Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government The Internet United States Your Rights Online

SOPA Provisions Being Introduced Piecemeal From Lamar Smith 134

Posted by Soulskill
from the will-be-hard-to-blackout-the-internet-every-other-week dept.
bricko sends this disappointing but not unexpected news from Techdirt: "While it didn't get nearly as much attention as other parts of SOPA, one section in the bill that greatly concerned us was the massive expansion of the diplomatic corp.'s 'IP attaches.' If you're unfamiliar with the program, basically IP attaches are 'diplomats' (and I use the term loosely) who go around the globe pushing a copyright maximalist position on pretty much every other country. Their role is not to support more effective or more reasonable IP policy. It is solely to increase expansion, and basically act as Hollywood's personal thugs pressuring other countries to do the will of the major studios and labels. The role is literally defined as pushing for 'aggressive support for enforcement action' throughout the world. ... In other words, these people are not neutral. They do not have the best interests of the public or the country in mind. Their job is solely to push the copyright maximalist views of the legacy entertainment industry around the globe, and position it as the will of the U.S. government. It was good that this was defeated as a part of SOPA... but now comes the news that Lamar Smith is introducing a new bill that not only brings back this part, but appears to expand it and make it an even bigger deal."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SOPA Provisions Being Introduced Piecemeal From Lamar Smith

Comments Filter:
  • Bit Slavery (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Stirling Newberry (848268) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @03:32PM (#40606905) Homepage Journal
    IP is a euphemism for bit slavery.
    • Re:Bit Slavery (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gstoddart (321705) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @03:56PM (#40607201) Homepage

      I think Colonialism might be a better word for it.

      But, very much the same thing.

      I wonder how long before countries decide they aren't willing to receive that person. Already Canada has basically said:

      In regard to the watch list, Canada does not recognize the 301 watch list process. It basically lacks reliable and objective analysis. It's driven entirely by U.S. industry. We have repeatedly raised this issue of the lack of objective analysis in the 301 watch list process with our U.S. counterparts.

      Courtesy of Michael Geist [michaelgeist.ca]. Everyone already knows these guys are industry shills ... adding them to your official diplomatic corps isn't necessarily going to gain you credibility for a position which is an industry one.

    • by HeckRuler (1369601) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @04:21PM (#40607499)
      Nonsense! Look at how much money RIAA pays out to the artists!
  • Why? (Score:5, Funny)

    by rampant mac (561036) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @03:41PM (#40607023)

    How could Lamar do this? I strongly suspect this to be a javelin to the heart of internet democracy, thrown by Lamar with his limp-wristed throwing style.

  • by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @03:45PM (#40607053) Homepage Journal
    Trying to sneak rejected legislation in under wraps should be grounds for public beheading.

    Time to get serious with these fucks, or else they'll never learn.
    • by Nerdfest (867930) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @04:27PM (#40607585)

      There really should be criminal charges for a government representative knowingly acting against the interests of the people. Is there one? Does treason cover it, or is specifically for national security related matters/

      • It's called bribery.

        • And it's legal!
          Humm, do I listen to the wishes of the people that merely voted for me, or do I placate to the whims and wishes of my 'friends' that gave me millions in "campaign funding".. Boy that's a tough one...
      • by Grishnakh (216268)

        Sorry, but the people elected him, so it's presumed he's acting in their best interest. If they don't think so, they're free to elect someone else, but I never see that happen too much.

        Maybe you could try charging all the voters in his congressional district with treason for re-electing him when he continues to do treasonous things.

        • Sadly, treason may be the only charge that has enough oomph to be effective these days. The only problem is that immediately after it is used on one of them, they'll turn it around and begin using it on regular Americans.

        • If they don't think so, they're free to elect someone else

          I thought the USA had no direct elections? How can people vote for someone who DOES have their party's best interest in mind if they can only vote for a representative who will vote for them?

          • by Grishnakh (216268)

            Huh? Our Congresscritters are all directly elected by the people. Over 100 years ago, only the Congressmen were elected, and the Senators were appointed by State Legislatures (which are, in turn, elected directly), but that was changed with the 17 Amendment to the Constitution. Now, the only ones not directly elected are the Supreme Court justices (appointed by President after approval by Congress) and the President (elected by "Electoral College" which is determined by popular election state-by-state, t

        • "If they don't think so, they're free to elect someone else,"

          Who will do the same thing.. All someone has to do is dangle $$$ in front of them.

          Voting is the biggest fantasy our government has got us to believe in.
          The game is rigged, folks. Time to toss the entire chess board..
    • by Loughla (2531696)

      I agree, but what are our options? They are working in someone's best interests. They are doing the work that some US citizen wants done. Is it the majority? No, but somewhere, they can point to someone and say, see, he agrees with me.

      Remember, that to most politicians, $1 = 1 voice. Are they wrong for being disconnected? Sure, but also remember that they've been conditioned to be that way. Our system is set up so that he with the most money has the most voice. What I find sad is that it makes complete sens

      • Simple - take the money away.

        No more legalized bribery, no more special favors, and the bureaucrats can do what they were elected to do - represent the People that this nation's government is allegedly comprised of, for, and by. Anyone who tries to stop the de-funding, or engages in said activity after the fact, should be publicly executed to serve as a lesson to their corrupt peers.*

        Is that an extreme solution? Sure, but as we see what peaceful protest gets you these days (maced, beaten, and arrested for
        • Occupy protesters did everything "right," i.e. non-violently, and yet they were responded to with extreme, violent force.

          For the most part, they did not get permits and they stayed well past what was reasonble. They stayed so long that - if it was another president - we would have started hearing comparisons to Hoovervilles. There were also multiple instances of rape, theft, vadalism, drugs, and violence during these protests.

          • by retchdog (1319261)

            i wonder if the incidence of rape and violence was actually higher than average. i mean, as you point out, they did stay quite awhile.

    • Indeed. I vote we invite them all to a closed session to discuss the legislation, then quietly brick up the doorways. I like to think I am not a violent man, but they are really pushing for some aggressive action.

      It's like dealing with certain family members. You tell them no to their belligerent attempts to slam something through, then they think you're negotiating. No means no.

      SOPA, ACTA & friends are terribly written pieces of legislation, and this is coming from someone who has applied for a patent!

  • by bughunter (10093) <bughunter&earthlink,net> on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @03:45PM (#40607055) Journal

    About 10 years ago I submitted a slashdot book review [slashdot.org] for the dark satire, KW Jeter's Noir.

    When I first read it, I was convinced he intended it more as a satirical caricature than a cautionary tale.

    Now I'm not so sure.

  • Oh, Lamar Smith... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @03:49PM (#40607111) Journal
    Out of curiosity, what keeps Lamar in office? His vehement support for the content cartels presumably doesn't hurt his war chest; but I don't imagine the 'Decadent Hollywood types love cutting me checks!' gambit is what gets out the voters down in Texas. He does have the requisite enthusiasm for fetuses; but that's a dime a dozen, and can be had from people who lack the additional oddity of being a Christian Scientist who spends part of his time hanging out in Massachusetts...

    Does anybody more familiar with the fellow's local style know what he does that keeps him in office, as opposed to some socially-identical baptist or something without a copyright maximalist fetish?
    • by txsable (169665)

      Well, you're talking about the representative from the Austin area...which tends to be a lot more liberal than the rest of the state. He also has name recognition, as well as a given name that has some ties to Texas history.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Indeed, there was a *Smith* at the Alamo.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Austin area...which tends to be a lot more liberal than the rest of the state

        That doesn't explain anything. Lamar Smith is a conservative Republican.

        • by Applekid (993327)

          Nothing more conservative than trying to enact new legislation...

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by daath93 (1356187)
            I have to agree with this. As a Conservative myself, It continually pisses me off when I see some congressman with an (R) espousing conservatism while wanting to enact legislation that takes away ANY kind of freedom. Be it freedom of marriage, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, expression, etc. In this case he wants to take away my freedom to download something i've already purchased and make it a criminal and not a civil action. These fucks are just as bad as the (D)s who want to take away my right t
        • You're missing out on the caricature. You need a secret decoder ring, so I'll lend you mine.

