virginia legislature. Not insane at all.
Just speculating on why you posted what you did since you didn't really clarify.
By the way, since the whole 'SECRET EXECUTIVE ORDER' has been debunked, maybe edit the topic so others don't assume it's true?
Just curious. Where is the debunking documentation?
Just read the article. Executive order isn't even mentioned other than in the headline. It's just a list of bills. The headline is just clickbait.
Do you ever find it odd how some people can have such an austere, one-sided belief system to the point where they just ignore obvious lies in order to keep espousing their initial viewpoint? I enjoy entertaining opposing viewpoints for the sake of actually bettering my understanding of the reality of any given situation.
TS missed the real news that Virginia actually passed the bill about awarding all electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote, amid certain conditions of course. It's a total power grab -- for which ever president wins the popular vote, provided the commonwealth of states signing similar laws into practice is active.
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/482766-virginia-house-passes-bill-to-award-electoral-votes-to-whoever-wins-the
February 05, 2020, 12:44:22 PM
[I post a bill]
[you flip out and post a source for the bill I didn't even use and claim it discredits it as you project your imagination on me as usual]
Thanks for more evidence of your mental illness. Now I am responsible for sources I didn't even use when I post directly from the Virginia legislature. Not insane at all.
Just speculating on why you posted what you did since you didn't really clarify.
By the way, since the whole 'SECRET EXECUTIVE ORDER' has been debunked, maybe edit the topic so others don't assume it's true?
Just curious. Where is the debunking documentation?
Just read the article. Executive order isn't even mentioned other than in the headline. It's just a list of bills. The headline is just clickbait.
February 05, 2020, 12:24:15 PM
[I post a bill]
[you flip out and post a source for the bill I didn't even use and claim it discredits it as you project your imagination on me as usual]
Thanks for more evidence of your mental illness. Now I am responsible for sources I didn't even use when I post directly from the Virginia legislature. Not insane at all.
Just speculating on why you posted what you did since you didn't really clarify.
By the way, since the whole 'SECRET EXECUTIVE ORDER' has been debunked, maybe edit the topic so others don't assume it's true?
Just curious. Where is the debunking documentation?
February 04, 2020, 07:49:07 PM
I'm thinking he fell for one of the articles with the fake "Democrats Push Legislation to Make Criticism of Government Officials a Criminal Offense" headlines, didn't realize they were amendments and misinterpreted the old laws (thinking they were new) to fit the headlines he had just read.
Most likely. Here's such an article from Newsmax:
Quote
Not content with destroying the Second Amendment with a rushed-through laundry list of gun control measures, Virginia lawmakers are now assaulting the First Amendment, the most cherished of constitutional guarantees.
Virginia HB1627, introduced January 16, would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor for engaging in “Threats and harassment of certain officials and property.” According to the bill’s summary, it would come into play only:
“if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”
Virginia HB1627, introduced January 16, would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor for engaging in “Threats and harassment of certain officials and property.” According to the bill’s summary, it would come into play only:
“if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”
Of course the author of this story either has serious reading comprehension problems or just didn't care what he wrote because he knew it would satisfy the hunger of his reader base -- either way it is purely a wrong take.
Oh, here's what he more likely read: zerohedge's (also wrong) interpretation of the bill:
Quote
Yet another new bill is on the table and this one criminalizes criticism of certain government officials...
By the very nature of running for public office, one should expect to be the target of some verbal harassment. People who are so thin-skinned as to make a law about why nobody should be able to say mean things to or about them have no business whatsoever in government.
By the very nature of running for public office, one should expect to be the target of some verbal harassment. People who are so thin-skinned as to make a law about why nobody should be able to say mean things to or about them have no business whatsoever in government.
Again, the law has been effect for almost 20 years already. The proposed amendment serves to clarify where the prosecution should take place.
[I post a bill]
[you flip out and post a source for the bill I didn't even use and claim it discredits it as you project your imagination on me as usual]
Thanks for more evidence of your mental illness. Now I am responsible for sources I didn't even use when I post directly from the Virginia legislature. Not insane at all.
Just speculating on why you posted what you did since you didn't really clarify.
By the way, since the whole 'SECRET EXECUTIVE ORDER' has been debunked, maybe edit the topic so others don't assume it's true?
February 04, 2020, 09:27:40 AM
I'm thinking he fell for one of the articles with the fake "Democrats Push Legislation to Make Criticism of Government Officials a Criminal Offense" headlines, didn't realize they were amendments and misinterpreted the old laws (thinking they were new) to fit the headlines he had just read.
Most likely. Here's such an article from Newsmax:
Quote
Not content with destroying the Second Amendment with a rushed-through laundry list of gun control measures, Virginia lawmakers are now assaulting the First Amendment, the most cherished of constitutional guarantees.
Virginia HB1627, introduced January 16, would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor for engaging in “Threats and harassment of certain officials and property.” According to the bill’s summary, it would come into play only:
“if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”
Virginia HB1627, introduced January 16, would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor for engaging in “Threats and harassment of certain officials and property.” According to the bill’s summary, it would come into play only:
“if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”
Of course the author of this story either has serious reading comprehension problems or just didn't care what he wrote because he knew it would satisfy the hunger of his reader base -- either way it is purely a wrong take.
Oh, here's what he more likely read: zerohedge's (also wrong) interpretation of the bill:
Quote
Yet another new bill is on the table and this one criminalizes criticism of certain government officials...
By the very nature of running for public office, one should expect to be the target of some verbal harassment. People who are so thin-skinned as to make a law about why nobody should be able to say mean things to or about them have no business whatsoever in government.
By the very nature of running for public office, one should expect to be the target of some verbal harassment. People who are so thin-skinned as to make a law about why nobody should be able to say mean things to or about them have no business whatsoever in government.
Again, the law has been effect for almost 20 years already. The proposed amendment serves to clarify where the prosecution should take place.
[I post a bill]
[you flip out and post a source for the bill I didn't even use and claim it discredits it as you project your imagination on me as usual]
Thanks for more evidence of your mental illness. Now I am responsible for sources I didn't even use when I post directly from the Virginia legislature. Not insane at all.
February 03, 2020, 06:11:03 AM
I'm thinking he fell for one of the articles with the fake "Democrats Push Legislation to Make Criticism of Government Officials a Criminal Offense" headlines, didn't realize they were amendments and misinterpreted the old laws (thinking they were new) to fit the headlines he had just read.
Most likely. Here's such an article from Newsmax:
Quote
Not content with destroying the Second Amendment with a rushed-through laundry list of gun control measures, Virginia lawmakers are now assaulting the First Amendment, the most cherished of constitutional guarantees.
Virginia HB1627, introduced January 16, would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor for engaging in “Threats and harassment of certain officials and property.” According to the bill’s summary, it would come into play only:
“if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”
Virginia HB1627, introduced January 16, would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor for engaging in “Threats and harassment of certain officials and property.” According to the bill’s summary, it would come into play only:
“if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”
Of course the author of this story either has serious reading comprehension problems or just didn't care what he wrote because he knew it would satisfy the hunger of his reader base -- either way it is purely a wrong take.
Oh, here's what he more likely read: zerohedge's (also wrong) interpretation of the bill:
Quote
Yet another new bill is on the table and this one criminalizes criticism of certain government officials...
By the very nature of running for public office, one should expect to be the target of some verbal harassment. People who are so thin-skinned as to make a law about why nobody should be able to say mean things to or about them have no business whatsoever in government.
By the very nature of running for public office, one should expect to be the target of some verbal harassment. People who are so thin-skinned as to make a law about why nobody should be able to say mean things to or about them have no business whatsoever in government.
Again, the law has been effect for almost 20 years already. The proposed amendment serves to clarify where the prosecution should take place.
February 03, 2020, 05:35:47 AM
I'm thinking he fell for one of the articles with the fake "Democrats Push Legislation to Make Criticism of Government Officials a Criminal Offense" headlines, didn't realize they were amendments and misinterpreted the old laws (thinking they were new) to fit the headlines he had just read.
Virginia Bill Wouldn’t Criminalize Criticism
Virginia Bill Wouldn’t Criminalize Criticism
Quote
Online headlines falsely claim that Virginia lawmakers want to make criticizing state officials a “criminal offense.” The bill doesn’t create new offenses. It would merely allow cases of threats or harassment against some state officials to be prosecuted in Richmond.
Viral headlines peddled by multiple websites have warned that a bill in Virginia’s state legislature would make a “criminal offense” out of criticizing the state’s elected officials.
Actually, the bill in question doesn’t create any new criminal offenses.
A review of the proposed state legislation, House Bill 1627, shows that the bill would make changes to where certain crimes against public officials can be prosecuted, but it doesn’t change the existing statutory offenses.
The bill proposes several amendments to the law that would make it so that cases of threats or harassment against certain state officials — or threats against some state-owned property — could be prosecuted in the state capital of Richmond, regardless of where such messages were sent or received. Under the current law, some of the statutes contain language that says such prosecutions can occur in locales where the communication was made or received.
Viral headlines peddled by multiple websites have warned that a bill in Virginia’s state legislature would make a “criminal offense” out of criticizing the state’s elected officials.
Actually, the bill in question doesn’t create any new criminal offenses.
A review of the proposed state legislation, House Bill 1627, shows that the bill would make changes to where certain crimes against public officials can be prosecuted, but it doesn’t change the existing statutory offenses.
The bill proposes several amendments to the law that would make it so that cases of threats or harassment against certain state officials — or threats against some state-owned property — could be prosecuted in the state capital of Richmond, regardless of where such messages were sent or received. Under the current law, some of the statutes contain language that says such prosecutions can occur in locales where the communication was made or received.
February 03, 2020, 04:03:59 AM
This particular law was enacted in the year 2000. The major change proposed to it states that if the person was harassing a state official they can be tried in the capitol instead of their home county.
Quote
§ 18.2-152.7:1. Harassment by computer; penalty.
If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act,he shall be is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.
If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act,
Yeah, sure, its a TOTAL POWER GRAB.
Tell me, was this sneaky alteration forced into law by secret executive order as well?
I know, I know: Can't I see how this is hastening our descent into TOTAL STATE CONTROL?
?!Well, no, I can't.
February 03, 2020, 03:32:11 AM
§ 18.2-152.7:1. Harassment by computer; penalty.
"If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he shall be is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia."
"If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he shall be is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A violation of this section may be prosecuted in the jurisdiction in which the communication was made or received or in the City of Richmond if the person subjected to the act is one of the following officials or employees of the Commonwealth: the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia."
January 27, 2020, 06:22:20 AM
The interesting thing is, that if somebody takes a law to court in a jury trial, the local jury can overrule the law for their locality... no matter what the law is.
January 27, 2020, 03:43:27 AM
Here you go TECHSHARE:
(Works pretty much the same in states as Federally)
I'm Just a Bill (Schoolhouse Rock!) . <--- Please watch this anyone who isn't sure how laws are passed in America. It's a great video and only 3 minutes!
Boy: Woof! You sure gotta climb a lot of steps to get to this Capitol Building here in Washington. But I wonder who that sad little scrap of paper is?
I'm just a bill.
Yes, I'm only a bill.
And I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill.
Well, it's a long, long journey
To the capital city.
It's a long, long wait
While I'm sitting in committee,
But I know I'll be a law someday
At least I hope and pray that I will,
But today I am still just a bill.
Boy: Gee, Bill, you certainly have a lot of patience and courage.
Bill: Well I got this far. When I started, I wasn't even a bill, I was just an idea. Some folks back home decided they wanted a law passed, so they called their local Congressman and he said, "You're right, there oughta be a law." Then he sat down and wrote me out and introduced me to Congress. And I became a bill, and I'll remain a bill until they decide to make me a law.
I'm just a bill
Yes I'm only a bill,
And I got as far as Capitol Hill.
Well, now I'm stuck in committee
And I'll sit here and wait
While a few key Congressmen discuss and debate
Whether they should let me be a law.
How I hope and pray that they will,
But today I am still just a bill.
Boy: Listen to those congressmen arguing! Is all that discussion and debate about you?
Bill: Yeah, I'm one of the lucky ones. Most bills never even get this far. I hope they decide to report on me favourably, otherwise I may die.
Boy: Die?
Bill: Yeah, die in committee. Oooh, but it looks like I'm gonna live! Now I go to the House of Representatives, and they vote on me.
Boy: If they vote yes, what happens?
Bill: Then I go to the Senate and the whole thing starts all over again.
Boy: Oh no!
Bill: Oh yes!
