For more infomation >> Guddan tumse na hopayga serial status video made videos 11.k - Duration: 0:30. 
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Gets HUMILIATED In Congress For Asking DUMB Questions
chair recognizes ms. Ocasio Cortez of New York for five minutes
Thank You chair so um let's play a game let's play a lightning round game I'm
gonna be the bad guy which I'm sure half the room would agree with anyway and and
I want to get away with as much bad things as possible ideally to enrich
myself and advance my interest even if that means putting it putting my
interests ahead of the American people so mrs. Hobart Flynn oh and by the way I
haven't listed all of you as my co-conspirators so you're gonna help me
legally get away with all of this so mrs. Hobart Flynn I want to run if I
want to run a campaign that is entirely funded by corporate political action
committees is that is there anything that legally prevents me from doing that
no okay so there's nothing stopping me from
being entirely funded by corporate PAC say from the fossil fuel industry the
healthcare industry Big Pharma I'm entirely hundred-percent lobbyists PAC
funded okay so let's say I'm a really really bad guy and let's say I've have
some skeletons in my closet that I need to cover up so that I can get elected
mr. Smith is it true that you wrote this article this opinion piece for The
Washington Post entitled these payments to women were unseemly that doesn't mean
they were illegal well I can't see the piece but I wrote a piece under that
headline in the post sighs and that's right okay great so green light for hush
money I can do all sorts of terrible things it's totally legal right now for
me to pay people off and that is considered speech that money is
considered speech so I use my special interest dark money fund a campaign to
pay off folks that I need to pay off and get elected so now I'm elected and I'm
in I've got the power to draft and shape the laws that govern the
United States of America fabulous now is there any hard limit that I have perhaps
mrs. Hobart Flynn is there any hard limit that I have in terms of what
legislation I'm allowed to touch are there any limits on the laws that I can
write or influence especially if I'm based on the special interest funds that
I accepted to finance my campaign and get me elected in the first place
there's no limit so there's none so I can be totally funded by oil gas and gas
it can be totally funded by Big Pharma come in right Big Pharma laws and
there's no limits to that whatsoever that's right okay
so awesome now now mr. Mara Bonnie the last thing I want to do is get rich with
as little work possible that's really what I'm trying to do as the bad guy
right so is there anything preventing me from holding stocks say in an oil or gas
company and then writing laws to deregulate that that industry and cause
you know that could potentially cause the stock value to soar and accrue a lot
of money in that time you could do that so I could do that I could do that now
with the way our current laws are set up
yes yes okay great okay so my last question is or one of my
last questions I guess I'd say is is it possible that any elements of this story
apply to our current government in our current public servants right now yes
yes so we have a system that is fundamentally broken we have these
influences existing in this body which means that these influences are here in
this committee shaping the questions that are being asked of you all right
now would you say that that's correct mr. Mara Bunny or mr. Shelby yes all
right so one last thing mr. Chou
in relation to congressional oversight that we have
the limits that are placed on me as a congresswoman compared to the executive
branch and compared to say the president of United States would you say that
Congress has the same sort of standard of accountability are there is there
more teeth in that regulation in Congress on the President or would you
say it's about even or more so on the federal in terms of laws that apply to
the president mm-hmm yeah there's just almost no laws at all that apply to the
president so I'm being held and every person in this body is being held to a
higher ethical standard than the President of the United States that's
right because there are some committee ethics committee rules that apply to you
and it's already super legal as we've seen for me to be a pretty bad guy so
it's even easier for the president of United States to be one I would assume
that's right thank you very much mr. Roy of Texas is recognized for five minutes
Thank You chairman mr. Smith ordered if you might have any comments on the
questioning by my colleague from New York he seemed to have a few notes
you're writing down anything you want to say after after that discussion well I
would say there are a couple things for example that would not be she answers
there anything that you know could apply here there are certain things that could
not apply here for example the whole point of the article that she held up
that I wrote was that you cannot use your campaign funds to make those kinds
of payments that would be illegal personal use but campaign funds are not
a dark money they are totally disclosed so they are not dark money it's worth