          Big Oil / Business / Defense Industry -> Republicans
          Liberal Media / Hollywood / Pharmaceuticals -> Democrats

          So, despite Lamar Smith running as a Republican, he is elected in an area with a greater percentage of Liberals (Democrats), whose interests are aligned, in this caricature, with Hollywood (MPAA, RIAA & friends); ergo, in representing his constituents, he represents their interests, which are those of

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @04:13PM (#40607409)

        Austin is actually gerrymandered to hell. It is split into about 5 different congressional districts so that the D can never overtake the R. We have no hope of getting rid of these idiots as long as they stuff a bunch of people who see voting as "Vote R for Jesus" into the voting population.

        • by tsm_sf (545316)
          We have no hope of getting rid of these idiots as long as they stuff a bunch of people who see voting as "Vote R for Jesus" into the voting population.

          Here's [tumblr.com] your solution. "Don't Vote. Pray." Pretty cynical. Pretty funny.
        • Do they still have the Congressional district that cuts the entire UT campus out of Austin and ties it via a long, skinny corridor to San Antonio? I always found that a particularly impressive bit of gerrymandering...

    • by Brucelet (1857158)
      Often, particularly in a state that skews heavily toward one party or the other, all it takes to keep an incumbent in office is inertia.
      • by Jetra (2622687)
        Good thing this didn't happen in Florida, Jack Thompson would back this shit with open arms.
    • Ignorance of the internal functioning of congress makes money matter more than informed views. That's it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Smith is a congressman for a district in north San Antonio and several, sparsely populated counties surrounding, such as Bandera, Kerr, Kendal, and part of Travis. The people he represents are either too lazy, too stupid, or just flat out don't give a damned and only keep voting him in on name recognition alone. That and some of his constituents are fairly wealthy, and probably have some vested interest.

    • by jodosh (1260096)
      He doesn't often have to run against another republican in the primaries. In most places in Texas the primary is the real election. He was born in the general area of his district and has lived in it most of his life, other republicans that have political aspirations have other low hanging fruit that they can pick from. I have the pleasure of voting against his re-election every 2 years.
      • by hemo_jr (1122113)

        There was a concerted effort on the part of some in the Internet community to raise money for his challengers in the primary this May, notably Richard Morgan. Unfortunately, the Internet is dominated by slacktivists, unwilling to put their money where their mouths are.

        Not enough money was raised to mount a significant challenge to Smith.

        • by metamatic (202216)

          Unfortunately, the Internet is dominated by slacktivists, unwilling to put their money where their mouths are.

          Or unwilling to donate money to a Republican.

          • by Jetra (2622687)
            I'd donate money to get this guy out, but fucktards like him are keeping me from a job.
        • There are more ways to promote a candidate than throwing money at them (really!)

          Slacktivists could do a really good job of "adjusting" google search results to promote Morgan and demote Smith, for example. A few people with large pipes could donate bandwidth to the robocall and email campaigns (yeah, I know....)

          With how pervasive technology is in our lives, the possibilities (even the legal ones) are limitless for promoting a politician. The real hurdle is getting all the talent organized.

    • I am a voter in Lamar's district (San Antonio, TX) and have been voting against him for the last 12+ years. He runs as a republican in a very "safe" republican district - no democrat will ever fill his spot.

      The best way to vote against him is to vote in the republican primary for another republican, in this case Richard Morgan [richardmorgan.com]. Unfortunately, my vote + my families vote + my other friends that I almost have drag to the polling booth don't seem to make much of a dent.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      He is protected from on high in the Texas GOP, and so runs in one of the most gerrymandered districts in the US. Contrary to what the sibling posts seem to suggest, the 21st reaches into Austin to dilute the Democratic vote. If it were not for the gerrymandering, Lloyd Doggett would be representing his areas of Austin. To suggest that Austin supports Smith's positions is ludicrous apologism.

