Oregon Rep. Mike Nearman booted from House for planning armed protest.

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Oregon House expels state Rep. Mike Nearman, plotter of Capitol incursion

State Rep. Mike Nearman became the first person ever expelled from the Oregon Legislature on Thursday, following revelations he helped plan an armed incursion in the state Capitol late last year.

In a widely anticipated vote, the Oregon House approved a resolution that formally found Nearman’s act of opening a Capitol door for a far-right crowd on Dec. 21 amounted to “disorderly behavior”, the constitutional standard for ejecting a legislator. The resolution passed by a vote of 59-1, with only Nearman voting against.

“This is potentially the most serious and historic vote any of us will ever take in our career as legislators,” said state Rep. Julie Fahey, D-Eugene, toward the end of a somber, relatively brief debate in which Nearman was the only Republican to speak.

For every action, there are consequences.

Thoughts?
 

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
13,648
6,107
Massachusetts
✟583,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I have not read what he has to say to speak for himself.

If we go by the Constitution, an accused person gets to represent himself or herself, I think.

So, what does he have to say about it? I intend to try to read something about this, right now.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I have not read what he has to say to speak for himself.

If we go by the Constitution, an accused person gets to represent himself or herself, I think.

So, what does he have to say about it? I intend to try to read something about this, right now.

First of all, this was a state congressional hearing, not a court of law.

Second, he did represent himself. From the article:

"“This is potentially the most serious and historic vote any of us will ever take in our career as legislators,” said state Rep. Julie Fahey, D-Eugene, toward the end of a somber, relatively brief debate in which Nearman was the only Republican to speak."

Clearly he spoke for himself because nobody else wanted to speak for him.
 
Upvote 0

GreekOrthodox

Psalti Chrysostom
Oct 25, 2010
4,121
4,187
Yorktown VA
✟176,292.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Here here! is what I have to say!

Although, really? "And Rep. Daniel Bonham, R-The Dalles, said he’d concluded Nearman must be expelled, even though he believes Nearman is a smart lawmaker whose intentions were merely to open up the governing process to the public."

What happened to close circuit TV or requesting gallery tickets, although I don't know if the OR statehouse has a gallery.
 
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
13,648
6,107
Massachusetts
✟583,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Thank you, @TLK Valentine . . . now I have read some reporting about this.

If the quotes of him are correct, he on purpose let people into the Capitol of Oregon without their being checked for weapons, and at least one person entering used bear mace on police. For whatever reason, that sort of stuff is not being charged as terrorism. It to me seems like trying to destabilize a present government which is in power, using force and weapons. So, to me it's some form of terrorism. But this is not new, in the United States whose earlier European colonists used bloodshed during the Revolution and who reportedly used terror and germ warfare of smallpox against native peoples of the land.

And the article says Representative Bill Post was a close colleague of his; and Bill says he lied to him about if there was more video evidence. But then that video showing the planning showed up on . . . yes . . . Youtube. But there is nothing I have read which shows that he knew about that video which I understand was filmed during his meeting for the planning.

So, I am not clear about if he knew of that video, though.

He could have known or assumed someone in the meeting would record it. But this does not mean he knew it would get out, therefore be evidence.

In any case . . . whether I get caught or not > I am clear that if I betray trust, including by lying to honorable and trustworthy people . . . betraying people is not loving them. So, if I can betray trust, I need to pray about if I know how to love, or not, the way God has us loving people. To be unable to genuinely love while doing things is a very dire consequence of committing myself to betraying trust.

And we see how the Republican Party was able to advance Richard Nixon to the office of President. And Richard reportedly proved to be a betrayer of trust.

So . . . even though I do not buy what ones in the Democratic Party are doing, I also am aware that a number of Republicans might not be functional in God's love and honesty. And Jesus says, "without Me you can do nothing", in John 15:5.

But it seems popular for ones of each party to say to the other > because you are wrong, I am right.

not quite

So, Mr. Nearman discovered the consequence of getting caught. But I can't assume if the ones voting against him are clean, themselves. He had been serving for some time, before that happened; how could he last that long, without ones realizing something was wrong with him???? By the way, Richard Nixon made it to the office of President before he got caught. Are cases like this, then, the tip of an iceberg of the character of various Republicans who could promote such people to their tip??

At least one Democrat has made it to the White House, yet it is reported he was a serial adulterer, yet is claimed to have been a great president.

If voters can't tell the difference, why? My own character can have me in darkness . . . not in God's light . . . so I can't see people right.

"'Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.'" (John 7:24)

Make sure with God about whom to trust. The American fifty-percent divorce rate might be evidence that many Americans do not make sure with God about whom they trust, including for marriage. These include ones who claim the Bible, as far as I know.

So, a consequence of reading this is I am reminded of my own failure. And a consequence needs to be how we pray for him and others and ourselves.
 
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
13,648
6,107
Massachusetts
✟583,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I have not read what he has to say to speak for himself.

If we go by the Constitution, an accused person gets to represent himself or herself, I think.

So, what does he have to say about it? I intend to try to read something about this, right now.

First of all, this was a state congressional hearing, not a court of law.

Second, he did represent himself. From the article:

"“This is potentially the most serious and historic vote any of us will ever take in our career as legislators,” said state Rep. Julie Fahey, D-Eugene, toward the end of a somber, relatively brief debate in which Nearman was the only Republican to speak."

Clearly he spoke for himself because nobody else wanted to speak for him.
To another thread to discuss this >

Should Constitutional principles of legal rights apply only in courts of law?? | Christian Forums
 
Upvote 0

trunks2k

Contributor
Jan 26, 2004
11,369
3,520
41
✟270,241.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
"“This is potentially the most serious and historic vote any of us will ever take in our career as legislators,” said state Rep. Julie Fahey, D-Eugene, toward the end of a somber, relatively brief debate in which Nearman was the only Republican to speak."
I read elsewhere that the Republicans voted to kick him not because of what he did, but that he lied about how much evidence there was that proved what he did.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Here here! is what I have to say!