noting by the way that earlier was mentioned that dark money constitute
about 1.7 billion dollars I believe that figure is incorrect by a factor of about
500% dark money constitutes about two to four percent of the total spending in
u.s. elections and has always been involved in u.s. elections so those are
just a couple of points and I was I was I did kind of chuckle at the question is
it possible asked of us that these influences are this money is influencing
the questioning here to that I'd say that's something you have to ask
yourselves if you're being influenced and see what you think if you are you
might question yourselves if you're not you might question this hearing
a couple of questions about super PACs as they are often referred to our
federal candidates allowed to coordinate Wed directly with a super PAC and or
have anything to do legally with its formation no they are not at the current
time with respect to super PACs is this a particularly partisan problem or would
you say both parties have super PACs funding elections and funding
candidacies both do I believe I'm not harvest insurance I believe historically
they've learned more Republican but in the last election cycle a more
democratic I'm not a hundred percent sure of that but it's certainly a
bipartisan issue so if we deployed the famous let me
google that for you and we got this to come up to say well a bunch of head
Lodging you google to say democrats super PACs spending three million
dollars from Menendez in new jersey super PAC money dominated 2018 election
in Colorado and Democrats controlled in the cash raised Democratic super PAC
translates ads in Spanish after seeing Election Day search trends and if we
went through and through and through we would see that this is not a
particularly partisan question or problem as just a baseline is that right
mr. Smith I think that's right and when we think about what we're dealing with
with respect to campaign finance are you familiar with daxing in the sense of
outing people online this you're referring to yes generally so for
example are you familiar with a Twitter account called every Trump donor
no we just weeded out one by one the names hometowns occupations employers
people who contribute as little as two hundred dollars to the president's
campaign he's tweet following a particular formula my point being and
the question for you is when we talk about campaign disclosures are we aware
of the negative impacts that you have on forcing American citizens and exercising
their free speech to have that information be disclosed whether that's
good policy or not might be debatable but is there are there negative
consequences to that with respect to free speech giving you an expert on free
speech there are and there are definitely studies that have shown that
disclosure does tend to decrease participation now that doesn't mean as
you point out that it's not worth it but it certainly has cost and so we have to
be careful on how broad we let that disclosure become thank you mrs. Hubbard
Flynn just a quick question do I did I hear correctly earlier in one of
your exchanges with one of my colleagues here that you consider proof of
citizenship as one of the barriers to voting or one of the obstacles for
people to be able to vote a proof of citizenship is that one of the ones you
outlined yes that it's appeared you know it is used you know at many polling
places that people just attest to that to have to come up with the paperwork is
a burden for many Americans as well as you like outlined photo ID
early voting changes if you're restricting early voting from being
longer shorter to shorter and election day registration that's that's the
position the reason the reason I ask is because when we look at optical to
voting we know that the voting rights Voting Rights Act was a paramount piece
of legislation to ensure people have access to the polls we also know that
the Voting Rights Act ran into constitutional problems in Shelby County
versus holder for very good reason if you look at what the majority wrote the
Voting Rights Act of 1965 employed extraordinary measures to address an
extraordinary problem in the face of unremitting and ingenious defiance of
citizens constitutionally protected right to vote section 5 was necessary to
give effect to the Fifteenth Amendment in particular regions of the country
this is South Carolina V katzenback and today our this is now Justice Thomas
writing in a in a concurrence today our nation has changed the conditions that
originally justified section 5 are no longer characterized voting in the
covered jurisdictions mr. Smith are you aware that in this legislation there's
an attempt to bring section 5 back with respect to preclearance and could you
comment at all on that and what that what that might mean that's right of
time I just note that yes that is true and I think the Supreme Court's concern
was that the formula applied from data from 1964 and simply need to be updated
to reflect modern realities in this bill I don't believe makes any effort to do
that that is correct thank you thank you god
bless you and God bless america
Đăng ký:
Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét