Forum Post: FACT: Dr Paul did not vote against unconstitutional defense bill yesterday.
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 15, 2011, 7:19 p.m. EST by TLydon007
(1278)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
FACT: Dr Paul did not vote against unconstitutional defense bill yesterday.
A call for TREASON charges on all yes votes in the house and senate. These people are no longer in support of this country, or at least what the country was supposed to be.
http://youtu.be/tYI1PY-b-ro
http://youtu.be/lO6yQvODZjI
MARSHAL LAW USA.............................................
All yes votes AND all those that abstained. There is no excuse to sit idly by while the constitution is being ripped apart.
especially when your specific duty is to uphold it.
He choose not to vote at all. That's different than what your troll is implying.
Probably a shrewd move too, because had he voted against it it wouldn't have made a lick of difference except that Romney and Newt would now be attacking him for voting against billions in critical defence funding needed to protect against terr'ists.
So you're saying he would rather play political games than protect the constitution??
The same exact thing he accuses every other politician of doing??
If you're right, he's a coward and a hypocrite.
He spoke out against it, and refused to participate in a pointless endeavor which would have accomplished nothing but hurting him politically.
I would have liked to see a "no" vote too, but the reality is he is trying to get the Republican nomination and can't be seen as opposing a large defense spending bill. The political games have to do with why in the hell they are even together in the same bill.
Perhaps Paul was read to vote yes on the budget, but no on detention, but choose neither because they come as an all-or-nothing proposition. Either way, he is still a hell of a lot better than the other people running.
Lawl says he wants US troops out of most foreign bases, he says that he opposes interventions just about everywhere. He knows he is not going to be nominated by the repugnicant party. Lawl could stand up for these purported principles, as well as oppose the military getting the right to intern people indefinitely without charges by voting against the military appropriations bill period.
"He spoke out against it"
"but the reality is he is trying to get the Republican nomination and can't be seen as opposing a large defense spending bill."
So he didn't oppose it?? When did he speak out against it?? How did he speak out against it and NOT "be seen as opposing a large defense spending bill"?? Doesn't make any sense.
The difference is Romney can't take out a slick political ad which says "Congressman Paul voted against 800 Billion we desperately need to support our troops and fight terr'ism"
He did speak out against it: http://rt.com/usa/news/defense-ron-paul-detention-745/
His position and that of his constituents, as spoken to congress and the world has been broadcast. I'm sure it's all over youtube.
Lawl says the military is getting too much money. What better way does a Congress member have to express that than to vote against the military's expense budget? He knows the budget will pass, he knows he is not getting the nomination but he could tell the world that he stood for his purported principles.
He doesn't and hasn't ever voted for OR against treasonous bills, doing so implies consent to such acts and entangles one in such conspiracies. If I'm wrong about this, school me.
I suppose we'll see about the nomination.
That's why YOU are a joless nobody instead of a politician. You don't know how to play the game which is merciless and often outright lying. "My opponent Paul voted against funding our soldiers! He hates them."
You can't get t the top without playing the politics. Even Jefferson did it. He would say one thing to the Congress ("yes buy Louisiana"), and something completely opposite to his constituents back home ("I opposed the purchase").
I have a job. One in which I am honest and paid well. As for Dr Paul, he's a disgusting sellout traitor that hates America and swore to protect the constitution but does nothing while it's being attacked.
Amen to that
Like one more vote would have even mattered in that landslide nice try troll!
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll932.xml
Every politician that didn't vote against that bill should be held accountable. Even those with a personality cult that spams the internet all day.
Be real and hold the ones that voted for it, accountable. That is something that can be done.
The ones that voted for it AND the ones that sat back and laughed while the constitution was being ripped apart. You don't get a free pass just because you talk about the constitution all the time. Either Dr Paul can walk the walk or he can walk his ass off a bridge.
CALL TO ACTION: USE NASI SARS TO CHARGE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE & SENATORS WITH SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Global Revolution 1: American Revolution 2: Day 85: Communication 1 IronBoltBruce's Kleptocracy Chronicles for 10 Dec 2011 (g1a2d0085c1) Will you go quietly like the Jews, or make a stand against Fascism?
The corporate powers that be have been attempting to redirect the wrath of the Occupy Wall Street movement to their puppet politicians in Washington DC since day one. And by yet another coincidence - or more likely design - the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA) now forces our attention in that direction. This Act was passed by both the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R.1540) and the U.S. Senate (S.1867), and now lacks only the signature of Bushbama to become law. If he signs it, the corporate fascist takeover of America initially exposed and delayed by USMC General Smedley Butler in the 1930s will be complete:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTdx6vEUtIA
Section 1031 of the NDAA as currently worded authorizes the President to use Military Force to detain indefinitely based on suspicion alone and without trial American citizens on American soil, effectively making the United States a Police State similar to Nazi Germany. You can read the wording here:
http://tinyurl.com/c4w2wdh
This is in direct conflict with and an overt attempt to override the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments to the Constitution:
"Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
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.
Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
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.
Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
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 defence."
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am4
93 of our 100 Senators and 322 of our 435 Representatives voted to make this Orwellian scenario the law of the land. You will find the names of these criminals listed here:
http://tinyurl.com/7v6zlq3
http://tinyurl.com/3mh3ke7
What follows is my layman's legal justification for refering to these corporate puppets as "criminals", and a call to action to all Americans to assure that their crimes do not go unpunished. I am not an attorney, and certainly not a constitutional lawyer. If you are - or if you know and can afford one - I invite you to take this ball and run with it:
Pursuant to Article 6 of the Constitution, every member of both houses of Congress is required to take the following oath of office: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Article6
http://bensguide.gpo.gov/3-5/symbols/oaths.html
In voting to pass the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 and thereby override our Constitution and Bill of Rights, 93 Senators and 322 Representatives clearly violated their oath of office. But unsurprisingly, they face no legal penalty for their "breach of oath":
http://oathact.us/
In conspiring to pass a bill that would enable the use of military force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution the of 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments, however, these 415 servants of the Kleptocracy committed "Seditious Conspiracy", a federal crime punishable by up to 20 years imprisonment:
U.S. CODE > TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > SECTION 2384 > SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY
"If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2384.html
CALL TO ACTION:
I am asking all American citizens to check the following links to see if their Senators or Representatives are among the 415 that need to be arrested and charged with Seditious Conspiracy:
http://tinyurl.com/7v6zlq3
http://tinyurl.com/3mh3ke7
If they are, I recommend you report them using the most expeditious tool for assuring that all federal, state and local law enforcement agencies who need to get involved are properly informed, and that is the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative, or "NaSI" for short. SAR links for all 50 states are available here:
http://amerikanreich.com/sar-list/
This is no joke. This is no drill. This may be our last chance to peacefully restore the Republic. And even if you might not consider our Republic worth saving, I suggest you help imprison THEM before they imprison YOU.
You're just trying to deflect attention away from the fact that he sat back and watched the constitution being ripped apart. Those that voted for it don't invoke the constitution every single day. He does. By his own account, he watched a horrific act being committed and just sat back and did nothing.
If you check, he's never voted on any such treasonous bills. I don't expect you to comprehend why.
I know exactly why. Because he's a coward that hates freedom and the constitution.
It's you that needs to comprehend it.
How is he a coward he voted against the patriot act and still to this day talk about how bad it is. Stop being a clown he can't vote well running for president that power is strip from him.
Well, then obviously he should be hung by a noose for voting on both the government funding bill on October 4th(against it) and the debt deal of August 1st(against it). That's just off the top of my head. The mere fact you need to spread lies (like the one where they're stripped of congressional powers during candidacy) only proves that he doesn't have the merit to stand on truth alone.
Face it. His entire campaign is just a tissue of lies.
No, it's you that needs to be taken behind the woodshed and if that doesn't work, taught respect one fat lip and black eye at a time.
Typical of you unpatriotic cowardly Dr Paul fans to threaten violence when you don't get your way. That's all you people care about is guns, drugs, and violence...
And why???
Because I posted the TRUTH??
Well, sorry for speaking truth to power!! Go ahead and keep threatening us REAL AMERICANS.. It definitely helps unmask the facade you Fascists have created..
They probably decided not to vote because it would affect their karma (especially Bachmann and Paul)
Maybe?? Or maybe they hate freedom?? Not sure how voting against it would affect their karma.
People would hate them for voting for, people would hate them for voting against. Less people would hate them for not voting at all.
So basically, he's just playing political games?? He would rather people like him than defend the constitution?? If that's the case, he's a coward and a hypocrite.
No, more like Paul and Bachmann were on the campaign trail in Iowa. Duh!
What a great excuse to let the constitution get torn apart!!
We couldn't protect the constitution because we were in Iowa talking about how much it's getting ripped apart and nobody is doing anything about it..
What a genius narrative.. I'm sold!!
Did you see the the vote how would one more vote have stopped this atrocity. Sure he would have another no to all his no's ( being as he is Dr. No). Seriously grow up.
I do believe he is calling for charges being brought against several........ sign the petition yourself. His position on it has been made very clear.
His position is too clear. Obviously, he loves sitting back while the constitution is being ripped apart just so he can try to score political points out of it later on.. At least the people that voted for it can claim they don't know any better. What's his excuse??
bleh bleh bleh bleh bleh whaaaaaa
you're retarded..... at least people vote for it can claim they didn't know.... obviously you do not watch your congress in action, it's broadcast 24-7.
please extract your mommy's latex fire hydrant from your bottom before you go out in public
Typical response for someone in a personality cult to insult my mom when they feel endangered. (Straight from the Larouche Youth handbook)
FACE THE FACT, RP is a coward and a threat to the constitution.
You'd no more about youth handbooks than myself.
Did I insult your mother? You mean that negligent witch that should have had the spine to rightfully pinch your head off at the time of your hatching?
More violent rhetoric and insults about my mom, huh??
Is there anything else you retarded cult members talk about??
How about the fact that Dr. Paul hates America??
No freedom of speech regarding that, huh.. Figures.
Well, I never said that was spot on what's happening. Just a small theory.
You're a liberal IDI0T! How a politician votes matters. Paul has a consistent voting record that shows he understands the average American and he respects liberty.
Please finish your high school homework. When you pay taxes then you can voice your opinion.
liberals are part of the Leftist Machine: liberals, Democrats, RINOs (Neocons), progressives, and socialists.
The Leftist Machine has controlled CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN, Hollywood, and politics for decades.
Please do some substantial research BEFORE you form opinions or vote! Ads, speeches, and biased news are not fact and not research.
u mean the NDAA Bill??
Obama will sign it likely...
and obama bots will still support him....
He probably will sign it.
Why??
Because it's a VETO-PROOF MAJORITY.
That's right. Dr. Paul could have prevented that, but he didn't. Because he is a fascist and that's what fascists do.
He did not vote YES on the bill and he has spoken out against it many times. Keep in mind his son was trying to delete section 1031.
Not Voting TX-14 Paul, Ronald [R]
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-932&utm_source=@HouseFloor
All he needed to do is say, "nay" and it would back up all the rhetoric about the constitution. But he decided it doesn't matter. Just rip it apart while my cult still defends me. At least his son had the balls to oppose it in the Senate. RP has no excuse.
Our foremost American patriot, Congressman Dr. Paul did not vote for the bill because he refused to recognize it as a legitimate piece of legislation. He refused to dignify this piece of treason with a vote. But, of course, only a person of honor would understand it.
yeap., he is on the republican platform.,the platform fund it by corporation is it that diffecult to understand? or you need some one from other countries to tell you?
Dear idjit
Ron Paul has accepted ZERO donations from corporations. He only accepts donations from individual voters (through his online moneybombs). You have made a FALSE accusation against a decent man. Mr. Paul is the closest thing we have to a modern day Thomas Jefferson (constitutionalist, pro-liberty, pro-limited government per the 10th amendment).
let`s asume what you say is correct,he can not do anything without GOP (corp)aprove it
Actually a president can do a lot. Veto crap like the NDAA or SOPA. End the undeclared wars overseas, and bring home the troops. Submit his 1 trillion dollar spending cut for his annual budget.
Plus there's a tendency, even if Congress doesn't like the president, for all the Republicans (or Democrats) to support their man in the White House.
He is just anther Ross perot hahaha and where is know? look he is too old for the job period
That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life..
You're saying he didn't vote against it because he's so opposed to it??
If that's the case, he's a moron and so are you.
You think he's a patriot? He thinks that Iran is not a threat to anyone. That's not a patriot, that's a nitwit.
And someone who think it was okay to kill 100,000 innocent men, women, and children (as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya) is a murderer. Did you see the youtube video of the little girl with her jaw blown off? For the rest of her life she will never be able to eat food like a normal person, because she has no jaw to chew it. Plus kids strewn around that were snuffed-out before they had a chance to live.
We have no right to commit aggravated assault and kill the innocent people of Iran with bomb strikes. Aggression is only okay in cases of self-defense (after you've been attacked).
Paul is nuts. unhinged. Iran has not compunction about murderimg as many non believers as possible. people get killed in a war.people of all ages. 50 million people were freed from the maniacal grip of saddam hussein. The USA ( with help from our allies)did that. you don't wait until you're attacked by your sworn enemy. You defend, you don't play catch up.
Go over there and kill them. Get back, we'll pin a fucking medal on you. Seriously, show the world how it's done, obviously, the playing field is wide open to be crowned as a world class and efficient killing machine. Can you handle it in less than six months?
... I'm sure there is plenty of el-kaida an' terr'ists and wmds there too!!
You make sworn enemies by bombing their families... or by overthrowing their elected governments to install dictators. You can't change the past, but lets not make it worse by dropping bombs on them.
btw. When was the last time Iran invaded anyone?
They are making nuclear weapons. Their goal is to destory the USA and Israel. Iran is our enemy, you don't appease enemies, you take them out. If you don't act against them they will positivley act against you. They aren't angry over anything except the fact the WE are NOT muslim. Their deluded intention is to rule the world under an islamic caliphate.
I'm not even remotely concerned about Iran having nuclear weapons. What are they going to do with them?
Are they seriously going to blow up their own holy sites in Israel, along with its sizable Muslim population? Plus take out Palestine? I doubt it. Plus the counter attack would destroy them, no one wants to be left ruling a smoldering heap of rubble.
The nation being aggressive is not Iran; if I were Iran, I would listen to the sound of the war drums beating, then look at all the foreign troops on my border... and what happened to my neighboring countries... and heck yes I would want a nuke. Not to destroy anyone, but because if you don't get one you will be destroyed. (e.g. North Korea isn't even mentioned by the media anymore because they have nukes... nobody can pick on them).
Take out palestine? There is no palestine.
Well whatever you want to call the place inhabited by Palestinians that is trying to be declared a state...
When Iran does something against our nation, upon having it's Sovereignty restored, then they will be dealt with accordingly.
The constitution of iran espouses martyrdom as a thing of honor. With that kind of policy, you know you're dealing with an insane govt.
So what? Do you not think our current government, say for the last 20 years, is any less insane?
Here is the gig. If the United States' Sovereignty has been infringed upon and has cause to declare war, it should be done with enough extreme prejudice against any offending nation as to bring about quick and decisive action against the entire offending nation AND strategy bound by real world financial constraints.
None of this taking 10+ years of surgically pecking away at this handful of offenders and that handful baloney. No more war efforts financed with debt loans from China, or anyone else.
You see, the rest of the world is aware of these issues and the debt loan bubble cannot go a day past another five years as there are certain finite constraints which form a clear line and lead logical persons to very few viable solutions in order to proceed with the continued debt borrowing in order to present as the world's police, which is actually more like promoting a handful of selfish persons' own agendas, and protect their own selfish interests.
No, he voted against it already the first time it hit the house before the Senate made more (worse changes).
Really is the the best you have? If you don't like the bill President Paul would be your best bet against it. No one else would even try to repeal it.
But hey cut off your nose to spite your face - the only reason I care is because your irrationality affects me via laws.
So he only opposed it before the Senate made unconstitutional changes??
If you're right, that's even worse than I thought. Thanks for helping to expose this traitor.
Wait a minute.
Your post implies he voted "AYE" but that's not true. Way to mislead people with inflammatory titling. So how many our your beloved Democrats and Republicans (same progressive party; different divisions) voted for it? Remember that when you vote next November, because if you re-elect any of these guys or the president (who will sign the bill), then that means you SUPPORT their this bill too.
Think about it.
.
Nothing inflammatory about it. When given a chance to protect the constitution, he decided it isn't worth saying "Nay". No excuse. As for Dems and Reps, I voted against both my House Rep and Senator and am damn sure I'll vote against them again.
As for the president, because of Congressman like Dr. Paul, he can't veto the bill. It's a veto-proof majority. That's why I'm pissed. Rand Paul voted against it, and thus has my respect. But RP is an unpatriotic coward.
This shows that we cannot thrust any political leader in Congress or States legislatures. They all vote "their conscience" and not the conscience of the people. That's why we have to kick all of them out and run our own people for all of the political positions of office. Obviously. we have to organize our own political party
That is the nature dark side of democratic vote. It command candidate to commit any criminal or even satanic conduct in order to avoid attacking from rival. In this case, he would be attacked by Newt or Romney for weak in defense if vote na to the bill. This is why bipolar partisan democracy would cause the house divided shall not stand. You have to choose winning evil or losing honest, not both
But he's not honest. He vowed to his constituents to go to DC and protect the constitution and clearly alienated them. His entire campaign is just an alternate form of style over substance. He is only more guilty than other congressman because they did not claim it was unconstitutional.
You must go to take fundamental logic 101 for some intellijunk. He could be dishonest now to get nominated and protect the constitution after general election. If he is honest now and vote ya, he will never get nominated and could not protect the constitution. There is a lot of temptation and dilemma in real life. The most common one is most people would choose to be dishonest and alive over honesty and result in death.
Ummmmmmmmmm idiot he can't you can't do that running for president idiot. You can't vote on anything
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Michele Bachmann voted on the Balanced Budget Amendment last month. Nice try spreading lies, though. Glad I caught that one before the rest of the crackpots clung onto it.
Well any way he as voted no to bills just like aka the patriot act which gives the president this power already anyways. He new the NDAA bill was going to pass he is trying to win the presidency to save your sorry ass. You bet your ass if any of the other GOPs win all you OWS liberals are going on a trip to the fema camps asap. So which one is more important to you him winning or you going to the fema camps. Because if he wins you won't have to worry about NDAA. Ron Lawl has a long list of votes that vote no to bills just like this. He is not called Dr. No for nothing.
[Deleted]
Go ahead. You should be detained indefinitely, as subscribed by the unconstitutional law RP supported.
He Trollface, you should be sent to Gitmo, Im more ineresting in talking about how you are wasting oxygen for the rest of us.
What makes it unconstitutional?
It violates a person's right to a jury trial, which is both public and speedy. Instead it allows the president to ship the American off to Guantanamo and keep him/her living there for decades w/o a trial. (All that is required is to label the American a "terrorist".)
Not true, read the bill.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf
Indefinite detention of American citizens without trial if suspected of supporting terrorism in any way.
Even Dr. Paul has been saying it's unconstitutional.
http://rt.com/usa/news/defense-ron-paul-detention-745/
But he has done nothing to stop it, even though it was within his power.
I knew that was what you were going to say and it is now obvious that you OWSers don't want facts and that you haven't read the bill that I have posted on here everyday since you all started spreading that BS. Here is the exact quote out of NDAA S.1867 that was passed by the Senate. This is from Chapter 669, Subtitle D, Section 1031. That is the detainee matters section. It reads as follows (This is a direct cut and paste from the approved bill):
(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS 9 AND LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.— UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United 13 States. 14 LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The require15 ment to detain a person in military custody under 16 this section does not extend to a lawful resident 17 alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
It clearly states that the rule under this law does not extend to United States Citizens. No where in this bill does it state that an american can be detained indefinatly in any capacity.
Stop the fear mongering OWS, you will get much further with truth and until you do you will not be successful.
I'm gonna level with you. I already knew it wasn't unconstitutional. I'm just getting a rise out of all the alarmist Dr. Paul fans that spread absurd propaganda every day. The fact that he preaches to his fans that it's unconstitutional and does nothing about it is what ticks me off. Also, the fact they persist in defending his decision, while they themselves believe it's unconstitutional also disgusts me.
Nice post, though.
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/singleton/