Arizona House votes to expel state Rep. Liz Harris

The final vote on Wednesday was 46 to 13.

On April 11, the House Ethics Committee issued a report saying Harris broke a rule during an election presentation.

House Democrats filed an ethics complaint following a presentation from a Scottsdale insurance agent in February, saying Harris invited Jacqueline Breger to speak, where she made serious and unfounded allegations accusing elected officials, judges and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints of taking bribes and laundering money for the Sinaloa Cartel.

Source

It must be expulsion season. The one on the chopping block today is Arizona State Representative Liz Harris (R) who got elected for being an election denier.

She recently gained some notoriety when she invited Jacqueline Breger to speak in front of the House about her unfounded claims that many in the government, including the governor and Speaker of the House, as well as the Mormon Church were bought and paid for by the Sinaloa Cartel. I'm sure we all remember the few threads that were made about it.

Following that presentation, Harris was referred to the House Ethics Committee. The committee determined that Harris' actions had damaged the "institutional integrity of the house," and recommended she should be expelled.

The exclusion vote concluded about an hour ago and the Republican majority House voted to expel her with a vote of 46-13.

It is now up to the Republican Precinct Committee of her district to recommend three replacements to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. The BoS will then select her replacement who will carry out the remainder of her term.

Just like in Tennessee, I don't like the idea that politicians can overrule the decision of the voters based on what is essentially a violation of a procedural rule. If a Representative does something egregious enough that their district wants them gone, then there should be options in place for a recall. Otherwise, censure them, fine them, and move on.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I just get a chuckle every time I see the sentence "Democrats file ethics complaint" because I always imagine that they're pissed because someone has any.

AAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

a reply to: DBCowboy

So you're just going to ignore that the Republican-led ethics committee recommended her for expulsion and the majority of the Republican-led House agreed with that recommendation?

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: DBCowboy

So you're just going to ignore that the Republican-led ethics committee recommended her for expulsion and the majority of the Republican-led House agreed with that recommendation?

Nah.

Republican politicians are spineless liars for the most part.

If democrats didn't suck so much, republicans would be the top assholes.

a reply to: Xcalibur254
I don't like the idea that politicians can overrule the decision of the voters based on what is essentially a violation of a procedural rule. If a Representative does something egregious enough that their district wants them gone, then there should be options in place for a recall. Otherwise, censure them, fine them, and move on.

Yes I see it really has you broken up.

That's why it was a mere footnote to the thread.

Your intentions are apparent...

Nothing she did could POSSIBLY do damage to the integrity of the House like ousting legislators who simply network with and/or support someone who says something controversial.

Soon it’s gonna be like Lepa Redic (sp?) all over again and people who go around saying or writing the wrong thing, even when true, will be strung up on the spot before their dangerous challenging rhetoric to the accepted official story has a chance to be heard.

Censorship, plain and simple. And everything this government was created to be a safe haven for, now destroyed while everyone sits idly by.

So, a guest speaks and the one who invited her is held accountable for what she said?

That's a little different than the insurrection at the Tennessee capital and those who led it. They should all be sitting in Gitmo with the J6 insurrectionists, waiting months for trial.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

We can't afford to be naive about the 4 ton gorilla in the room.

There are drug and crime policies that are not conducive with a flourishing economy and a stable society. (This isn't organic in its inception or application. You know this. You might deny it and that's on you.)

NONE of what is spiraling us down the toilet COULD be happening without MAJOR shifts and accommodation from top leaders.

What you BELIEVE has nothing to do with what's REALLY happening on the ground.

The biggest difference in your presentation is that the "Tennessee Three" were pushing to TAKE rights. Whereas in Arizona, it was a push to PRESERVE them.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Just like in Tennessee, I don't like the idea that politicians can overrule the decision of the voters based on what is essentially a violation of a procedural rule.

It's laws , rules , and regulations .
As many times as I have said that , looks like you would get just a bit of understanding .
One just cannot do what one wants to ....

Politicians participating in an ethics committee is the definition of irony.

Especially when the supposed violations of said ethics are unsubstantiated claims.

a reply to: Xcalibur254
This is great news! Now we can work on removing every single person that lied about Covid!!

Right? RIGHT

a reply to: MykeNukem

You're free to believe whatever you want but this thread follows the same format whenever I make a new thread.

Snippet from the article
Link
Several paragraphs summarizing the event
A paragraph giving my thoughts

originally posted by: MykeNukem

a reply to: Xcalibur254
I don't like the idea that politicians can overrule the decision of the voters based on what is essentially a violation of a procedural rule. If a Representative does something egregious enough that their district wants them gone, then there should be options in place for a recall. Otherwise, censure them, fine them, and move on.

Yes I see it really has you broken up.

That's why it was a mere footnote to the thread.

Your intentions are apparent...

Your from failed America.
Clearly nothing north works out so your opinion means less than a withered daisy.

a reply to: Gothmog

So you are of the opinion that Harris should have been expelled?

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Just like in Tennessee, I don't like the idea that politicians can overrule the decision of the voters based on what is essentially a violation of a procedural rule.

It's laws , rules , and regulations .
As many times as I have said that , looks like you would get just a bit of understanding .
One just cannot do what one wants to ....

I'll remember you said that.

originally posted by: PurpleFox
a reply to: Xcalibur254
This is great news! Now we can work on removing every single person that lied about Covid!!

Right? RIGHT

I’ve been sitting here for a good five minutes giving you several hundred stars. So far, it has only registered one but I’ll give it another five min I guess because you’re exactly right. I’ve been saying for ages every doctor, politician, reporter, and celebrity who pushed and pushed for people to swallow the 30million predicted dead hypothesis, then the getting a tragically dangerous shot, then the 1.2 million death figure before the CDC and WHO revised it to between 2000 and 4000…

but all of those who kept the bs going in the minds of those who were somehow not able to see thru it from day one which I was sure would be the only time needed, my God was I wrong though.

Hell, people I once respected for their intelligence even (mistakenly obviously) are still wearing masks and getting boosted today.

Wait, you suddenly care about ethics and election integrity?


Naaa, I dont believe it for a second.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou

originally posted by: MykeNukem

a reply to: Xcalibur254
I don't like the idea that politicians can overrule the decision of the voters based on what is essentially a violation of a procedural rule. If a Representative does something egregious enough that their district wants them gone, then there should be options in place for a recall. Otherwise, censure them, fine them, and move on.

Yes I see it really has you broken up.

That's why it was a mere footnote to the thread.

Your intentions are apparent...

Your from failed America.
Clearly nothing north works out so your opinion means less than a withered daisy.

Not even sure WTF that means, lol.

"nothing north works out" - what about compasses or roads or Oliver?