I saw this on facebook

https://www.facebook.com/jeffreydyounger/posts/537865297542714


Followed up the twitter screenshot with the actual link

SOURCE: #TxLege DEM Richard Raymond is in Texas, and a specific location was reported to @GregAbbott_TX’s @TxDPS… They wouldn’t go and arrest him.

Why is that, @GovAbbott & @DadePhelan? Can @TexasGOP Chair @MattRinaldiTX explain?

Big talk on TV, but no action when it matters?

— Michael Quinn Sullivan\uD83C\uDDFA\uD83C\uDDF8 (@MQSullivan) July 15, 2021

Here is another.

#TxLege Rep. ?@KyleBiedermann? confirms: ?@TxDPS? & the House Sergeant-At-Arms have NOT been instructed to retrieve Democrats known to still be in Texas.

Why have ?@GregAbbott_TX? & ?@DadePhelan? not given this order? pic.twitter.com/frE1TXVIr9

— Michael Quinn Sullivan\uD83C\uDDFA\uD83C\uDDF8 (@MQSullivan) July 15, 2021

For those that dont know Michael Quinn Sullivan is the conservative reporter that the former speaker Dennis Bonnen tried to buy off.

How about Michael Quinn Sullivan is a bullshit artist trying to help destroy the Texas Republican Party. If you think Abbott is so bad, please move to California, New York, New Jersey or Michigan and find out what a pile of shit governor really is.

No kidding.  I'm not saying that Abbot is everything that I could ask for in a Governor, but I think that a lot of the sniping against him around here goes beyond the reasonable.  We could have a LOT worse.

So you are cool with Abbott saying one thing about Democrats while doing nothing bout them in reality?

I would rather have a governor do 90% of what I consider important than someone only doing 5% of what I consider important. Abbott even gave up some of his power when he signed the bill preventing the governor from shutting down gun stores, ranges, firearm manufacturers in an emergency.

He can’t do anything yet, now when the fly back into Texas we will see what happens. Right out of Abbott’s mouth he said when they return to Texas soil they would be arrested, brought to the Capital and cabined there.

You know they can't be arrested in DC right?

I guess you missed these parts

They have not committed a crime, all they can do is bring them to the Capital, if one person made a difference, then Raymond would have been brought to the Capital.

I mean the whole point of the arrest is to force them back to the capitol to make quorum right?  Is hauling in one going to make that happen or do they then have to keep him in custody until they make the numbers?

They are not able to put Raymond in jail and hold him. When I heard Abbott say he ‘was going to cabin them in the Capital’ I took it as they get sat down at their desks in the House and forced to vote on the bills, then they go home. They may get stuck at their desks for 24-48 hours as the bills are brought up for votes. That would take all the wind out of their sales for amendments.

Cabin them until their friends come back. They can sleep on the floor in the Capitol with a rotating guard until that happens.

MQS ran Empower Texans, an advocacy group (which didn't give two shits about Second Amendment advocacy). In order to try and get media credentials that would allow access to the House floor, he set up a meeting with Bonnen and recorded the meeting. Bonnen offered House media creds if MQS would criticize certain moderate Republican's that Bonnen didn't like.

While the release of that recorded meeting killed Bonnens political future, it also killed Empower Texans and Michael Quin Sullivan's chances of ANY politician giving him the time of day. Empower Texas went from being a rich PAC that terrified politicians to being dissolved last year. I guess the fifteen minutes of fame over Bonnen didn't work out like MQS thought.

I'm not sure if the Governor can issue an arrest warrant for missing House members or if that must come from the Speaker of the House. That whole pesky separation of powers thing and all.

I like that idea.

This. Not all of the Dems left for DC; mostly just enough to deny a quorum. There's no point in "arresting" those who didn't flee to DC. Those who didn't flee are actually not in violation of House rules, either. Some of them are still going to work at the capitol, too.

As others have mentioned, the "arrest" in this case isn't what most people think it is; it's simply detaining them and bringing them to the capitol. When they have a quorum, they'll lock the doors, and no one leaves without Phelan's permission.

They actually did send the Sergeant at Arms to go and grab one of those fleeing for DC, but she made it out before he got there. I posted the video of him going to her office with a DPS officer looking for her last week.

They will remain in DC for the rest of the current special session, Abbot will call another one, and they'll eventually come back - likely before Sept 1, as that's when funding for the legislature expires. But they're gonna run out the clock on the current session just so they can say that they did, and that they "killed" the election bill.

But they'll be back eventually, and those bills will get signed. All they can really do is delay them.

Exactly this.

People actually think he meant he was going to place them in custody?  Like tdcj or local sheriff's office jail?  Lol.

It is not a criminal arrest according to state law. They will be brought back to the capital to vote. The way the law is written, state LEO's can not leave the state to "arrest" them. This convoluted mess is another gift from the days of the Carpetbaggers after the civil war I'm sure.

BTW:  From a FB post if you would like to drop these turds a line.
Mark RamseySenate District 7
 ·
AWOL cowardly Democrats. (Copied, thanks to those who helped compile.)
I took the list and added phone numbers at the Capitol for the 51 Democrats who left the state to avoid a vote that is inevitable.  I wonder how much this stunt is going to cost. 51 people, 28 days in Washington, it's got to be North of a million dollars. I hope the Democratic party is paying and not the Texas taxpayers!

Alma Allen (Houston)   512 463 0744
Rafael Anchia (Dallas) –  Chairman: Pensions, Investments, & Financial Services Committee. 512 463 0746
Michelle Beckley (Carrollton). 512 463 0478
Diego Bernal (San Antonio) – Vice Chairman: Public Education Committee. 512 463 0532
Rhetta Bowers (Rowlett). 512 463 0464
John Bucy III (Cedar Park). 512 259 1478 ?& 512 463 0696
Liz Campos (San Antonio). 512 463 0452
Terry Canales (Edinburg) – Chairman: Transportation Committee. 512 463 0426
Sheryl Cole (Austin). 512 463 0536
Garnet Coleman (Houston) – Chairman: County Affairs Committee. 512 463 0524
Nicole Collier (Ft. Worth) – Chairman: Criminal Jurisprudence Committee. 512 463 0716
Philip Cortez (San Antonio) – Chairman: Urban Affairs Committee. 512 463 0269
Jasmine Crockett (Dallas). 512 463 0586
Yvonne Davis (Dallas) – Vice Chairman: Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence Committee. 512 463 0598
Joe Deshotel (Beaumont) – Chairman: Land & Resource Management Committee. 512 463 0662
Alex Dominguez (Brownsville). 512 463 0604
Harold Dutton Jr. (Houston) – Chair: Public Education. 512 463 0510
Art Fierro (El Paso). 512 463 0596
Barbara Gervin-Hawkins (San Antonio) – Vice Chairman: Culture, Recreation, & Tourism Committee. 512 463 0708
Jessica Gonzalez (Dallas) – Vice Chairman: Elections Committee
512 463 0408
Mary Gonzalez (El Paso) – Vice Chairman: Appropriations Committee
512 463 0613
Vicki Goodwin (Austin). 512 463 0652
Bobby Guerra (Mission). 512 453 0578
Ana Hernandez (Houston) – Vice Chairman: State Affairs Committee
512 463 0612
Gina Hinojosa (Austin) – Vice Chairman:
Human Services Committee. 512 463 0957
Donna Howard (Austin). 512 463 0981
Celia Israel (Austin). 512 463 0821
Ann Johnson (Houston). 512 463 0389
Jarvis Johnson (Houston). 512 463 0554
Julie Johnson (Carrollton). 512 463 0468
Oscar Longoria (Mission). 512 463 0559
Ray Lopez (San Antonio). 512 463 0669
Eddie Lucio III (Brownsville). 512 463 0660
Armando Martinez (Weslaco). 512 463 0530
Trey Martinez-Fischer (San Antonio). 512 463 0616
Terry Meza (Irving). 512 463 0641
Ina Minjarez (San Antonio). 512 463 0634
Joe Moody (El Paso) – Speaker Pro Tempore; Vice Chairman: Calendars Committee
Christina Morales (Houston). 512 463 0732
Penny Morales-Shaw (Houston). 512 463 0620
Sergio Munoz Jr. (Mission). 512 463 0704
Victoria Neave (Dallas) – Chairman: Juvenile Justice & Family Issues Committee; Vice Chairman: General Investigating Committee. 512 463 0244
Claudia Ordaz Perez (El Paso). 512 463 0622
Lina Ortega (El Paso). 512 463 0638
Leo Pacheco (San Antonio) – Vice Chairman: Higher Education Committee. 512 463 0714
Mary Ann Perez (Houston). 512 463 0464
Ana-Maria Ramos (Richardson). 512 463 0454
Richard Pena Raymond (Laredo) – Chair: Defense & Veterans’ Affairs Committee
Ron Reynolds (Missouri City). 512 463 0558
Eddie Rodriguez (Austin). 512 463 0675
Ramon Romero Jr. (Ft. Worth). 512 463 0674
Toni Rose (Dallas) – Vice Chair: Redistricting Committee. 512 463 0664
Jon Rosenthal (Houston). 512 463 0722
Carl Sherman Sr. (DeSoto). 512 463 0953
James Talarico (Round Rock). 512 463 0670
Shawn Thierry (Houston) – Vice Chairman: Ways & Means Committee. 512 463 0518
Senfronia Thompson (Houston) – Chairman: Licensing &. Administrative Procedures Committee; Vice Chairman: S/C on Constitutional Rights & Remedies. 512 453 0720
Chris Turner (Grand Prairie) – Chairman:  Business & Industry Committee; Chairman: House Democrat Caucus. 512 463 0574
Hubert Vo (Houston) – Vice Chairman: Insurance Committee. 512 463 0568
Armando Walle (Houston). 512 463 0924
Gene Wu (Houston)   512 463 0492
Erin Zwiener (Driftwood). 512 463 0647
(Thanks to those that compiled the list.)

When they do finally get them back, they should change the House rules on quorum to majority instead of 2/3. Requiring 2/3 doesn't make any sense in a majority-rule body, and it's obvious that the Dems will simply abuse the rule any time they don't like whatever's on the floor from now on. And fundraise off of it.

They will probably have to wait until next session to do so, but it should be the first order of business going forward.

Also need to change per diam, so that if in session they must be in Austin. Now they do get their $600 for each month they are in office even if not in session. When in session they get $221 a day per diam. Plus travel from their district to Austin. Any other travel must be approved.

The 2/3 rule is there to protect all sides so everyone gets a say before a vote. It’s also there to show they the government is trying to be transparent.  Unfortunately the Dems have decided that throwing a tantrum like a child is more important then having respect for the position they were elected to do. This is the same as a sports team just walking off the field when they believe they are going to loose a game instead of finishing it like real men and women do.   All that is going to happen now is that rules will be changed and they will be completely cut out in the future from all decision making.

Maybe require that you can not miss more than 5 days in a session unless it isn’t a medical condition. Miss more than 5 days in a row means you resigned your seat.

To easy to get around.  I can get doctor today to send a notes that says I will be sick for the next 6 days if I wanted.  

The rules for the lawmakers are setup thinking they would have respect for the position they have.

If 51% of members present vote that another member has fled the state merely to break quorum, the member should be removed from their seat for the remainder of their term and the governor appoints a replacement for the remainder of that term.

That would shut this "Chicken D" bullshit down right now.

While aggravating, its part of politics. Both parties do it, both parties know the other party will do it, and both parties will do what it takes to further their agenda.
Note that the filibuster rule is all thats keeping the Dems from running the table in DC.

Phelan is looking the fool, he could have pushed this through during the regular session but failed to do so. I'll bet he has a few regrets.

The Democrats walked out 2 days before the end of the session. The session ended 5/31, the Democrats walked out on 5/29 and all over a bunch of lies.

The legislature is in session for 140 days. Being that voter fraud was one of the priorities it should have been one of the first bills out.

There were a lot of hearings through the entire session on Voter Integrity, it was not quick and dirty to get bill written.

The were too busy passing lame resolutions like making some random county the fruitcake capitol of Texas. They should have passed one making the capitol building the hot air capitol of texas.

The filibuster is a different thing though -- they have to be present and work for it.  Just being a chicken and fleeing -- well, that is just spineless.  And it is funny how the Dems are all wanting to eliminate the filibuster now, when they've used it in the past.  They just love to change the rules when it suits them but cry like babies if anyone does it to them.

I know there is no chance of my suggested rule change being enacted, but I'd like to see it proposed just to put some fear into those Chicken Ds.

I really wish that people would stop comparing this to the filibuster. They aren't remotely the same.

The filibuster is a legitimate tool enshrined in *Senate* rules. It was put there for a reason, and there is no filibuster in the House for a good reason. The House is a majority-rules body, the Senate is designed to protect the minority and give them a say in governance. It's absent from House rules for a reason.

Fleeing the state to break quorum is NOT a legitimate tactic. It's a very clear violation of the House rules, and those participating in it are in violation of their oaths taken to serve their constituents. You can't represent your constituents if you don't show up for work, and by doing this they are effectively disenfranchising EVERY VOTER IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. No one has representation in a dysfunctional legislature that can't conduct business because a bunch of assholes violated their oaths.

The Democrats lost the election. They do not control the legislature because they lost enough elections to matter. You know, that whole "elections have consequences" thing. That means that they don't dictate policy, because the voters didn't want them to. If they want to have their say and try and stop bills from passing, then they can try and filibuster in the Senate. That's their only legitimate recourse here.

Stop comparing the two. They aren't even in the same ballpark.

I didn't say they were the same, nor did I compare the two.
Both are means of stopping or delaying legislation.

Under current Texas House rules, those breaking quorum face no consequences. So they will continue to employ the tactic.

That;s what I'm saying.  There need to be consequences.  Like losing seats.

You mentioned the filibuster, and the filibuster has absolutely nothing to do with what these retards are doing. THEY are trying to conflate the two in order to lend legitimacy to what they're doing. The media will happily help them do it, but we should not. They frankly shouldn't be mentioned in the same conversation.

One is legitimate, the other is not. It's important to differentiate between the two, and it drives me nuts seeing people fail to do that.

There's no getting around the jurisdiction issue. But I agree on the need for consequences. I actually like the idea of them being stripped of their seats after a certain period and special elections held for the open seats, with them being disqualified for running for those seats. But I don't see that happening.

I do think that they'd have a better chance of changing House rules to majority for quorum. That would eliminate this situation entirely.

As it is, the present situation, the primary consequence will be the legislative staffers' funding dry up on August 1. The legislators might not give a shit, since they all mostly have other jobs, but their staffers will very much give a shit, and the legislature will effectively cease to function entirely. I don't think they'll take it that far.

I expect them to remain in DC for the duration of this special session so that they can say they made their point and "killed the bill". And then Abbott will call another one, and they will run up against the FY deadline, and then they'll have a REAL choice to make, because it's no longer theatre at that point. Ultimately, they'll come back and those bills will get passed. And then they'll get to deal with redistricting...

I can't believe people still defend Abbott. He cares very little about Texans, and a lot about his political career. He wants to run for president (he would never win), and in his attempt to gain national favor, he has disregarded our state and US Constitutions. Add on top of that, that he was sympathetic towards rioters to an extent, and claimed that while the violence wasn't right, we need to address the history of racism in our country and state. He propagates messages from the left while pretending to be a conservative.

Thankfully we have true conservatives running in the primary, but I hope people vote against the man who shut us down, masked us, fined us, signed a $295 million dollar contact tracing contract, all without legislative approval... And then refused to actually stand up for children being mutilated until he realized that his seat is in jeopardy. Oh, and top that off with the fact that he bought Trump's endorsement and promised to finish the wall, which he is doing with chain link.

Texans better open their eyes, because Abbott is not our friend.

Austin news ran a speech from TX dems this morning that I had to laugh at. They seriously said Abbott  needs to focus on important things like Covid 19. Meanwhile they spread covid  across the country with their publicity stunt.

I mentioned the filibuster because it and quorum breaking are effective means of delaying legislation.



Wrong.
There is nothing illegal about breaking quorum. Its a common tactic used by both parties.
If you are old enough to remember, in 1988 US Senate Republicans walked out to stop discussion.






