It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Phil Hare, remember him? Intimidates Veterans Group!

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Remember Phil Hare, you know, the guy that said and I quote "I do not worry about the Constitution on this, to be honest."

Now does not EVERY person holding office in the US of A, swear to uphold and defend the Constitution. To me, with THAT statement, committed treason and broke the oath of office. Hell, he straight out stated that he can break the law any time he feels like it.

Now he is attacking a Veterans Group trying to remove him from office.



Here are a couple of articles on the situation.

First off, Phil Hare response to why he filed the complait-
Decatur Tribune-HARE ISSUES STATEMENT ON FEC COMPLAINT AGAINST VETERANS

Sorry about the all caps-their headline.

A snippet-

Hare's response to the FEC charges he brought against the veterans group.



“These are serious charges. I urge the FEC to quickly and judiciously investigate any illegal coordination between my opponent and Veterans for the Constitution. I call on Mr. Schilling to emerge from the shadows and demonstrate the courage to challenge me directly. Hiding behind front groups like this speaks volumes about what type of leader he’d be in Congress.”


See, this is the attitude that the freaks in Government have, that if you campaign against them, they will file a complaint against you. Like you or I do not have a right to throw their sorry asses out of government. Total attack of the person instead of the message. I guess WE the PEOPLE cannot help our candidates win elections. I guess we are supposed to shut up and take it.

This was in response to Shilling's statement of the Hare FEC complaint against the group.

Here is another article-
Decatur Tribune-SCHILLING ISSUES NEWS RELEASE ON HARE'S 'INTIMIDATION' OF VETERANS' GROUP

Sorry again, their headline.

Here are the statements by Shilling of the attacks on the veterans group, by Phil Hare.

A snippet-


"It's unfortunate that these types of political games have dominated the debate instead of the real issues that affect the 17th District," said Schilling. "With the unemployment rate having doubled, the national debt having grown by over $5 trillion and more taxes being pushed on to the middle class all since Rep. Hare was first elected, it's no wonder that the Hare campaign would have one of their cronies pull this type of stunt. Rep. Hare can't focus on the issues that are affecting us because if he does, he loses. Simple as that. This is a baseless claim and a dirty political stunt."


Another-


"On a day when President Obama is honoring our troops for a job well done in Iraq, Rep. Hare has instead decided to attack our veterans and silence their freedom of speech. These are men that have fought and bled for our first amendment rights. He should be ashamed of himself. This is one of the reasons why people truly believe that Rep. Hare doesn't worry about the Constitution."


The veterans group web site-Vets for the Constitution

Bobby Shilling's web site-Bobby Schilling

I will not link a site for Phil Hare, he is a traitor and a fool.

Other news regarding this issue.

Dems target vets group that is supporting Schilling

And for good measure, Phil Hare's thoughts on the Constitution-




Whaaatt about the children?



They always use that spiel, what about the children, as they steal your money and your ability to pay for your children's health care.

They want us ALL on the dole so they can what? Here is what they want-




What are we going to do to help all those people dying out there? These people just piss me off.

To control the people, period. To control your health, to control your life, to control your property, to control your labor. That is what they want.

Now shut up and sit down.

eidt for a couple errors




[edit on 1-9-2010 by saltheart foamfollower]




posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Boy, I thought I did a little better on this one. Did some extra legwork and everything.

Oh well, there is no chance in hell Hare will be re elected anyway.

He sunk himself with that Constitution statement.

I guess folks do not like it when a congressman straight out admits to treason, breaking the oath of office and breaking the law.

They just cannot understand how us pissants believe they should follow the same LAWS as we do.

Oh well, I can smell November from here.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 




To me, with THAT statement, committed treason and broke the oath of office. Hell, he straight out stated that he can break the law any time he feels like it.

OK, to start off with, if you are going to try to defend the Constitution from people running it down, you should start by understanding what the Constitution says.

