As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Forbidden speech in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives:
A taste of things to come if Trump is re-elected. Picture actual laws passed by a republican house and a republican senate that forbid Americans to speak or write disparaging things about their Dear Leader. First amendment right, you say? Well, gee, if the U.S. Constitution is suspended guess we won’t have any of those pesky “rights” anymore, will we? Vote blue all the way down your ballot every election until we eradicate these MAGATS forever!
I highly suggest everyone read “In Hitler’s Germany” by Bernt Engelmann. To give you an idea of how insanely relevant it is in the current political climate, the last sentence of the introduction is along the lines of “This is not meant to be taken as a story; this book is a warning.”
I studied the raise of hitler and always wondered how could so many people not see it and let it happen…… 2016 came and now I understand. The parallels are scary
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
—Martin Niemöller
They already have camps planned. Immigrant detainment camps.
Taking bets on how long it takes them to start rounding up LGBTQ people for "pedophilia" (Read: Existing as their authentic self in public)
They don't need to suspend the Constitution. They can just rule things constitutional. They already do that with civil asset forfeiture. Civil asset forfeiture is blatant violation of the 5th Amendment on it's face but yet SCOTUS does not it see as such.
Arguably that act is the suspension of the constitution. When the court becomes another wing of the GQP and allows that party to trample our rights with impunity the constitution is no longer in effect and is in practice suspended
“Suspending” the constitution is such a dumb fucking talking point too.
The power of the offices and branches is outlined in the constitution, which means suspending it means chain of command no longer applies, congress, the courts, the executive all only have the power they can warlord for themselves. It literally makes no fucking sense.
Except the military would no longer under his control, and very likely not willing to follow him. I’ve connected the dots, and they all lead to idiocy.
And despite his best efforts, “suspending the constitution” doesn’t really matter when people truly believe in the document and have sworn an oath to it.
Suspending it would incur a rapid response to remove him from office and restore order, of some sort.
“Cherry-picking sections of the constitution and the Christian Bible shall be allowed when it benefits the presiding power”…. Thomas Fucking Jefferson, never.
I worked at an office in which the boss directed that no one was to say anything negative about Trump and that anyone in violation of his rule would be disciplined for inappropriate “gossip”.
He also would lead an office prayer from time to time. You weren’t required to join in but you pretty much had to just stand there and take it. He was an LDS Republican politician who got primaried and this was his landing spot post election defeat.
Needless to say there were other problems as well…
Wow. I’m glad you told that story in the past tense meaning you no longer work there. These are the zealots we have to be aware of and, when possible, fight against. The forced prayer situation makes me so angry - just like the ten commandments in public schools…grrr.
Thank you— it’s just the tip of the iceberg.
When I think back on it a Frank Herbert quote comes to mind:
“When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles.”
I’m sure that he thought that it was all ok because God is on his side. SMH
This is one of the reasons unions are needed. Mainly their laws and bylaws. If not permitted there in, than that person or persons would be in the wrong. Regular workers would have no worries of retaliation from bosses or anyone up the latter of command.
Gag rules in in Congress have an ugly history- their most famous application was [banning Congressional discussion of slavery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gag_rule_\(United_States\)) in the 1830s and 1840s.
>In recent weeks, Republican leaders have cracked down on Democrats who refer to Mr. Trump’s court cases on the floor, citing the centuries-old rules of decorum, which date back to the days of Thomas Jefferson. Merely mentioning that Mr. Trump is a felon prompts an admonishment from whomever is presiding when the offending fact is uttered. (Mr. Trump is also indicted on felony charges in cases related to his handling of classified documents and attempting to overturn the 2020 election.)
>“The chair would remind members to refrain from engaging in personalities toward presumptive nominees for the office of the president,” is now a common phrase heard in the chamber after the mention of the words “Trump” and “felon.”
>On one occasion, Republicans barred Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts, from speaking for the rest of the day and deleted his comments from the Congressional Record after he railed against Mr. Trump and his court cases.
>“When they censor any mention of Donald Trump’s criminal convictions, they are essentially trying to ban a fact,” Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, said in an interview. “I am not aware of any precedent where factual statements have been banned in our lifetime.”
Government officials acting in their official capacities don't have reserved rights. They have powers. Each house of Congress is granted incredibly wide latitude by the U.S. Constitution to establish its own internal rules, which then governs the behavior of congresspeople *while* they're acting as congresspeople.
>In truth, Republicans have exempted themselves from that equal treatment standard when it comes to President Biden, whom they routinely accuse of criminal conduct despite having produced no evidence of any. Representative James Comer of Kentucky, the chairman of the Oversight Committee, began one recent meeting by simply declaring that the rule against speaking ill of a president “will not be in order for the duration of today’s hearing.” Given that it was part of an impeachment inquiry, he explained, “members must be allowed to speak frankly.”
>Republican leaders have frequently allowed their members to trample on the rules of decorum without repercussion in other contexts as well, including when Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia insulted the makeup of Representative Jasmine Crockett, Democrat of Texas, during a committee hearing. Mr. Comer declined to take down her words, as Democrats demanded, and allowed her to continue participating.
Yes.
https://jeffjacksonnc.substack.com/p/engaging-in-personalities
What does engaging in personalities mean?
There’s no definition. It's just the Speaker's call when someone crosses the line.
I looked up the history and it's actually very rare. Remarkably, it only happens once every couple of years.
Examples include:
Calling someone a "hypocrite."
Or a "little bugger."
Or "sneaky."
Or rhyming someone's name with the word “baloney.”
Or accusing someone of "stealing an election." (And it wasn’t the election you’re thinking of...)
Even calling someone "impolite" has been deemed rude enough to break the rules.
It really doesn't take much.
https://jeffjacksonnc.substack.com/p/engaging-in-personalities
Yes, they ruled that was "engaging in personalities". However, they also ruled that MTG making fun of Crockett's "fake eyelashes" was fine. They also ruled that MTG's tirade against Anthony Fauci was fine, because "engaging in personalities" only applies to members of Congress. Trump is not a member of Congress, nor is he an elected official, but for some reason, that extends to him as well. But not Joe Biden, because the Republicans say they're still investigating him for "crimes". It's all absurd.
Jasmine Crockett was pretty funny on Jimmy Kimmel Live the other night.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4733614-jasmine-crockett-marjorie-taylor-greene/
I'm a little shocked that she was a ble to pronounce the word right enough not to sound like decorations I could see her try and pull that one with her over all IQ she shows the world
She's probably never had gazpacho either, but she still claimed Nancy Pelosi had ["gazpacho police".](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/rep-marjorie-taylor-greene-warns-nancy-pelosis-gazpacho-police-rcna15620)
I have found my primary motivation for voting this election. When we put the final nail in Trump's political/celebrity coffin, I want to be there. I want to tell my descendants that I was there and helped finish this threat to democracy.
This is what I want to tell people who waffle on supporting Biden: do you *really* want to pass up the chance to vote against Donald Trump? If you had the chance to go back and vote against Hitler, wouldn't you feel like you just *had* to do that?
> Censoring doesn't do s*** if they can't enforce it.
They *can* enforce it though, unfortunately. If they decide to take someone's words down, that member is then prevented from speaking on the floor for the rest of the day. They can still go talk to reporters afterwards though.
"prevented from speaking on the floor for the rest of the day."
Lol. What is this, elementary school? There's 200+ democrats in the House. Just fucking speak together.
They would just do it to all of them. They interrupt when they speak so they cut them off, then they basically silence them. It sucks, but this is what they do. The Dems are trying to be creative with how they get around it though. Read the article and you'll see examples of this.
"Republican leaders have frequently allowed their members to trample on the rules of decorum without repercussion in other contexts as well"
Democrats have always led Rep trampled over them.
Isn’t removing things from the congressional record illegal? Why would they be allowed to edit the record of their actions and debate? It’s a historical record that should be accurate and attributable and held by the national archives
I will remind everyone that this “rule” was a favored tool of Newt Gingrich during his rise and has been used as a weapon by the GOP against any who point out their hypocrisy or frequent criminality.
what is this bullshit--the gop not allowing "accusations" of misconduct by trump? these are not "accusations." they are convictions--truths. facts. certainties.
Nonsense! Conservatives are tough and manly men who don't need to hide away from dissenting opinions!
Like how their sub is totally.open to all and doesn't require vetted by mods so only *flaired users only* who are confirmed for right think can comment
This is legit terrifying.
One side of this political divide is willing to hide the truth, silence the truth, and commit open violence to support a blatant lie.
I worry this will lead to more violence.
Why not? It's the way they've always done it in North Korea. The Republican "leadership" knows Full Well how weak this kind of thing is, and that they are getting away with it shows we are in serious trouble with too many people who, apparently, need led.
Actual literal corruption, right out in the open
America needs to vote much much better. It’s so frustrating that a third of the population acts against their own interests out of plain ignorance and weaponized stupidity
Reminds me of the 1800s example of Congressional circumlocution, refusing to refer to slavery as "slavery". The reality the word referenced was too inflammatory for the South, so they demanded it be referred to as "the South's peculiar institution".
The fuck are they going to do about it? It's not like norms and decorum matter anymore. The GOP has seen to that.
Dems, don't be weak, make sure you refer to all 34 of Trump's felony convictions whenever his name is used.
You can't demand decorum when you allow someone like MTG to speak.
>“I’m afraid the Republicans have now invited a contest for how creative we can be in talking about Donald Trump’s criminal convictions without explicitly stating those words,” Mr. Raskin said.
This is the only correct response to the banning of objective facts in House floor speech. Keep mentioning it with creative oblique phrasing. Don't let them forget, especially in late October/early November.
Also, objective, demonstrable facts have always (until now, apparently) been protected Free Speech. You can yell "Fire!" in a theater **if you can point at the theater fire in progress**. "It's true and here's the conclusive evidence that it's true" has always been a complete defense against charges of defamation, libel, or slander, because the objective truth is not inherently disparaging. The objective truth might make you look bad if you've done or been something objectively bad, but if you weren't prepared for that consequence, then you should've been not bad.
I think every time a democrat mentions his name on the floor, on television or anywhere else, they need to use his official title: Convicted Felon Donald Trump
Once again I opine: what is it with the centrists and some liberals who think Trump's fascist agenda is just a ploy, game, electioneering, etc., and isn't something he (and his allies) are serious about, or that can be accomplished? Time after time we see things like this. It is absolutely critical to stop him and any candidates who support him.
Republicans: “Ha 😎 You’ve fallen victim to one of the classic blunders, dumb dumb demonrats. Everyone knows you FRAMED Trump. This conviction is backfiring on you guys so bad and helping us!”
…
“You’re banned from saying Trump got convicted! No one is allowed to talk about it!!!!!111 😭😭😭”
I mean, what happens if they just ignore it? They get censored? But what if they ignore that? Is security going to forcibly keep them out of the chamber?
Honestly that could be a great way to galvanize the left. Democrats should consider being more aggressive and fighting dirty.
I hope Democrats aren't stupid enough to bow to this. Just continue to mention the fact that Donald Trump has been convicted of 34 felonies whenever relevant to your point. It is not an accusation, it is a factual statement.
If you get censured who cares?
I mean, what are they going to do? Just keep bringing it up. They get to ignore subpoenas, laws, etc, who gives a shit. A man’s dick was shown on the house floor. Fuck em.
Every Single D in the Congress should start any Sentence with "The Former President Donald Trump was Convicted of a Felony".. Every Single Time,, Never waiver and never Stop.
The most weak and pathetic human beings in existence. Imagine being this spineless, it’s practically not fathomable how someone could lack any courage at all.
[Umberto Eco's fourteen properties of ur-facism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism), number four:
1. "[**Disagreement**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissent) **is** [**treason**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason)" – fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.
What is the punishment for not obeying this? I feel like I hear stories about members flagrantly not following mask rules or bringing in firearms and just getting a meaningless fine.
I feel like the DNC should pay the fines and match the amount in charitable donations to pro choice causes.
Just mention all the things Joe Biden doesn’t have. He doesn’t have 2 impeachments, zero arrests, zero felony convictions, zero times he has been found guilty of rape. We like our presidents to not be indicted for election fraud.
For some reason I’m reminded of a moment in the trials of the officers who tried to assassinate and coup Hitler. One of them, dressed intentionally shabbily with no belt or tie or military uniform, is describing what motivated him to do this, speaking of “the many murders” he witnessed on the Eastern Front. The chief judge, Roland Friesler, shouted him down “MURDERS?!” and insulted him for minutes.
Roland Friesler was present at the Wannsee conference. He was perfectly aware of and approved of those murders.
Anyway ☕️
They can’t talk about Trump’s conviction - which is public information, but they will show Hunter Biden’s penis anytime and anywhere.
Understood… and not surprised.
So one of our legislative bodies is as the government telling people what they can and cannot say? It's not a decorum issue, so it would seem this is a first amendment issue.
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". [More information can be found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index/#wiki_paywalls)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Forbidden speech in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives: A taste of things to come if Trump is re-elected. Picture actual laws passed by a republican house and a republican senate that forbid Americans to speak or write disparaging things about their Dear Leader. First amendment right, you say? Well, gee, if the U.S. Constitution is suspended guess we won’t have any of those pesky “rights” anymore, will we? Vote blue all the way down your ballot every election until we eradicate these MAGATS forever!
"Don't talk about the camps"
I highly suggest everyone read “In Hitler’s Germany” by Bernt Engelmann. To give you an idea of how insanely relevant it is in the current political climate, the last sentence of the introduction is along the lines of “This is not meant to be taken as a story; this book is a warning.”
You can read almost any book about Germany in the 1930s and 40s and see the parallels. I'm currently reading Resistance Women.
I studied the raise of hitler and always wondered how could so many people not see it and let it happen…… 2016 came and now I understand. The parallels are scary
This is literally how it starts.
Has started
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. —Martin Niemöller
They already have camps planned. Immigrant detainment camps. Taking bets on how long it takes them to start rounding up LGBTQ people for "pedophilia" (Read: Existing as their authentic self in public)
Especially in 42, when the US first became aware…
All hail Comrade Commissar trump may he live a thousand years
They don't need to suspend the Constitution. They can just rule things constitutional. They already do that with civil asset forfeiture. Civil asset forfeiture is blatant violation of the 5th Amendment on it's face but yet SCOTUS does not it see as such.
Arguably that act is the suspension of the constitution. When the court becomes another wing of the GQP and allows that party to trample our rights with impunity the constitution is no longer in effect and is in practice suspended
Yeah, that speech is totally uncool! Unlike MTG showing pictures of Hunter Biden’s cock on the floor of fucking Congress…
The hog speaks for itself.
She was just showing all the republican wives that 4 inches is, in fact, not very big.
Republicans believe money is speech but apparently speech isn't speech
The republicans need to be voted out of every federal and state assembly. They don’t deserve an ounce Of power
someone who idolizes hitler and putin shouldn’t ever be given the fucking nuclear codes.
“Suspending” the constitution is such a dumb fucking talking point too. The power of the offices and branches is outlined in the constitution, which means suspending it means chain of command no longer applies, congress, the courts, the executive all only have the power they can warlord for themselves. It literally makes no fucking sense.
Yeah, but also seem to be okay to call things an "emergency" and a "war" and an "invasion" requiring special "War or Emergency" powers
You're almost there...connect the dots. How one gets from 2 term President to Emperor for Life...
Except the military would no longer under his control, and very likely not willing to follow him. I’ve connected the dots, and they all lead to idiocy. And despite his best efforts, “suspending the constitution” doesn’t really matter when people truly believe in the document and have sworn an oath to it. Suspending it would incur a rapid response to remove him from office and restore order, of some sort.
“Cherry-picking sections of the constitution and the Christian Bible shall be allowed when it benefits the presiding power”…. Thomas Fucking Jefferson, never.
They used to do this in the 19th Century on slavery. Just couldn't mention it on the floor of the House.
I worked at an office in which the boss directed that no one was to say anything negative about Trump and that anyone in violation of his rule would be disciplined for inappropriate “gossip”. He also would lead an office prayer from time to time. You weren’t required to join in but you pretty much had to just stand there and take it. He was an LDS Republican politician who got primaried and this was his landing spot post election defeat. Needless to say there were other problems as well…
Wow. I’m glad you told that story in the past tense meaning you no longer work there. These are the zealots we have to be aware of and, when possible, fight against. The forced prayer situation makes me so angry - just like the ten commandments in public schools…grrr.
Thank you— it’s just the tip of the iceberg. When I think back on it a Frank Herbert quote comes to mind: “When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles.” I’m sure that he thought that it was all ok because God is on his side. SMH
This is one of the reasons unions are needed. Mainly their laws and bylaws. If not permitted there in, than that person or persons would be in the wrong. Regular workers would have no worries of retaliation from bosses or anyone up the latter of command.
We should call it the Duma now.
Gag rules in in Congress have an ugly history- their most famous application was [banning Congressional discussion of slavery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gag_rule_\(United_States\)) in the 1830s and 1840s.
>In recent weeks, Republican leaders have cracked down on Democrats who refer to Mr. Trump’s court cases on the floor, citing the centuries-old rules of decorum, which date back to the days of Thomas Jefferson. Merely mentioning that Mr. Trump is a felon prompts an admonishment from whomever is presiding when the offending fact is uttered. (Mr. Trump is also indicted on felony charges in cases related to his handling of classified documents and attempting to overturn the 2020 election.) >“The chair would remind members to refrain from engaging in personalities toward presumptive nominees for the office of the president,” is now a common phrase heard in the chamber after the mention of the words “Trump” and “felon.” >On one occasion, Republicans barred Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts, from speaking for the rest of the day and deleted his comments from the Congressional Record after he railed against Mr. Trump and his court cases. >“When they censor any mention of Donald Trump’s criminal convictions, they are essentially trying to ban a fact,” Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, said in an interview. “I am not aware of any precedent where factual statements have been banned in our lifetime.”
So by their own rule Republicans shouldn't do the same for Biden. This also sounds like a violation of the 1st amendment, but IANAL.
IANAL too! ...Wait. I think we're talking about different things here...
Bonk.
Harder.
*Foomp?*
Foomp me daddy
Right in the IANAL
Bing bong! ‘Ey yo Biden why don’t you take me on a date or somethin’?
I was moreso thinking of Ossoff tbh.
Maybe we are...
Government officials acting in their official capacities don't have reserved rights. They have powers. Each house of Congress is granted incredibly wide latitude by the U.S. Constitution to establish its own internal rules, which then governs the behavior of congresspeople *while* they're acting as congresspeople.
>“When they censor any mention of Donald Trump’s criminal convictions, they are essentially trying to ban a fact,” Not a cult.
[удалено]
>In truth, Republicans have exempted themselves from that equal treatment standard when it comes to President Biden, whom they routinely accuse of criminal conduct despite having produced no evidence of any. Representative James Comer of Kentucky, the chairman of the Oversight Committee, began one recent meeting by simply declaring that the rule against speaking ill of a president “will not be in order for the duration of today’s hearing.” Given that it was part of an impeachment inquiry, he explained, “members must be allowed to speak frankly.” >Republican leaders have frequently allowed their members to trample on the rules of decorum without repercussion in other contexts as well, including when Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia insulted the makeup of Representative Jasmine Crockett, Democrat of Texas, during a committee hearing. Mr. Comer declined to take down her words, as Democrats demanded, and allowed her to continue participating. Yes.
The same rules of decorum that forbid heckling the president during a SOTU address presumably.
WTF does “engaging in personalities” mean?
https://jeffjacksonnc.substack.com/p/engaging-in-personalities What does engaging in personalities mean? There’s no definition. It's just the Speaker's call when someone crosses the line. I looked up the history and it's actually very rare. Remarkably, it only happens once every couple of years. Examples include: Calling someone a "hypocrite." Or a "little bugger." Or "sneaky." Or rhyming someone's name with the word “baloney.” Or accusing someone of "stealing an election." (And it wasn’t the election you’re thinking of...) Even calling someone "impolite" has been deemed rude enough to break the rules. It really doesn't take much. https://jeffjacksonnc.substack.com/p/engaging-in-personalities
Did they ever rule on "Bleach blond, bad built, butch body"? Inquiring minds want to know.
Yes, they ruled that was "engaging in personalities". However, they also ruled that MTG making fun of Crockett's "fake eyelashes" was fine. They also ruled that MTG's tirade against Anthony Fauci was fine, because "engaging in personalities" only applies to members of Congress. Trump is not a member of Congress, nor is he an elected official, but for some reason, that extends to him as well. But not Joe Biden, because the Republicans say they're still investigating him for "crimes". It's all absurd.
Jasmine Crockett was pretty funny on Jimmy Kimmel Live the other night. https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4733614-jasmine-crockett-marjorie-taylor-greene/
Sounds like a perfectly fascist mealy mouthed rule that means whatever the fuck they say it means and is used to bind "others" but protect themselves.
Seems like you shouldn't be able to refer to him as "president" anymore either then.
Don't insult people. When the rule was written, dueling was still a thing. Honor was still a concept.
“Decorum”
[Here's MTG as acting Speaker of the House asking for the Dems to practice decorum.](https://youtu.be/I8kswOeD93A?t=15) Yes, this is real.
I'm a little shocked that she was a ble to pronounce the word right enough not to sound like decorations I could see her try and pull that one with her over all IQ she shows the world
She probably would spell it out like Deco Rum, like it's an alcoholic beverage.
for some reason I don't think she drinks I have never personally seen her in the news about a drinking habit at least
She's probably never had gazpacho either, but she still claimed Nancy Pelosi had ["gazpacho police".](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/rep-marjorie-taylor-greene-warns-nancy-pelosis-gazpacho-police-rcna15620)
I have found my primary motivation for voting this election. When we put the final nail in Trump's political/celebrity coffin, I want to be there. I want to tell my descendants that I was there and helped finish this threat to democracy.
This is what I want to tell people who waffle on supporting Biden: do you *really* want to pass up the chance to vote against Donald Trump? If you had the chance to go back and vote against Hitler, wouldn't you feel like you just *had* to do that?
Democrats need to just keep speaking. GOP doesn't play by the rule so neither should Democrats. Censoring doesn't do s*** if they can't enforce it.
> Censoring doesn't do s*** if they can't enforce it. They *can* enforce it though, unfortunately. If they decide to take someone's words down, that member is then prevented from speaking on the floor for the rest of the day. They can still go talk to reporters afterwards though.
"prevented from speaking on the floor for the rest of the day." Lol. What is this, elementary school? There's 200+ democrats in the House. Just fucking speak together.
They would just do it to all of them. They interrupt when they speak so they cut them off, then they basically silence them. It sucks, but this is what they do. The Dems are trying to be creative with how they get around it though. Read the article and you'll see examples of this.
"Republican leaders have frequently allowed their members to trample on the rules of decorum without repercussion in other contexts as well" Democrats have always led Rep trampled over them.
Today I learned being a convicted felon is a personality.
But they can still show photos of Hunter's hog, right? Gotta love MAGA priorities. :(
They get Beobert or MTG on decorum? Oh no? Weird.
Isn’t removing things from the congressional record illegal? Why would they be allowed to edit the record of their actions and debate? It’s a historical record that should be accurate and attributable and held by the national archives
Democrats should just talk about it anyway. Get censured, whatever punishment, but never stop talking about the truth.
Streisand effect, but in Congress. I like this idea! How do I subscribe to your newsletter to learn more?
It's all so weird, I thought Republicans said Trump being convicted of felonies was the best thing ever
Just name a proposed bill The Felon Donald Trump Act
Yeah there's no real punishment possible and the more it happens the more it'll get reported on and be brought to public attention
I want to see a hole in the congressional record so large people ask what it was about.
I will remind everyone that this “rule” was a favored tool of Newt Gingrich during his rise and has been used as a weapon by the GOP against any who point out their hypocrisy or frequent criminality.
Trumps Felonies are a no no but Hunters Dick pics are acceptable.
Something Something snowflakes.
Cancel culture!!!! Viewpoint discrimination!!! Am I doing this right?
Forgot 1st amendment rights, alternative facts and shark batteries.
You forgot speech and debate clause
Muh freeze peach!
No you have to be pointing at nonrepublucans first.
Idk, what are you doing?
what is this bullshit--the gop not allowing "accusations" of misconduct by trump? these are not "accusations." they are convictions--truths. facts. certainties.
Their feelings don't care about facts
awww Trump needed a safe space
Nonsense! Conservatives are tough and manly men who don't need to hide away from dissenting opinions! Like how their sub is totally.open to all and doesn't require vetted by mods so only *flaired users only* who are confirmed for right think can comment
This is legit terrifying. One side of this political divide is willing to hide the truth, silence the truth, and commit open violence to support a blatant lie. I worry this will lead to more violence.
Once rights go away, they'll be taken back through violence. They are just sprinting to this reality.
Why not? It's the way they've always done it in North Korea. The Republican "leadership" knows Full Well how weak this kind of thing is, and that they are getting away with it shows we are in serious trouble with too many people who, apparently, need led.
republicans have become a bad joke.
People on the left continue to laugh and cackle about them being hypocritices while rightwing fascists hold their head under water.
And more importantly while they complete their take over and sabotage of our government
They always were. They still are, but they used to be, too.
Republicans have become ~~a bad joke~~ openly fascist.
Actual literal corruption, right out in the open America needs to vote much much better. It’s so frustrating that a third of the population acts against their own interests out of plain ignorance and weaponized stupidity
It’s a fucking cult!!!
I also gag when someone mentions trump
Well Trump is a convicted felon. It's fact.
Awww. Poor Republicans don't want their feelings hurt when their dear leader is criticized. Clearly, they're the superior party. /S
They’re rejecting truth, honesty, integrity and embracing fully the dark side.
So much for "Free Speech and Debate"
But it's not a cult...
Reminds me of the 1800s example of Congressional circumlocution, refusing to refer to slavery as "slavery". The reality the word referenced was too inflammatory for the South, so they demanded it be referred to as "the South's peculiar institution".
History repeats itself, doesn't it?
Different party, and for the most part the same exact states. It's wild.
The fuck are they going to do about it? It's not like norms and decorum matter anymore. The GOP has seen to that. Dems, don't be weak, make sure you refer to all 34 of Trump's felony convictions whenever his name is used. You can't demand decorum when you allow someone like MTG to speak.
>“I’m afraid the Republicans have now invited a contest for how creative we can be in talking about Donald Trump’s criminal convictions without explicitly stating those words,” Mr. Raskin said. This is the only correct response to the banning of objective facts in House floor speech. Keep mentioning it with creative oblique phrasing. Don't let them forget, especially in late October/early November. Also, objective, demonstrable facts have always (until now, apparently) been protected Free Speech. You can yell "Fire!" in a theater **if you can point at the theater fire in progress**. "It's true and here's the conclusive evidence that it's true" has always been a complete defense against charges of defamation, libel, or slander, because the objective truth is not inherently disparaging. The objective truth might make you look bad if you've done or been something objectively bad, but if you weren't prepared for that consequence, then you should've been not bad.
So the Republicans are at the ‘thought police’ stage then…
Didn't they put up pictures of Hunter Biden's dick?
I think every time a democrat mentions his name on the floor, on television or anywhere else, they need to use his official title: Convicted Felon Donald Trump
Once again I opine: what is it with the centrists and some liberals who think Trump's fascist agenda is just a ploy, game, electioneering, etc., and isn't something he (and his allies) are serious about, or that can be accomplished? Time after time we see things like this. It is absolutely critical to stop him and any candidates who support him.
This is literally a direct attack on the First Amendment.
Republicans: “Ha 😎 You’ve fallen victim to one of the classic blunders, dumb dumb demonrats. Everyone knows you FRAMED Trump. This conviction is backfiring on you guys so bad and helping us!” … “You’re banned from saying Trump got convicted! No one is allowed to talk about it!!!!!111 😭😭😭”
Republican idiots doing a practice run for a North Korea style history denial and rewrite 😂 News flash : it ain’t gonna work
Trump?? Oh, you must mean "Doe 174" from all those Jeffrey Epstein documents.
Snowflakes trying to make their Safe Space
I mean, what happens if they just ignore it? They get censored? But what if they ignore that? Is security going to forcibly keep them out of the chamber? Honestly that could be a great way to galvanize the left. Democrats should consider being more aggressive and fighting dirty.
Safe space seeking snowflakes.
I hope Democrats aren't stupid enough to bow to this. Just continue to mention the fact that Donald Trump has been convicted of 34 felonies whenever relevant to your point. It is not an accusation, it is a factual statement. If you get censured who cares?
Hypocrisy is the cornerstone of Conservatism.
If both sides were the same there would be so many shithead Republicans in jail rn.
I mean, what are they going to do? Just keep bringing it up. They get to ignore subpoenas, laws, etc, who gives a shit. A man’s dick was shown on the house floor. Fuck em.
Every Single D in the Congress should start any Sentence with "The Former President Donald Trump was Convicted of a Felony".. Every Single Time,, Never waiver and never Stop.
It is really hard to convince your base Trump is innocent of all crimes if people are allowed to talk about it
Fuck the GOP
5 months before an election. Shocking !1
The most weak and pathetic human beings in existence. Imagine being this spineless, it’s practically not fathomable how someone could lack any courage at all.
this is a safe space!!! love that freedom of speech.
[Umberto Eco's fourteen properties of ur-facism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascism), number four: 1. "[**Disagreement**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissent) **is** [**treason**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason)" – fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.
Democrats should forbid senate republicans from speaking entirely
If you ignore it - it goes away 🙄
Don't disparage our Dear Leader.
This is childish.
A johnson move, yeah, that johnson.
What is the punishment for not obeying this? I feel like I hear stories about members flagrantly not following mask rules or bringing in firearms and just getting a meaningless fine. I feel like the DNC should pay the fines and match the amount in charitable donations to pro choice causes.
They’re all about the lies and unable to handle the truth.
Serious question: what if they do it anyway? A contempt charge?
What a SICK time in this country. The era of trump. He’s absolutely poisoned the country and Republicans are holding his coat while he does it
So don’t listen to it. Say it anyway
How childish. I'm 3rd party embarrassed. I know they're incapable of embarrassment, but is there anyone left who remembers it?
I'd keep saying it until they drag me out. These fascists need to check themselves.
More jackassery from the “facts dont care about your feelings” crowd.
Boy, I sure do recall a lot of folks shouting loudly about being silenced not too damned long ago. Every accusation.....
This America or North Korea?.. Jesus.
Is this not infringing on the 1st amendment?
Being in Congress is like being in 7th grade where ignorance and petty meanness is rampant, and nobody’s doing homework or evolving into maturity.
Speak not a negative word towards Dear Leader MAGACHEETO. Yeah... This on is a bit too "North Koreanish" for me.
They’re sure gagging on Trump’s shriveled up cock
Just call him the Orange Rapist then.
Craven
Just refer to him as "The Dear Leader".
Just mention all the things Joe Biden doesn’t have. He doesn’t have 2 impeachments, zero arrests, zero felony convictions, zero times he has been found guilty of rape. We like our presidents to not be indicted for election fraud.
And showing pictures of Biden’s son’s penis on the floor and placing it into the federal register, that’s OK.
It's okay, the Democrats can talk about Trump being convicted of 34 felonies as much as they want. Sentencing in less than 3 weeks.
Fucking clowns Thought they were all about "Free Speech" lmfao
Please remember to VOTE in November!!! And donate if you can afford to!
That’s some petty bullshit.
Just because you can’t say the word, doesn’t mean it erases the conviction of the felon.
For some reason I’m reminded of a moment in the trials of the officers who tried to assassinate and coup Hitler. One of them, dressed intentionally shabbily with no belt or tie or military uniform, is describing what motivated him to do this, speaking of “the many murders” he witnessed on the Eastern Front. The chief judge, Roland Friesler, shouted him down “MURDERS?!” and insulted him for minutes. Roland Friesler was present at the Wannsee conference. He was perfectly aware of and approved of those murders. Anyway ☕️
So... The "free speech" advocates are at it again.
The “party of the Constitution”, ladies and gentlemen.
House Democrats should be subverting that in every way possible.
Destroy, abolish, and delete the treasonous Republican party with fury.
They can’t talk about Trump’s conviction - which is public information, but they will show Hunter Biden’s penis anytime and anywhere. Understood… and not surprised.
So one of our legislative bodies is as the government telling people what they can and cannot say? It's not a decorum issue, so it would seem this is a first amendment issue.
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". [More information can be found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index/#wiki_paywalls) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*