Well, by calling one a filibuster and the other quorum breaking it should be easy to differentiate as long as you know what those terms mean.

With 6 out of 51 having COVID what the fuck. They sat on that fucking plane no masks on, but ran around the Capital always wearing masks, locking their office doors, making their staff wear masks, not seeing anyone but their select lobbyists. I have been in committee hearings where these same Democrats refuse to remove a mask to speak, yet they have plexiglass between their seats and are over 10 feet from those testifying.

Other than offer free vaccines which President Trump already had in place what the fuck else can a state or federal government do?

Stop trying to play word games. I said illegitimate, not illegal. And breaking quorum is most definitely NOT a legitimate tactic for stopping legislation. It is quite literally against the rules that they agreed to, and it runs counter to the oath that those legislators swore to uphold. Skipping town to avoid work is NOT "faithfully executing the duties of the office" in any way, shape, or form. It's quite literally the opposite of it.

As for it being a common tactic for both parties, please let me know when the last time that the Texas Republican legislators fled the state to break quorum. I'll wait.

This is most definitely a Democrat tactic in modern times. There is a single example of Republicans doing it in this century (Oregon, I think), and quite a few of Democrats doing it. Regardless, whichever party does it it is illegitimate every time someone does it.

Noteworthy state legislative walkouts



Again... This is pretty simple. One is a legitimate parliamentary procedure under SENATE rules, the other is a clear violation of HOUSE rules. It exists in the Senate because that body is designed to be deliberative, it's structured to protect the minority, and it's supposed to slow things down. The House, on the other hand, is a majority-rules body. It is NOT designed to slow down and deliberate, and there is no filibuster in the House for a good reason. If you don't understand this distinction then I'd ask why you think that we have a bicameral legislature in the state, and urge you to revisit Civics 101.

Again, the Democrats lost the fucking election. They have no right to disenfranchise the entire state by bringing the entire legislative process to a halt. They're holding a fucking gun to our heads and threatening us to do what they want or else.

This is NOT legitimate. Stop making excuses for them.

It's both legitimate and legal.
And the word "illegitimate" is synonymous with illegal.
If breaking quorum is not a legitimate tactic, then why is it being used effectively for decades in Texas?





I'm sure they would argue that executing the duties of their office entails every legal means of opposition to legislation they disagree with.




I wrote its a common tactic for both parties, not specifically Texas, but has occured in other states and I even gave you an example from the US House where Republicans broke quorum. Does it happen often? No. But its not illegal. Don't like it? Change the law.



The ability to break quorum depends on the rules adopted by that body. Some require a simple majority ie 51 out of 100 for example, others a supermajority, 60/100 for example.




No kidding. I fully understand the differences and have pointed that out above.



   
Quit whining. Just as it did in 2003, this too will end. Give them enough rope and they hang themselves. So far they've looked like idiots on Capitol Hill.
Abbott/Patrick/Phelan now have to walk a PR tightrope: appease the conservatives and get back to business without making the Dems martyrs to their constituents.




You confuse explanation with excuses. I'm not excusing anyone, Republican or Democrat. In my book they waste the majority of time they are in session EVERY time they are in session.

Oh, bullshit. Again, you're playing word games to try and justify what the Democrats are doing. It's pathetic.

"Illegal" has a strict definition that *only* pertains to compliance with the law. "Illegitimate" *can* be used in that context, but it also has several other uses. Note the 4 definitions here:

Legitimate
a. Being in compliance with the law; lawful: a legitimate business.
b. Being in accordance with established or accepted rules and standards: legitimate advertising practices.
c. Valid or justifiable: a legitimate complaint.
d. Based on logical reasoning: a legitimate deduction.

"Legitimate" is the word you use when something may not be in violation of statute, but not in accordance with "established or accepted rules and standards" - as is exactly the case here. Something can be legal and yet illegitimate at the same time. They are acting out of accordance with established House rules, even if they're not in violation of Texas state law. You know that, so stop playing fucking games.

As for why it's been used, that's because they get away with it. Same reason Democrats steal elections in states with Democrat governors and SoS's - because no one will stop them. And in the case of Texas, they get away with it because they haven't set quorum rules to majority (instead of 2/3), and there are no real repercussions for doing it. That doesn't make it legitimate. It's still a violation of House rules, and no matter what sort of logical pretzel you try and twist here, that is a fact that you can't get around.



Not showing up for work is not "exercising the duties of the office". It's literally the opposite of that.

Here's a thought experiment for you. Let's say that they never come back. I know, they will, but let's just say that they don't. Have they "faithfully executed the duties of the office"? The primary duty of their office is to represent the interests of their constituents in the legislature. How can you argue that they've done that if they've literally shut down the legislature and failed to show up to work?

Again, give me a fucking break.



It's not a common tactic for both parties. The single example that you gave happened 33 years ago. "Common"? It's a FAR more common tactic among Democrats. Did you not read the Ballotpedia link I posted? Of course not...

That doesn't change the fact that in every case it's done, it's a violation of the legislature's rules and is illegitimate. No matter who does it.



There's not a legislative body in the country that allows quorum busting as a legitimate procedure. It's a violation of the legislature's rules in every single case that it's ever occurred.

Do you not understand that those rules are there for a good reason? I get it, you're a Democrat, and the ends justify the means to you people. But normal people want our elected representatives to abide by the rules that are set. When breaking rules becomes the norm, the other guys start doing it too, and then the entire system breaks down.



No, I don't think that you do understand the difference. You've shown pretty clearly here that you actually do think that it's a legitimate tactic even though it's a clear violation of House rules, and that despite what you keep saying you do equate it with the use of the filibuster.
   


Of course it'll end. That doesn't mean that we should just shut up and go along with it. These fucking pieces of shit have disenfranchised ALL of us. If the legislature can't conduct business, then my reps aren't able to represent me. Neither are yours. That's not OK, and it's not a small thing.



OK, so you don't give a shit. That's your prerogative. Well, I do. I want that election integrity bill passed, I want that bail reform done, I want them to do everything possible to stop teachers from peddling CRT bullshit in schools, and frankly just about everything else that they had on the agenda. I don't want Houston and Dallas running up the score with mail-in ballots again like they tried to do in 2020. I want violent criminals to stay locked up and not be immediately released like the Leftist DAs and judges in the cities are doing.

And I want EVERYONE to play by the fucking rules. That is not too much to ask for from our elected representatives. It shouldn't even be an issue.

You might not care about it, bot a lot of us find that stuff to be important.

Stevie Wonder saw this coming.

Nope.
Voted Republican for the last forty six years.

At least you didn't call me a Nazi.

OK. But when I see someone making Democrat arguments and defending indefensible Democrat bullshit like this, it's a fair assumption that they're a Democrat.

That's the charitable assumption.

You came to a faulty conclusion.
If I was "making Democrat arguments and defending indefensible Democrat bullshit" I sure as hell would have mentioned WHY they walked out and WHY they had such feels and WHY its for the children. I didn't.



The shoe could be on the other foot. And that's why you'll not see serious mention of changing from supermajority to simple majority by the Republicans. Failure to recognize that is as scary as the US Senate filibuster rule riding on a few DEMOCRATIC senators.....which it does.

Some people are just "principled" Republicans, they play nice, and abide by the Marquis de Queensbury rules, all the while getting thier balls kicked into their throats by Dems who do not care.

This boils down to a war, between goiod and evil, light and darkness...this needs to be played for keeps, winner takes all. Unless you are willing to utterly destroy your enemy, and destroy any will to fight, you will lose this war.

Make no mistake, the Dems are the enemy, they are playing for keeps.

Rightfully, whence back in Texas people who ran from their elected duties should be placed in a short rope with a long fall, and left for public display.

Until a side is willing to do so, that side will lose.

See Col Kurtz' monologue about the pile of small inoculated arms. Thats the will to win...all else is fail.

No, you're still defending them. That's obvious. Pretending that this is a legitimate tactic when it's a clear violation of House rules serves only that purpose, and it's disingenuous as well. I have a hard time believing that anyone who would do that is a lifelong Republican voter, but then aqain the Republican party is full of closet Leftist cunts too, so who knows.