      In addition to being in charge of whatever the House committee on IP is called in a given term, he is chair of the Jud

  • by Jetra (2622687)
    I like how it says to "Elevate the playing field." What do they mean? Tearing up everything and then paving their own companies above it so nothing grows? Also, the fact that it got passed hastily has me a bit worried. Yes, that trick almost worked with SOPA, but what if this one actually makes it past? My God, this thing is a Cthulu holding a flower while holding a gun behind his back, ready to shoot every form of competition.
    • Re:Irony (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anrego (830717) * on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @04:00PM (#40607253)

      That's the biggest problem I see with this shit.

      They can just keep trying, voer and over again, until either by apathy or random chance it gets through.

      We can't all mobilize like we did for SOPA every month.. eventually people run out of energy fighting this stuff.. and then it'll pass.

      • by Jetra (2622687)
        Get off the energy drinks and/or coffee and you might actually have more energy than you think. Unfortunately, we have to keep vigilant or in the end we end up with collars around our necks waiting for our government to tell us when to bark.
        • Re:Irony (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Anrego (830717) * on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @04:15PM (#40607441)

          That's not even it.

          Thing with SOPA is it got people who had no interest in this stuff thinking about it. I know this because a lot of my non-geek friends were asking me about it. That works once.. maybe twice. All the big name sites that participated in the protest arn't going to do it every time one of these bills comes up, and even if they did, people would very quickly start ignoring it again. SOPA protests were effective because they were unprecedented and it got peoples attention.

          Without the kind of mass public "wtf is this about" response, it's just a bunch of geeks yelling at a wall.

      • Re:Irony (Score:4, Insightful)

        by replicant108 (690832) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @04:59PM (#40607945) Journal

        This is exactly why the digital rights activists need to go on the offensive. As long as we are continually on the defensive we are vulnerable to aggressive industry lobbying. Legislation needs to be promoted and passed that will solidify protection for digital rights, and weaken the position of our opponents. In strategic terms, we need to take the battle to the enemy.

      • by biodata (1981610)
        Hopefully the politicians would be happy to see it fail repeatedly - Big content bribes politicians, politicians 'try' to pass bill but fail, big content bribes politicians to have another go, bill fails again. You can see that rinse and repeat is in the politicians best interests, not passing the legislation.
        • by Jetra (2622687)
          Which begs the question: How much is this lobbying contributing to our national deficit?
      • by riverat1 (1048260)

        The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

  • "Oh, No Mr congressman! We don't want that dildo!"

    "Well, little voter, don't worry your little head off. We see you can't possibly handle that dildo legislation.. so, how about THIS one?"

    "Oh gosh Mr Congressman! That one's even bigger than the last one!"

    (Repeat ad nauseum until little voter gets so shocked about what Mr Congressman can pull out of his rape kit that he accepts a "smaller" dildo, but still gets fucked.)

    • by Jetra (2622687)
      Truely, the weakening of the American Will. Well, these assaults can't last much longer.
    • by bughunter (10093)

      You know, considering how the target countries of these of these "attaches" are going to be screwed both coming and going, they should be renamed 'DP Attaches.'

      (Of course, officially, 'DP' stands for 'Digital Property.')

  • Looking at where the IP attaches are sent(http://www.uspto.gov/ip/global/attache/index.jsp), China, Thailand, India, mid-east, it's clear that it's not all about the RIAA-style intellectual property rampages. This has more to do with the counterfeiting of physical goods, and the stealing of actual, useful research. Given the US's unwise decision to jump into an IP economy, this makes sense, and isn't necessarily a bad thing. They're not worrying about software and music here, they're worrying about research
    • by Anonymous Coward

      "This has more to do with the counterfeiting of physical goods, and the stealing of actual, useful research."

      No. It doesn't. The manufacturing sector has been yelling about a lack of enforcement for decades. Even they were quiet about SOPA.

      This legislation is 100% shit. People can try to fabricate some kind of silver lining, but to what end? We all know how this legislation will be used. Because we have seen it happen again and again and again. The results are ugly.

