Lee then pounced and demanded that Gaines’ remarks be struck for “engaging in personalities” rather than the substance of the debate:“Inclusion cannot be prioritized over safety and fairness. And ranking member Lee, if my testimony makes me ‘transphobic,’ then I believe your opening monologue makes you a misogynist.”
As Jonathan Turley details, what followed was hurried consultation and presumably a few explanations for Lee on why witnesses are allowed to respond to such attacks by a member.“I move to have the gentlewoman’s words taken down.”
Shotgun filled with lead shot.
I saw that exchange. Gaines don’t **** around.We need more pushback like this.
Gaines proceeded to slam Lee stating in a bold retort:
Lee then pounced and demanded that Gaines’ remarks be struck for “engaging in personalities” rather than the substance of the debate:
As Jonathan Turley details, what followed was hurried consultation and presumably a few explanations for Lee on why witnesses are allowed to respond to such attacks by a member.
Rule XVII, clause 1(b) prohibits Members from engaging in “personalities.” That is a rule cited to the Speaker or chair to bar personal attacks from other members that are deemed unparliamentary. There is no definition of what words are considered to be violative of the rule.
However, Lee was attempting to use this against a witness who was defending herself against her own personal attack. It is a dangerous extension. Members of Congress generally are protected under the “speech or debate” clause in Article I, Section 6, of the Constitution. The privilege protects legislative proceedings and generally does not apply to news releases, speeches and other public comments. This was the holding in Hutchinson v. Proxmire, when Sen. Proxmire was found to be acting outside of the clause in making media comments regarding his golden fleece award.
Members often knowingly make defamatory comments in congressional debates, but then decline to repeat those same words in public to avoid any legal accountability. I faced that tactic in representing Dr. Eric Foretich in the Elizabeth Morgan controversy. Members would say false and defamatory claims about my client on the floor, but would carefully avoid repeating those claims in interviews. My challenge to the Elizabeth Morgan Act took years before it was struck down as an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder. However, we could not bring a defamation action due to members using the Speech and Debate Clause as a shield.
That would create a nightmarish combination if members are protected from actions in defaming witnesses but then can censor them when they defend themselves.
The fact that Lee’s immediate response was to censor a person who she had just attacked is telling.
After labeling Gaines a hateful bigot, Lee did not believe that she should be allowed to denounce Lee’s own comments as an attack on women.
It shows the slippery slope of censorship.
Democrats have embraced an anti-free speech agenda to silence opposing viewpoints. That desire becomes insatiable even as citizens seek to rebut personal attacks from members in a congressional hearing.
Riley Gaines Wrecks "Misogynist" 'Squad' Member After Being Called 'Hateful, Transphobic' | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zerowww.zerohedge.com
I saw that exchange. Gaines don’t **** around.
I also think we need to cal them out on their racism more.Time to start dishing it back.
Most of their 'arguments' can be thrown right back at them.
"you're offending me"..
okay. And you're offending me.
Have a fellow employee going to IUPUI or whatever the **** it's called, with the same requirement.
A health sciences program offered at The Ohio State University requires those who sign up for the course to take part in an array of discussions and assignments about gender and race, including one that asks students to address their privileges if they are White, heterosexual or able-bodied.
Yep,we live in clown world.
Father SUES Woke School For MILLIONS After They REFUSE To Fly Straight Flag With Pride Flag!
As an alumnus, I would immediately cut them off from any future donations, except they already ****** me off years ago and never get anything from me. Now they've given me another reason.
A health sciences program offered at The Ohio State University requires those who sign up for the course to take part in an array of discussions and assignments about gender and race, including one that asks students to address their privileges if they are White, heterosexual or able-bodied.
Yep,we live in clown world.
Amazon product ASIN B0B35RFR52Wait... We have a straight flag?
I mean, I go to all the straight meetings. I read the straight newsletters. How was I NOT made aware of this?
You snoozeWait... We have a straight flag?
I mean, I go to all the straight meetings. I read the straight newsletters. How was I NOT made aware of this?