I'm still waiting for you to tell me about the time that the Republicans in the Texas legislature busted a quorum. It's a "common tactic that both sides use", you say. Still waiting.

And you just equated quorum busting with the filibuster. Again.

Heard Phelan on the radio today doing an interview. He has taken away Moody’s Pro Tem in the House. He would like to remove all Democrats for any chairs of committees, but he can’t because of a 1993 law that removed his ability to take chairs away. Now that law may wind up changing after this.

I'm not defending them because there is no defending them.
I agree, its a clear violation of TX House rules. But it's not illegal, immoral or illegitimate no mater how tight your pants get when they pull this stuff. It's a rules violation with no punishment. The House deals with it in the only way they can.......by waiting them out. While you are huffing and puffing REEEEEEE!!!!! ILLEGITIMATE!!!!!  House Republicans will do nothing to punish them because they can't.

You seem to believe a "clear violation of House rules" is akin to a crime....its not. It's parliamentarian rules.




First you call me a Democrat, now you refer to me as a "closet Leftist cunt"? Dude you know you want to call me a Nazi, so do it, don't be a coward.




Sigh.
Again, I wrote its a common tactic for both parties, not specifically Texas, but has occurred in other states and I even gave you an example from the US House where Republicans broke quorum. Does it happen often? No. But its not illegal. Don't like it? Change the law, ask the Texas House to change its required quorum.
Lack of quorum occurs even in small town government as well. It causes the city council meeting to be rescheduled because Bob was off chasing a cow and Bubba missed his flight back from his daughters wedding.



No sir, not once have I written that they are equal. But they both have the ability to delay action on legislation...and whether legitimate or illegitimate, both are completely legal means. I mentioned the US Senate filibuster requirements because they can be changed by the Senate from the current super majority to a simple majority. Thems the rules.

You've spent the entire thread defending them and defending the use of this tactic. We can all read, here. Don't try and weasel out of it. You've staked this hill, now you get to defend it.




Of course it is, you can't disagree on that. At least you admit one part of the obvious.



It isn't illegal, but it is most definitely immoral, unethical, and illegitimate. But as with most Democrats, you try and create an equivalence where if it's not illegal, then it's automatically moral and legitimate, too.

These assholes are still collecting their normal pay, and they are still collecting the daily per diem while actively skipping out on their jobs. Do you seriously find nothing immoral about collecting pay at the taxpayers' expense while not only failing to show up to work to do the job you're being paid for, but doing so in clear violation of the rules? Really? Nothing at all immoral about that?

I literally gave you the definitions of the word "legitimate", one of which was acting in accordance with established rules and procedures. There's no question that this is illegitimate under that definition.



This is true, and something that they should address when they do finally get back into session. Of course, as soon as they try to, the Dems will take another vacation...

Hostage-taking works when there are no repercussions and we've got Lefty cunts in the corporate media and social media making excuses for it.



At no point in this thread have I said that it was a crime or indicated that it be treated as such. Now you're just making shit up.



If you spend the entire thread defending Democrats and making excuses for this tactic, and if you act like a Democrat, then I'm going to assume that you're a Democrat and call you one. If that hurts your feelings, oh well.

Whether you're a closeted Leftist cunt is not for me to decide, as I don't know you. That's between you and God.



It's not a "common tactic" for both sides. I linked to a Ballotpedia article outlining the notable times that it's been used, and with one or two exceptions it's a FAR more common tactic used by Democrats. And it has NEVER been used by Texas Republicans, so it's absurd for you to try and insinuate that it's something that both parties do here. That's a clearly disingenuous argument, and your refusal to acknowledge this obvious fact is one more reason to suspect that you're a Democrat, frankly. "Both parties do it" is a common refrain when they get caught doing something naughty.



You've literally spent this entire thread equating the two. You talk about them both in the same sentence repeatedly as if they're equivalent actions conducted for the same purpose - you literally did exactly that in this post.

And again, you take the position that as long as something is legal, it's fair game, regardless of its ethical or moral framework. THAT is a hallmark Democrat mindset. It's the party of trial lawyers for a reason.