>

The GOP house majority lead is clocking down faster than an Agatha Christie novel and for all the same reasons
I'm pretty sure people like George Santos are getting into republican politics not because they believe in whatever that platform represents today but because there is such a low bar you can be a known criminal and be welcome with open arms. >

Maybe 5 years ago a someone could've told me how the party represents a vastly different way of life with a valid perspective. Today anyone who tells you conservatives have values is ether a fool or a fooler. >

Sorry, but nothing has changed since then, and 5 years ago you would have been the fool. Even if you corrected to a date before Trump. 
It's just only now do some more people are paying attention. I just wish enough people would realise Establishment Dems are not your friends either. No values but what maximizes their donors' profits with zero thought about what Americans need, let alone what they want. >

Between Thieves and Murderous Thieves, I know who my first enemy is. >

But no one ever acknowledges that the Lesser Evil is still also Evil. Very evil. Just not as evil as the most. And they are ruining our country in different ways that prevent our countrymen from being able to take care of each other and their selves. No wonder they wanted to throw the firebomb that is Trump into the Presidency. 
Liberals just put their fingers in their ears and go "La La La I can't hear you, Democrats are perfect, if you disagree you're a dumb Conservative la la la." Even when you're definitely not Conservative, they just can't help but think Democrats are perfect because they aren't Conservative. >

You fail to understand that women, gays, and other minorities are in a fight for their human rights and lives.
There is a 2 party system in this thing the rest of us call objective reality, and there is currently only a least worst option. 
Fuck the fucking democratic party; but my other option is being fucked and killed. >

Yea man dems are doing such a good job protecting rights, I'm not sure you've heard of a little something called Roe v. Wade it was kind of a big deal, which was repealed while democrats had complete control. Gay rights and interracial marriage are gonna be on the chopping block as well.
Just wait until the fascist supreme court rules on independent state legislature theory and they take away your vote and the dems stand with their arms crossed doing nothing while crying about republicans destroying the country.
Democrats apathy is just as bad as republicans psychotic illegal acts, why? Because they let them get away with it regardless of who's in power. >

Which party is doing the Women are Property push again? Can't remember. >

And who is trying to stop them? Not the democrats that's for sure. >

Did you miss everything I said in the first comment you replied to, or are you just fulfilling some quota? >

Who else didn’t even need to look at the story to know what party he represents? >

It is kind of a fun game now. “Let’s see what party…..of course!” >

More like "99% sure not a Democrat, but I might as well double check for that other 1% confirmation." >

Yep 99% of the time it's a Republican.
But the other 1% of the time it's Anthony wiener. >

When democrats are found to be sexual deviants they are ousted from the party
Republicans elect theirs president. >

In this instance, elected to State Rep despite this being known before the election.
Republican voters love these sexual predators! >

Some people vote for the guy they would have a beer with. >

It's so weird. It's very very rarely I see any celebrity, or really anyone for that matter I'd want to have a drink or smoke with.
Like, maybe Eric Andre or Adam Sandler.
But could you imagine smoking a bowl with Trump or the rapping republican granny?
I'd rather rip my own dick off. >

Get that ol' dick twist, just twist it right off. 
Can you imagine smoking a bowl with like Kaitlyn Bennet? She just polishes her one rifle while talking about her awkward obsession with Trans people before shitting her pants? 
I'd absolutely take the dick twist too. >

I recognized the reference, at least lol.
Now I'm looking for that video again. >

I imagine Stout is bleating about "cancel culture". >

And “wokism”.
“This is an attack on my Christian values! The Bible says women are to be submissive. Taking a woman’s claim of sexual assault seriously infringes on my belief! It is feminism run amok!” >

Lol. Wokism 
I too despises Asian barbeque! >

This is good. >

“Speaker of the Oregon House of Representatives Dan Rayfield removed freshman Rep. Brian Stout (R-Columbia City) from his committee assignments because a five-year protection order against Stout remains in place.
A former campaign volunteer in November accused Stout of sexually abusing her and threatening her with violence.”
How did I know it was a Republican? >

I'm surprised he was removed from his committee assignments. McCarthy is rewarding Santos with one. >

The speaker is a Democrat. >

Derp. Thanks for pointing out what should've been obvious. >

Oh yeah, this is a goldmine...