The Constitution defines Treason. It is the only crime defined in the Constitution, and for good reason. It is the ultimate crime that can be committed against 'the People'. Before independence the Crown had stretched the application of treason so far as to make it almost meaningless. If drawing a charicature of the King is treasonous, then how is treason more heinous than stealing a loaf of bread?

Just so you know: violating an oath of office is not part of the definition of treason in the US Constitution. Knowingly or unknowingly violating a provision of the Constitution is not a part of that defintion. I encourage you to look it up.

Hare may be making an incendiary comment, or merely saying his complaint doesn't rest on the Constitution, he is not committing treason. Calling everyone a traitor and actions you don't agree with treason all the time does nothing but to demote the severity of the act of treason to meaninglessness.

By the way, your video about 'Hare's views on the Constitution' doesn't bear out your interpretation of the incident. Yes, he did make the remark, but it was clearly made in the context of it wasn't relevant to the point he was trying to make. The questioner jumped on the phrase and hijacked discussion even yelling in glee 'jackpot' because he got what he came for. Andrew Brietbart would be proud, but you should be embarassed by promoting it.

EDIT: (oh wait! Maybe it was one of Briebart's character assassinations!)

As to the spat between Hare and Schilling about the Vets involvement? Eh, just standard political point scoring during the election cycle. Does election law allow coordination between political parties and uncontrolled PAC groups? Did that occur? I'm not close enough to know or care. If Schilling and the Vets did nothing wrong, then the FEC will find their favor, that's what they are there for.

And about your repetition of Dingell's remark, it is tiresome, but you know people do make slips of the tongue sometimes. He has admitted he 'goofed' and apologized. He should have been more clear, fine. That doesn't make him the anti-Christ.

You know words have many meanings and collective terms can be applied at many levels. The word 'people' can apply to all kinds of groupings, from 'We the People', to 'my people - my family', to 'those people' or to 'us people', or to 'some people'. The subcommittees writing the legislation are 'people' too. The agencies that are going to administer the legislation are 'people' too. The Insurance Companies that are going to provide the insurance are people too. These last two groups are especially the ones that need to be 'controlled'.

Just because you support one candidate over the other doesn't mean you can't maintain some perspective.



[edit on 1/9/2010 by rnaa]

[edit on 1/9/2010 by rnaa]



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


Treason as defined in the Constitution. Hmmmm.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Tell me, if one attempts to destroy the country by going DIRECTLY against the very laws that establish the government, would that not be considered treasonous.

Define war-is war only taking up arms. I think that would be a big fat NO. There are many aspects of war is there not. Do you think infiltrating a government and going directly against the VERY meaning and structure of said government, IMO, is treasonous.

To defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC.

Hey, he did not just say that he did not know if it was not against the Constitution, he said he did NOT CARE if it was. Specifically he stated again for your ears-"I do not worry about the Constitution on this, to be honest."

He flat out said he does not worry about the Constitution, meaning he could CARE LESS what it says.

Sorry, as an elected official, one swears to uphold ALL LAWS of the the US of A, especially the Constitution.

You can blather on and on about how just because someone may accidentally go against the Constitution, but YOUR representatives do not care if they go against the LAW. It comes out of their mouths left and right.

Patriot Act?

Or how bout this old video of ol Bama defecating on the Constitution.



Yeah, slip of the tounge here to I suppose too huh?


And by the way, who is Breibart? Never heard of him. Tried to google it and nothing came back. Can you give me an idea on who it is?

Yep, just like Bush backers, obfuscating and blathering on and on and on.

Yep, your defense for all of this is what again, you bloviated so much, I did not catch your excuse for the OP.

What again is the excuse for the Hare attacking a veterans group for backing his opponent.

Oh yeah, it was because that is politics. NO, not so much, that is sleaze plain and simple.

Dang it, these folks just do not realize that this is the age of video, where there lies and treasonous acts are kept for replay.

Yeah, I suppose this video is just some mispeak also-




Yeah, we have mentally disfunctional representation, we have a representative attacking a veterans group because they support his opponent, a president saying that we can write a NEW format for throwing people in prison indefinitely for possible future crime and the bloviates just spew their ignorance. Thanks for the comment.

Maybe next time, if you are going to attempt to dispute my contention of the Constitutional treason, maybe you should use the Constitution instead of hyperbole.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Tell me, if one attempts to destroy the country by going DIRECTLY against the very laws that establish the government, would that not be considered treasonous.


The short answer is no. Not if we take the meaning of treason from the constitution itself.

You're not allowed to cry treason at every action the government takes that you don't agree with.


Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.


You would have to first prove that an individual is actually levying war...which is, generally, defined as: "a certain state of organized violent conflict that is engaged in between two or more separate social entities."

Lawmakers, at the local or federal level, can pass any law they want. It may be unconstitutional (which is decided by a federal judge, not you), but will likely never be treasonous unless it is explicitly declaring a state of war between them and the federal government.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Phil Hare needs to be behind bars for perjury.

Willful violation of an oath of office constitutes perjury.

He should be tried and convicted.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 12:12 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


Yeah, I guess destroying a nation is not treasonous.

I give up.

What exactly is a fifth column movement?

Oh well, I guess nowadays they call them liberal progressives, or communists.

To willfully and knowingly commit actions that brings the US into certain demise, IMO, would definitely be called treasonous.

But I guess progressives think, oh I am sorry, we thought we were helping.

Yeah right. We all know the Saul Alinsky model.

Heck, if you think this is not true, that all of this is being done on purpose. Explain this to me.

UCLA Professor calls for Mexican Revolution in the US.

San Diego Professor helping Mexicans to cross border using GPS phones paid for by US tax dollars.

We have people HERE in the US calling for the destruction and the dissolution of the US government so they can set up their socialist/communist nightmare.

Yeah, do not say anything, everything is fine. Just drink your fluoridated and lithium drugged tap water. Nothing to see here.

Right. Whatever.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Yeah, I guess destroying a nation is not treasonous.


That's your opinion of what's going on, not mine.


I give up.


Honestly...don't.


What exactly is a fifth column movement?


"A fifth column is a group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group such as a nation from within, to help an external enemy."

Who's the external enemy?


Oh well, I guess nowadays they call them liberal progressives, or communists.


That could be internal...there are American communists.


To willfully and knowingly commit actions that brings the US into certain demise, IMO, would definitely be called treasonous.


At least you've clarified that it's your opinion. In my opinion, passing a health care law is not bringing us to certain demise.


But I guess progressives think, oh I am sorry, we thought we were helping.


Well, we are...as we've been for the past century.


Yeah right. We all know the Saul Alinsky model.


Obscure reference?


Heck, if you think this is not true, that all of this is being done on purpose. Explain this to me.

UCLA Professor calls for Mexican Revolution in the US.


San Diego high school teacher calls for La Raza revolution in the US. No different than some TPM folks calling for revolution...the tree of liberty and all that nonsense. The more I learn of post-revolution Jefferson the more I dislike him.


San Diego Professor helping Mexicans to cross border using GPS phones paid for by US tax dollars.


Eh...helping dying illegals find water in the desert with an iphone app that was funded by a state college? I don't necessarilly have a problem with it, I don't like to see or hear about people dying slow, painful deaths.


We have people HERE in the US calling for the destruction and the dissolution of the US government so they can set up their socialist/communist nightmare.


"We have people HERE in the US calling for the destruction and the dissolution of the US government so they can set up their Christian/fascist nightmare."


Yeah, do not say anything, everything is fine. Just drink your fluoridated and lithium drugged tap water. Nothing to see here.

Right. Whatever.


I drink bottled water like a good, yuppie, liberal...but even that's just tap-water!



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


Who is the external, could that be globalists and agencies like the IMF?


Sorry, I thought that the professor part was wrong. Dang google, I should have just gone by memory. High School history teacher at the UCLA campus, calls for the overthrow of the government to institute a new government. Hmmm, yes others discuss it, this guy calls for it.




top topics



 
5

log in

join