Although, really? "And Rep. Daniel Bonham, R-The Dalles, said he’d concluded Nearman must be expelled, even though he believes Nearman is a smart lawmaker whose intentions were merely to open up the governing process to the public."

What happened to close circuit TV or requesting gallery tickets, although I don't know if the OR statehouse has a gallery.

For that matter, what happened to security checkpoints and metal detectors? Oh, right -- Nearman helped people get around them.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Thank you, @TLK Valentine . . . now I have read some reporting about this.

If the quotes of him are correct, he on purpose let people into the Capitol of Oregon without their being checked for weapons, and at least one person entering used bear mace on police.

None of which is being disputed, so the presumption of innocence is moot.

For whatever reason, that sort of stuff is not being charged as terrorism. It to me seems like trying to destabilize a present government which is in power, using force and weapons. So, to me it's some form of terrorism. But this is not new, in the United States whose earlier European colonists used bloodshed during the Revolution and who reportedly used terror and germ warfare of smallpox against native peoples of the land.

I can only assume that Nearman isn't being charged with terrorism because it cannot be proved that he was aware of the group's full intentions.

As for the terrorists themselves, I have no idea why they're not being charged as such.




In any case . . . whether I get caught or not > I am clear that if I betray trust, including by lying to honorable and trustworthy people . . . betraying people is not loving them. So, if I can betray trust, I need to pray about if I know how to love, or not, the way God has us loving people. To be unable to genuinely love while doing things is a very dire consequence of committing myself to betraying trust.

Peter denied Christ three times in one morning, and still went on to be the first Pope... just saying.

And we see how the Republican Party was able to advance Richard Nixon to the office of President. And Richard reportedly proved to be a betrayer of trust.

Which is unfortunate, because Nixon did do some good for the country... at first. Normalizing relations with China, for example.

But not everyone is prepared for the pressures that come with the presidency. The Office does not make men great, but it can break weak men. IMO, Nixon cracked under the pressure and descended into paranoia and corruption. Also IMO, he was neither the first nor the last president that happened to.

So . . . even though I do not buy what ones in the Democratic Party are doing, I also am aware that a number of Republicans might not be functional in God's love and honesty. And Jesus says, "without Me you can do nothing", in John 15:5.

But it seems popular for ones of each party to say to the other > because you are wrong, I am right.

But "I" don't have to be right -- I just have to not open the door for a group of armed thugs.

Even in a court of law, you are only guaranteed a jury of your peers -- not a jury of Saints.

not quite

So, Mr. Nearman discovered the consequence of getting caught. But I can't assume if the ones voting against him are clean, themselves. He had been serving for some time, before that happened; how could he last that long, without ones realizing something was wrong with him????

Not realizing... or far more likely, not caring. As long as Nearman voted on their side, his colleagues were happy to look the other way. But there's only so much they can overlook.

Remember, even Judas gave back the 30 pieces of silver when he saw that things had gone too far. Now we see what it takes for the Oregon GOP to do likewise.

By the way, Richard Nixon made it to the office of President before he got caught. Are cases like this, then, the tip of an iceberg of the character of various Republicans who could promote such people to their tip??

At least one Democrat has made it to the White House, yet it is reported he was a serial adulterer, yet is claimed to have been a great president.

Several Democrats -- as well as Republicans.

Even our esteemed "founding fathers" had their share of dalliance -- both alleged and confirmed. Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton...

History calls them great men, and by all accounts, they were. But just because you fight on the side of the angels, that doesn't make you one.

If voters can't tell the difference, why? My own character can have me in darkness . . . not in God's light . . . so I can't see people right.

You're assuming people can't tell the difference -- they can. The thing is, they don’t care. 30 pieces buys a lot of forgiveness.

In Matthew 16:26 (one of my favorite verses), Jesus was asking a rhetorical question. It would seem the political world has provided an answer.

So, a consequence of reading this is I am reminded of my own failure. And a consequence needs to be how we pray for him and others and ourselves.

It would seem that in his case, a specific prayer has been answered -- Psalms 109:8 (another favorite of mine!)
 
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
13,648
6,107
Massachusetts
✟583,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
In any case . . . whether I get caught or not > I am clear that if I betray trust, including by lying to honorable and trustworthy people . . . betraying people is not loving them. So, if I can betray trust, I need to pray about if I know how to love, or not, the way God has us loving people. To be unable to genuinely love while doing things is a very dire consequence of committing myself to betraying trust.
Peter denied Christ three times in one morning, and still went on to be the first Pope... just saying.
I can be very first to just criticize a person and not consider how there is hope for him or her to do better. So, thank you very much for reminding me that I need to first start with compassion and hope for a person who fails.

Nixon did do some good for the country... at first. Normalizing relations with China, for example.

But not everyone is prepared for the pressures that come with the presidency. The Office does not make men great, but it can break weak men. IMO, Nixon cracked under the pressure and descended into paranoia and corruption. Also IMO, he was neither the first nor the last president that happened to.
Hopefully this will improve how I evaluate people. Be more alive with hope, though I can be wise to see something that is wrong. I have been feeding too much on the failure part of people. So, thank you! :)
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: TLK Valentine
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,319
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I read elsewhere that the Republicans voted to kick him not because of what he did, but that he lied about how much evidence there was that proved what he did.

The only Commandment -- Thou Shalt Not Get Caught.
 
Upvote 0