Pelosi Declared Martial Law last night!, page 1

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 13 times

Topic started on 28-9-2008 @ 03:01 PM by Skipper1975

Watch this CSPAN clip from last night.

At about 20:50 Rep.Burgess confirms the speaker declared martial law last night!

www.c-spanarchives.org...

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 03:17 PM by TrueAmerican

reply to post by Skipper1975

Holy crap!! You're right!

BUT BUT BUT.

I went back and listened to Burgess's entire dissertation. He is bitching like hell that the Reps have been left out, and actually thrown out, from meetings regarding this bailout bill, and makes the great point that "let's put it up on the internet at least for 24 hours and let the people see what we have done in the darkness" or something close to that. And he refers to "Thomas," no doubt meaning thomas.gov, the site that has all of congress's legislation on it.

So I'm not sure if he meant it in a literal sense, rather than a proverbial sense. I think it is the latter, on first impression.

But needless to say, this should send a few people to dig up what exactly Pelosi said last night, and in what context. Because if we were truly as a country already under martial law, then WTF were they doing there legislating as usual, and why wouldn't we have heard of this announced on emergency radio or the EBS TV system?

[edit on 28-9-2008 by TrueAmerican]

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 03:19 PM by Romantic Rights

I think Pelosi might have placed the House under an emergency protocol which I've seen referred to as martial law for Congress.

An example of what I mean is from this 2007 HuffPo article by David Roberts:

Pelosi has also imposed the Congressional equivalent of martial law, invoking emergency rules procedures that will allow the bill to go to Rules Committee, get a rule, and bring the bill to the floor all on the same day. That means that tonight will be a battle royal.

I believe that right now, in 2008, Pelosi's initiated the same protocol in response to passing a bailout plan.

[edit on 9/28/2008 by Romantic Rights]

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 03:22 PM by Skipper1975

reply to post by Romantic Rights

yeah someone brought that up on GLP,but still we should find out for sure what the deal is.....

interesting times these are...

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 03:25 PM by dodgygeeza

Wow

"Mrs speaker i understand we are under marshal law as declared last night"

Might have been a slip of the tongue. Poor choice of words though.

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 03:42 PM by James Random

I never saw this as step 1:

Put Congress under marshall law - Bush/Paulson do whatever they want and any objection is met with 'shut the *snip* up, there's a new sherrif in town now [insert evil laugh]'. Congress gets the gag order.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 9/28/2008 by maria_stardust]

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 03:59 PM by philjwolf

reply to post by Skipper1975

marshall law in congress.. yeah.. happens all the time.. Besides.. the speaker of the house .. can not declare any other type. Borrrrrrringggg...

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 04:09 PM by Skipper1975

We Are Under Martial Law ! ? "UPDATE"
cspanjunkie.org...
September 28, 2008 C-SPAN

UPDATE:
"There has apparently been some process having been activated in Congress called martial law, not applying to the citizenry. Let's be careful and try and get a clear picture of what is going on. I'm thinking this could be every bit as serious as the initial bulletins led us to believe it was, however.

If I'm getting an accurate read no this, its basically that the Congress is not allowed to know what is in the bill they are having to vote on but are required to vote on it anyway

uk.youtube.com...

still sounds like a BS move in my opinion....

basically the feds are trying to force this bill.

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 06:27 PM by justme2

Wow..
Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse.
They are pushing this through, ignoring any dissent from the citizenry or opposition representatives.

This reminds of an era from the last century.......er........hmmm

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 06:45 PM by clay2 baraka

Here is a fantastic explanation of the "Martial Law" procedure:
(note the following refers to a 1996 bill)

Under the martial law procedure, longstanding House rules that require at least one day between the unveiling of significant legislation and the House floor vote on that legislation — so that Members can learn what they are being asked to vote on — are swept away. Instead, under “martial law,” the Leadership can file legislation with tens or hundreds of pages of fine print and move immediately to debate and votes on it, before Members of Congress, the media, or the public have an opportunity to understand fully what provisions have been altered or inserted into the legislation behind closed doors. This is the procedure that the Leadership intends to use to muscle through important bills in the next two days.

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

I hope this helps to shed more light on the issue. . .

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 06:56 PM by Techsnow

Yeah its martial law in congress. But when did this come about, who created it? TBH its the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of. They should be given the time they need to review what they are voting for! Who the hell is enforcing this anyway? Martial law has to do with military, the whole idea of it taking place in congress is beyond reasoning, even though I know there is no one really enforcing it.