    • by mlts (1038732) *

      Smith is playing with fire though. Right now, there is a fight on who gets to control the Internet. Will it be the US and ICANN, or will it be an international body from the UN (mainly chaired by BRIC) who gets to say who gets an IP address and who doesn't?

      Another SOPA-like item might be the final straw.

    • by AK Marc (707885)

      This has more to do with the counterfeiting of physical goods, and the stealing of actual, useful research.

      That's how they sell so many things. "They came for the counterfeiters, but I didn't speak up because I don't counterfeit. When they came for those that lend purchased DVDs to friends, there was nobody left to speak up for me." They'll serve up the most outrageous first attempt, then see what happens. Sometimes they pass (a la USA PATRIOT Act), most of the time they are shot down, and then they look at the reasons why, and reword or eliminate a few of the most contentious provisions, and submit it once

    • It's still about bullying other countries into passing laws they don't want. It undermines national sovereignty, and just because it may deal with an issue that is actually important to the US economy doesn't make it okay.
      • by khipu (2511498)

        It's still about bullying other countries into passing laws they don't want. It undermines national sovereignty

        These are global trade agreements: everybody wants to trade with each other, that's why we all negotiate and agree to common rules, equally binding on all. Some of these rules may be bad, but nobody is being "bullied".

        • These agreements are in practice not equally binding on all. In many cases, foreign governments are pressured into having laws that are not part of US law. More importantly, not all countries are on even terms of negotiation. Like you said, trade is good, so about the only rules should be that I don't put tariffs on your goods, you don't have tariffs on my goods, I don't bomb you, you don't bomb me.
          • by khipu (2511498)

            These agreements are in practice not equally binding on all. In many cases, foreign governments are pressured into having laws that are not part of US law.

            "In many cases"... like what?

            Are you aware that many European publishers and artists are screaming bloody murder because European Internet parties managed to stop ACTA? They wanted tougher IP laws. It seems whatever special interest group in Europe isn't getting its way, they are always blaming the US instead of fixing their problems at home.

            More impo

            • "In many cases"... like what?

              IIRC, the bill Spain was blackmailed into went beyond US laws in a couple of regards, as did the law Canada was pressured into.

              Are you aware that many European publishers and artists are screaming bloody murder because European Internet parties managed to stop ACTA? They wanted tougher IP laws. It seems whatever special interest group in Europe isn't getting its way, they are always blaming the US instead of fixing their problems at home.

              I think their primary beef was that the

              • by khipu (2511498)

                IIRC, the bill Spain was blackmailed into went beyond US laws in a couple of regards, as did the law Canada was pressured into.

                Blackmailed? Did the US say "we are going to drop some nukes on you if you don't sign"? Did the US say "we are going to reveal the extramarital escapades of your prime minister if you don't sign"? I doubt that. What the US may have said is "if you want to trade with us/loans from us, you sign this". That's not "blackmail", that's a business deal, and Spain can take it or leave

                • Blackmailed? Did the US say "we are going to drop some nukes on you if you don't sign"? Did the US say "we are going to reveal the extramarital escapades of your prime minister if you don't sign"? I doubt that. What the US may have said is "if you want to trade with us/loans from us, you sign this". That's not "blackmail", that's a business deal, and Spain can take it or leave it. What the US can negotiate is already strongly constrained by WTO rules anyway.

                  Trade sanctions are economic threats, and can som

                  • by khipu (2511498)

                    No, different countries in Europe want different laws. They have different economies from each other, so that's perfectly fine. A nation is just fine to set it's own laws, that's what makes them a sovereign nation.

                    And the US is just fine to set its own laws. That includes choosing not to trade with India or canceling loan guarantees or whatever if other countries choose not to respect US intellectual property.

                    That's how the US whooped the rest of the world's ass in the music and movie industries. We told t

    • by khipu (2511498)

      US's unwise decision to jump into an IP economy,

      No "decision" and no "jumping" happened. US manufacturing keeps growing and is bigger than it has ever been. It's just that other sectors have grown as well, and that manufacturing requires fewer workers per output and doesn't have much use for unskilled labor anymore.