He did admit that the woman had performed fellatio on him after a 2020 campaign event, but he said the encounter was consensual and that she had initiated it. Stout confirmed that his wife walked in on the pair as the act concluded.  
“There was a huge lapse of judgment by me,” Stout said. “I let her pull my pants down and perform oral sex. It was short, it was brief, and it was a mistake. She wanted it to go further. It did not.” >

You don't get a sexual assault conviction and 5 year restraining order for consensual blowjob.
*edit: should have read the article. Court matters are still in process, apparently. That's a long protection order without a conviction. My point still stands about the consent part, though. >

I mean, I could come up with a number of scenarios where a woman would consent to sexual acts and then later lie about the consensual part for some kind of gain.
Not saying that's the case here, or that it's common or whatever, but it's definitely not impossible nor does it by itself indicate guilt. >

You could.  You'd be arguing in such bad faith the Inquisition would pop up out of the ground to investigate, but you certainly could. >

"It was short, it was brief..." If the encounter ended quickly, what was he describing first? >

Joking aside, that's such a BS defense. He's trying to downplay saying it was brief as if he put a stop to it? When obviously it stopped because of what he said here
"Stout confirmed that his wife walked in on the pair as the act concluded." >

Is there a/an eligibility list to follow for running for office?  So many of these people are criminals and need to be locked up.  Sickening really. >

There is not if you are a republican. It seems the more stupid/evil/despicable the candidate, the more the rank & file republicans love him. >

The party of family values strikes again >

attempts to not assume what party this rep belongs to
belongs to party I assumed they belong to >

GOP’s reign of childishness is off to a banger of a start. >

Is being a sex offender part of the job for Republicans now? That’s like 6 just in the past couple months. And of course everyone know about the pedophile Matt Gaetz. What a weird party. >

Republicans love sex offenders,  it gets Da Libs upset.   More Republican sex offenders!!!!  That’ll show em! >

How did I know this fuck was a repub before even looking. >

What's with Republicans and all the sexual abuse? >

They are creating their very own Vatican Follies (follys)? >

Republican?
*checks *
Republican >

Don't forget to note the fact that the house in question of presently controlled by anyone other than the Republicans, otherwise he wouldn't be punished at all. >


The seat has been held by incumbent Democrat Brad Witt, but redistricting eliminated Democrats’ advantage in the district and Witt moved to Salem to seek a seat there.
Stout’s victory helped the GOP strip Democrats of their three-fifths supermajority in the Oregon House.

So this guy won due to redistricting. Quelle surprise. >

The districts were passed into law by a Democratic-run legislature and signed by a Democratic governor as well as approved by several court decisions, I don't know who you think is pulling one over here. >

That's all well and good. But the narrative here for me is that gerrymandering continues to favor Republicans and hurts democracy. >

This is not Gerrymandering favouring Republicans. The map was drawn by and approved by Democrats. 
The Democrats still control the governors office and both houses. The redistricting also gave them an extra safe federal seat. >

You don’t know what you’re talking about. The Democrats didn’t get an extra safe federal congressional seat. Oregon got a new district, due to population growth, but the Republicans picked up the seat. It had been 4-1, D-R, now it’s 4-2. 
There was not extreme partisan gerrymandering in Oregon, because the process was not controlled by Republicans. >

Attention future Republican politicians. Just assume you are not desirable and get yourself a professional....you'll have to legalize it first but then you'll actually be able to get laid >

Another wild stab from a Canadian: Republican?
Quick Google later: Yup >

Yep, as expected.  As also expected, the only reason he's being removed from committees at all it because his party doesn't control the house... >

Why not remove the 200 weirdo Congress people from all comitees once and for all? >

Republicans only vote for the best people. /s >

And yet another Republican. >

Tell me again, how you are the party of moral Christian values! >

I thought these were christian values…. >

I stand corrected! >

Remember when the Democrats made Al Franken resign because of an inappropriate photo taken years before he was elected? >

This comment has been reposted at nauseam. 🥱 >

Just another republican caught with . . .
Again >

i’m gonna gamble, and guess he’s a republican. >

Yep, and the Oregon house is controlled by the Democrats (otherwise, he'd get no punishment at all because Republicans support criminals in their midst). >

I have no idea who this is but I'm going to guess he's a republican now I'll look him up and see if I'm right
What do you know i was right it's a republican >

Yet Santos, MTG and Gosar can be sworn in and hold committee positions?!
Why is there a mechanism here for Stout not not them?! >

Because this story is about the Oregon State House of Representatives and, even then, the Democrats are presently in control of that body.  You didn't actually think Republicans would punish sex offenders amongst their own party, did you? >

If the accusations are true, it begs the question of why the RNC (and everyone else) condones his association, why the ERO was filed the day before the election but 15 months after the first incident and why the judge loosened the restrictions.
If the accusations are not true, it begs the question of why lawmakers who are entrusted to protect our rights treat a person guilty absent a trial until his “many witnesses” can prove him not guilty.
“You’re not under arrest but we’re cuffing you, searching your car, seizing your ID, looking through your phone and will shoot you if you move for our own protection……”
Regardless, the guy cheated on his wife showing his word is only as good as his options. >

The GOP doesn't give a flying f**k about a politicians background or moral character as long as they can be counted on to vote in favor of any GOP backed issues.
The GOP knows that they can't win in fair elections, so the best they can do is to pack the local, state and federal legislatures and the courts with sympathetic bodies by any means possible. Once there are enough of those in place, voting no longer matters - and we are very rapidly approaching that point.