I'm just a bill
Yes, I'm only a bill
And if they vote for me on Capitol Hill
Well, then I'm off to the White House
Where I'll wait in a line
With a lot of other bills
For the president to sign
And if he signs me, then I'll be a law.
How I hope and pray that he will,
But today I am still just a bill.
Boy: You mean even if the whole Congress says you should be a law, the president can still say no?
Bill: Yes, that's called a veto. If the President vetoes me, I have to go back to Congress and they vote on me again, and by that time you're so old...
Boy: By that time it's very unlikely that you'll become a law. It's not easy to become a law, is it?
Bill: No!
But how I hope and I pray that I will,
But today I am still just a bill.
Congressman: He signed you, Bill! Now you're a law!
Bill: Oh yes!!!
(Works pretty much the same in states as Federally)
I'm Just a Bill (Schoolhouse Rock!) . <--- Please watch this anyone who isn't sure how laws are passed in America. It's a great video and only 3 minutes!
Boy: Woof! You sure gotta climb a lot of steps to get to this Capitol Building here in Washington. But I wonder who that sad little scrap of paper is?
I'm just a bill.
Yes, I'm only a bill.
And I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill.
Well, it's a long, long journey
To the capital city.
It's a long, long wait
While I'm sitting in committee,
But I know I'll be a law someday
At least I hope and pray that I will,
But today I am still just a bill.
Boy: Gee, Bill, you certainly have a lot of patience and courage.
Bill: Well I got this far. When I started, I wasn't even a bill, I was just an idea. Some folks back home decided they wanted a law passed, so they called their local Congressman and he said, "You're right, there oughta be a law." Then he sat down and wrote me out and introduced me to Congress. And I became a bill, and I'll remain a bill until they decide to make me a law.
I'm just a bill
Yes I'm only a bill,
And I got as far as Capitol Hill.
Well, now I'm stuck in committee
And I'll sit here and wait
While a few key Congressmen discuss and debate
Whether they should let me be a law.
How I hope and pray that they will,
But today I am still just a bill.
Boy: Listen to those congressmen arguing! Is all that discussion and debate about you?
Bill: Yeah, I'm one of the lucky ones. Most bills never even get this far. I hope they decide to report on me favourably, otherwise I may die.
Boy: Die?
Bill: Yeah, die in committee. Oooh, but it looks like I'm gonna live! Now I go to the House of Representatives, and they vote on me.
Boy: If they vote yes, what happens?
Bill: Then I go to the Senate and the whole thing starts all over again.
Boy: Oh no!
Bill: Oh yes!
I'm just a bill
Yes, I'm only a bill
And if they vote for me on Capitol Hill
Well, then I'm off to the White House
Where I'll wait in a line
With a lot of other bills
For the president to sign
And if he signs me, then I'll be a law.
How I hope and pray that he will,
But today I am still just a bill.
Boy: You mean even if the whole Congress says you should be a law, the president can still say no?
Bill: Yes, that's called a veto. If the President vetoes me, I have to go back to Congress and they vote on me again, and by that time you're so old...
Boy: By that time it's very unlikely that you'll become a law. It's not easy to become a law, is it?
Bill: No!
But how I hope and I pray that I will,
But today I am still just a bill.
Congressman: He signed you, Bill! Now you're a law!
Bill: Oh yes!!!
January 24, 2020, 12:28:21 PM
Yes, we have been over this already. Any excuse to ignore the disturbing goals and intent of the current Virginia administration, that is the substance. "snuck through" refers to the fact that the gun law was used as a distraction while these other laws were introduced. You keep obsessing about the pimple on your face while gangrene takes your leg. This is about protecting yourself from the cognitive dissonance you would experience by examining the goals and contents of these laws by focusing on peripheral issues to minimize and dismiss it.
You're really reaching hard now to justify your (continued) posting of utterly fake news. Again, none of these bills have been passed, and no "secret executive order" was issued. You're worrying about a problem that doesn't exist. I suggest you find a better hobby for your own well being.
You are really just repeating the same thing you have said 3 times in a row now. Who is try harding? If some one is walking towards you in a dark alley with a knife, he hasn't stabbed you yet, so the problem doesn't exist right? No need to take any action until AFTER he stabs you. Perfect logic Nutilduuuuhhh.
Jump to: