Armed Militias Pledge to Fight for Fugitive Oregon GOP Lawmakers ‘At Any Cost’

[JAKIII]

Some will view them as villains, I view them as martyrs.

Where I work, job abandonment will get you terminated...

[Palerider]

The democrats have used this tactic in several states. I think it’s a shitty way to behave but since they’ve dropped the gloves, I’m fine if the R’s do.

[Pilot321]

Where I work, job abandonment will get you terminated...

Why didn't the Democrats get terminated the several times they've pulled this stunt? Why can they do it, and the Republicans can't? I'm not saying I agree with the tactic at all, but like the NUCLEAR OPTION they sanctioned this behavior first.

[JAKIII]

Why didn't the Democrats get terminated the several times they've pulled this stunt? Why can they do it, and the Republicans can't? I'm not saying I agree with the tactic at all, but like the NUCLEAR OPTION they sanctioned this behavior first.

This thread outlived it’s usefulness pages ago... we’re all just going in circles at this point and repeating ourselves.

[Mosinshooter762]

Like voting, prosecutorial discretion, jury nullification, judicial review, or other mechanisms that place a check and balance on government, I don’t think taking steps to prevent a legislative quorum should be taken lightly. However, lets say you and a group of like minded legislators could prevent the passage of a blatantly unconstitutional bill, such as the mass confiscation of standard capacity magazines and semi-auto firearms with no provision for compensation. In such a case, you can call me lazy, incompetent, a drone on the tax payers, or any nasty words you can think of, but I am not participating in any way in ramming through a blatantly unconstitutional bill that can be stopped in a legal or quasi-legal way. Reasonable tax payers are not paying me to assist in blatantly violating their rights. I would be doing my job in seeing that blatantly unconstitutional laws are not passed.

[sota]

Does anyone have the statute for Oregon that gives the govn'r power to send the state police to round up wayward representatives? I'd like to see/read that, please.

[PAMedic=F|A=]

A less biased report.

(Reuters) - Oregon’s State Capitol building was shut down on Saturday as a safety precaution, police said, in the wake of a bitter partisan divide that had Republican lawmakers walked out to block a vote on a bill to reduce climate change-causing gases.


Democratic Governor Kate Brown on Thursday dispatched state police to round up the absent 11 Senate Republicans, at least two of whom are needed to form a required quorum for conducting business in the 30-member chamber controlled by Democrats.

Some right-wing militia groups have expressed support for the absent Republican lawmakers, and opponents of the bill to cut greenhouse gas emissions below 45 percent of the state’s 1990 levels by 2035 staged a small rally on Saturday at the Capitol building in Salem.

“We have been monitoring information throughout the day that indicates the safety of legislators, staff and citizen visitors could be compromised if certain threatened behaviors were realized,” said Oregon State Police spokesman Captain Timothy Fox said by email.

Fox declined to elaborate on the threats, other than to say: “We are monitoring all sources of information and intelligence.”

The decision to close the building came after Senate President Peter Courtney canceled a floor session he had previously set for Saturday because of risks posed by the possible presence of militia groups, his spokeswoman, Carol Currie said by phone.

The Republican walkout has halted work on other legislation as well, she said.

Although no Republican senators have been apprehended so far, Fox said police have been in contact with several of them and have been assisted by “out of state resources.” He declined to elaborate.

In a “call to action” on Thursday, a militia group known as Oregon Three Percent said it would provide security, transport and refuge for the absent Republican senators.

“We will stand together with unwavering resolve, doing whatever it takes to keep these senators safe,” the group said on its Facebook page.

Republicans contend the legislation, which would cap the state’s total amount of greenhouse gases and force utilities and other companies to buy emission allowances, would make fossil fuel prices too high. They have instead sought to allow the proposal to be placed before voters on a ballot.

One of the missing Republicans, state Senator Brian Boquist, told Portland television station KGW on Wednesday that if state police come for him, they should “send bachelors and come heavily armed.”



Reporting by Peter Szekely in New York, editing

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...k-gop-walkout/

[PAMedic=F|A=]

People always asking "is it time".

Looks like for Oregon it is time.

[staylo]

Like voting, prosecutorial discretion, jury nullification, judicial review, or other mechanisms that place a check and balance on government, I don’t think taking steps to prevent a legislative quorum should be taken lightly. However, lets say you and a group of like minded legislators could prevent the passage of a blatantly unconstitutional bill, such as the mass confiscation of standard capacity magazines and semi-auto firearms with no provision for compensation. In such a case, you can call me lazy, incompetent, a drone on the tax payers, or any nasty words you can think of, but I am not participating in any way in ramming through a blatantly unconstitutional bill that can be stopped in a legal or quasi-legal way. Reasonable tax payers are not paying me to assist in blatantly violating their rights. I would be doing my job in seeing that blatantly unconstitutional laws are not passed.

If they were constitutional issues in question then I would agree. That would be the one instance where I think it would be an ethical move to prevent a quorum to prevent a vote from passing on an unconstitutional question. HOWEVER, this isn’t that. This is merely Republicans ducking out on a bill they don’t like, just like the Democrats ducked out on the union busting bill that they didn’t like in Wisconsin. It’s stuff like this that is causing our framework of government to deteriorate, and that’s why we’re seeing activist judges “legislating” from the bench, attempts at end runs around the electoral college, etc. I agree that currently one side of the aisle is blatantly breaking the rules and refusing to abide by our governmental framework, and then demanding that our side abide by it when it suits them, but if both sides throw aside the constitutional framework for expediency then there will be no framework and it will be a bald majority rule. That’s exactly what the founders tried to prevent when they created our system. If no one is going to stand up for the rule of law and our constitutionally created system of government, then it’s going to die and what will be left will be something that we will not like, and that we may not prevail against.

[icp4life162005]

If they were constitutional issues in question then I would agree. That would be the one instance where I think it would be an ethical move to prevent a quorum to prevent a vote from passing on an unconstitutional question. HOWEVER, this isn’t that. This is merely Republicans ducking out on a bill they don’t like, just like the Democrats ducked out on the union busting bill that they didn’t like in Wisconsin. It’s stuff like this that is causing our framework of government to deteriorate, and that’s why we’re seeing activist judges “legislating” from the bench, attempts at end runs around the electoral college, etc. I agree that currently one side of the aisle is blatantly breaking the rules and refusing to abide by our governmental framework, and then demanding that our side abide by it when it suits them, but if both sides throw aside the constitutional framework for expediency then there will be no framework and it will be a bald majority rule. That’s exactly what the founders tried to prevent when they created our system. If no one is going to stand up for the rule of law and our constitutionally created system of government, then it’s going to die and what will be left will be something that we will not like, and that we may not prevail against.

What are you smoking?

NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!

That's exactly what this is all about. Something our founding fathers took up the fight on much quicker then our society of cucks today.