  • Mass Mailings (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Antipater (2053064) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @04:03PM (#40607297)

    "Dear Sir or Madam,

    I am writing to you because your government is scheduled to soon receive an 'IP Attache' from my country's Commerce Department. Please be aware that despite the departmental title, this person DOES NOT represent my will, nor the will of the American people as a whole. The position he or she occupies was created through corrupt means and despite our vocal protests. I and my fellow Americans ask that you treat this representative as the corporate thug they are. They are not a diplomat. They have neither your best interests, nor ours, as their goal, only their own. I humbly ask that you treat them as you would any other hostile entity.

    Sincerely, (name)"

    • Very interesting. I believe I may do this.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      You better be careful! United States federal law forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. Violation of the Logan Act is a felony, punishable under federal law with imprisonment of up to three years. Logan Act [wikipedia.org]

      Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

      • by Jetra (2622687)
        Three years? Hell, I'll correspond with other countries. I'm not treasonous, I'm tired of this god damn tyranny.
      • by Sabriel (134364)

        I'm no lawyer, so how the hell does that Act pass constitutional muster? I'd have thought any such correspondence would come under the protection of the First Amendment... and now that I've read the linked wikipedia entry, I see it was passed into law as a form of petty revenge and has not once led to a conviction in the 213 years it has existed (!), despite having primarily been used as a threat to intimidate and to chill freedom of speech.

  • by rolfwind (528248) on Tuesday July 10, 2012 @05:11PM (#40608059)

    A pre-emptive strike is needed.

    Campaign Contributions should not only be public, but limited as being from citizen/residents of the level of office that is representing that district. Would-be representatives should only be allowed to accept funds coming from citizens from within that district and Senator from within the state. This will, in theory, make them more likely to honestly represent the area in question. I doubt Lamar Smith's own district in TX is clamoring for this shit.

    Superpacs should not be allowed. I don't think anyone but citizens should be allowed in the campaign contribution. No groups like megacorps, superpacs, NRA, no unions, nothing. At best, special interest groups should be allowed to notify members in the specific area to give to candidate X or Y. That keeps freedom of association.

    The way it works now, with the structure of the Congress, special interest groups like the MPAA/RIAA entertainment cartel just have to target a few special senators/representatives that head pertinent the committees and have seniority, like the Bidens/Lamars of the world for bribes campaign donations, and they can usually railroad what they want through unless the apathetic public makes a special effort to counter it.

    The problem is that the general public has a life besides watching Congress like a hawk and protesting. These groups can just keep advancing their agendas patiently, like a person playing chess, despite any one-time setbacks.

    • by hazah (807503)
      It's a nice idea... I wonder if anyone else had ever thought of that.
    • by khipu (2511498)

      Superpacs should not be allowed

      So how is this supposed to work? Is everything every company, not-for-profit, newspaper, or church publishes going to go through a government panel or court who determine whether it is allowable non-political speech? Or what?

  • The Democrat running against Lamar Smith is Candace Duval- http://www.candaceduval.com/ [candaceduval.com] while John Henry-Liberty is running as a libertarian- http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/John-Henry_Liberty [ballotpedia.org]. I don't unfortunately see any website that Henry-Liberty has set up, but the Duval has a donation button on her website. So the best thing to do to make clear one isn't happy with Lamar Smith is to donate to Duval's campaign. I'm donating right now. Fuck Lamar Smith.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    ... doing what they always do... (and it isn't manual labour...)

    Who does your Congress bow down to? Netenyahu. It's sickening.

    • by hazah (807503)
      Oh ain't you clever and full of facts! Look boys, we got ourselves a thinker!
  • I mean, at a certain point, constantly trying to sneak in legislation that's been rejected by congress and by the people is clearly not in the best interest of this country. Treason:

    The crime of betraying one's country, esp. by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.

    It would seem, to me at least, that this fits the definition of Treason very well. Or is it the case that congresspeople are granted complete immunity and impunity to all laws?

  • I don't want to hear any more of this BS about conservatives getting government off of peoples' backs.
  • how these Republicans are working to shrink government and get it out of our lives?

HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!

Working...