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 07:14 PM by clay2 baraka

reply to post by Techsnow

If I remember correctly. It was an obscure parliamentary maneuver that was resurrected in the last few years by the house leadership under Tom Delay to push through controversial legislation overnight without review.

I remember there being quite an uproar when the tactic first started being utilized.

[edit on 28-9-2008 by clay2 baraka]

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 07:22 PM by Mirthful Me

Just a little PSA here...

In strict dictionary terms, martial law is the suspension of civil authority and the imposition of military authority. When we say a region or country is "under martial law," we mean to say that the military is in control of the area, that it acts as the police, as the courts, as the legislature. The degree of control might vary - a nation may have a civilian legislature but have the courts administered by the military. Or the legislature and courts may operate under civilian control with a military ruler. In each case, martial law is in effect, even if it is not called "martial law."

www.usconstitution.net...

An excellent read on what martial law is, and when it has been invoked (in it's true sense).

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 07:54 PM by Mirthful Me

Another PSA...

Here is a more in depth explanation of Congressional Martial Law when applied to the House of Representatives:

The House leadership is using a parliamentary gambit to evade a longstanding House rule that is supposed to ensure that this kind of obfuscation does not occur. That House rule (Rule XIII(6)(a)) provides that a resolution (called a rule) reported by the Rules Committee cannot be considered by the House on the same legislative day that the rule is reported (except by a two-thirds vote of the House). This is supposed to ensure that Members of the House and the public have at least one day to examine and analyze what is in legislation before they have to debate and vote on it.

To maneuver around this House rule and rush the three proposals discussed above to a vote before they have been fully examined, the Rules Committee reported a rule late Thursday afternoon (H.Res. 958) that would waive the application of Rule XIII(6)(a). Instead, it would allow the Rules Committee to wait until the last minute and not to report the rules governing the consideration of these bills or to release the text of the bills themselves until immediately before debate and votes on the bills, and on the rules governing their consideration, commences.

This extraordinary procedure is known as a “martial law” rule because it suspends the normal procedures and safeguards and allows the House Leadership to operate in a more authoritarian fashion. It enables the Leadership to seek to ram a bill or conference report through before the Members have the opportunity to fully understand what they are voting on.

www.commondreams.org...

Here is the House Committee on Rules schedule:

Saturday, September 27, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. in H-313 the Capitol

H.Res. __ - Waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII with respect to the consideration of certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules
-Emergency Meeting

www.rules.house.gov...

I would prefer that they provided a resolution number (for posterity), but that is the genesis of this procedural.

Hope that further clarifies this issue.

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 08:21 PM by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Hope that further clarifies this issue.

Yeah it clarifies the issue, so thanks for that.

But what it doesn't do is lessen the gravity of what just took place. And why. I mean that is history making legislation that they are trying to push through so fast not many get a chance to read it, Patriot Act style. It's underhanded as hell. Especially for something so important the taxpayers will have to pay for.

In the latest revision of the bill which looks likely to pass, even in such a hurry, Wall St. just walked away with over $200 Billion, with more in the kitty for them if they need it. Like the public is supposed to be happy with that or something? And like US government takeover of industry has any difference to what Chavez has done in Venezuela?

There should be no bailout at all, the firms should be allowed to fail, and the market should be allowed to correct its overly inflated self, just like Ron Paul said. Under that scenario we hurt for one year, under theirs we, and all our next generations hurt for infinity. Not good.

I heard a radio interview with a local mortgage banker just yesterday, who was commenting on the fact that their business was very stable due to smart investing, and they would be affected very little from the crash. In fact she was also saying that "crash" is what they deserve for avoiding oversight in an attempt to reach less credit worthy markets. She said their business knows of all those investment types, but expressly stays away from them.

Those are the kind of businesses that should be rewarded with longevity and loyal customers, not broke customers paying off the opportunists in a money grab.

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 08:42 PM by Mirthful Me

reply to post by TrueAmerican

Don't even get me started... As someone who is involved in a small business the acrobatics that is being performed by our "representatives" is nothing less than appalling. To "service" the financial sector as has been the mantra can only mean one of two things, either there is some illict payoff or there is the mother of all naked photo collections in the hands of these banks and equities firms.

One has to wonder how many bad mortgages a compromising picture of Nancy Pelosi is worth.

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 08:47 PM by pluckynoonez

YouTube Link

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 09:01 PM by Anonymous ATS

reply posted on 28-9-2008 @ 09:17 PM by Rockpuck

reply to post by pluckynoonez

...Why the hell isn't HE the Republican Presidential Candidate???

Anyone notice the Presidential candidates always seem to have an IQ hovering around that of a mentally challenged rodent?

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^