Liberal Forum

*Beekeeper » Today, 4:12 pm » wrote: ↑

Today, 4:12 pm

A LAWSUIT can make all the **** IDIOTIC CLAIMS it wants. The Speech and Debate clause HAS BEEN RULED AS ABSOLUTE by the SCOTUS, DICKSUCKER!!

AND as a FYI, her SPEECH was in regard to LEGISLATION being considered and her FLOOR SPEECH is protected, SUKM!! 

Article I, Section 6, Clause 1:
 The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

 The Supreme Court has described the Speech or Debate Clause as a provision that cannot be interpreted literally,1 but instead must be construed broadly in order to effectuate the Clause’s vital role in the constitutional separation of powers.2 Deceptively simple3 phrases—such as shall not be questioned, Speech or Debate, and even Senators and Representatives—have therefore been accorded meanings that extend well beyond their literal constructions.4 Arguably, this purpose-driven interpretive approach has given rise to some ambiguity in the precise scope of the protections afforded by the Clause. Despite uncertainty at the margins, it is well established that the Clause serves to secure the independence of the federal legislature by providing Members of Congress and their aides with immunity from criminal prosecutions or civil suits that stem from acts taken within the legislative sphere.5 As succinctly described by the Court, the Clause’s immunity from liability applies even though their conduct, if performed in other than legislative contexts, would in itself be unconstitutional or otherwise contrary to criminal or civil statutes.6 This general immunity principle forms the core of the protections afforded by the Clause.

Blackvegetable » 14 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

14 minutes ago

Without any question,; the dumbest **** alive....not named @*HooooeyVagina

Blackvegetable » 11 Feb 2025, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2025, 10:44 am

Democrats were 'completely unhinged' during Pete Hegseth's confirmation hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace says

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6367119837112

Mace Takes to House Floor With Charges of Rape and Sexual Predation
The South Carolina Republican used her floor privileges to lodge shocking accusations against her former fiancé and three other men.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/10/us/p ... roid-share
In a stunningly graphic speech on the House floor that had little precedent, Ms. Mace said the men, whom she named and displayed photographs of on a placard where lawmakers more typically display charts and graphs on policy issues, were involved in the “premeditated, calculated exploitation of innocent women and girls in my district.”

 “You’ve booked yourself a one-way ticket to hell,” she said, referring to the men directly at one point in a speech that lasted close to an hour. “It is nonstop. There are no connections. So I and all of your victims can watch you rot into eternity.”

 On the floor of the House, Ms. Mace was protected by the speech and debate clause, even as she accused the men of repeatedly assaulting incapacitated women and filming it. The clause provides lawmakers immunity from criminal prosecutions or civil suits, such as for slander, when they are acting “within the legislative sphere.” Ms. Mace offered no evidence to support the accusations, although she said she had plenty of such material.

She "fell victim" to this......repeatedly?

I suspect that Nance may be trying to get ahead of something...

https://youtu.be/6WTdTwcmxyo?si=d2OWLNCrwk9bRAZS