Stop Nick Shirley Act

Where all the MAGAt Trumpeteers and Lie-brul communists to post their wearisome screeds.
The board admins are not responsible for any items posted from Biker's FaceBook feed.
Anyone posting Ben Garrison political cartoons gets a three-day vacation.

In memory of our lost political forum members. :cry:

Moderator: Biker

Post Reply
User avatar
Biker
Official UJR Russian Asset
Posts: 14950
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Stop Nick Shirley Act

#1

Post by Biker »

Cant make this shit up. Democrats are the enemy of the people
Nick Shirley confronts California Democrats over 'Stop Nick Shirley Act,' pressing on First Amendment rights

CJ Womack

5–6 minutes

California lawmakers were confronted at the state Capitol in Sacramento as independent journalist Nick Shirley filmed a video published this week questioning Assembly Bill 2624, a proposal California Republicans have dubbed the "Stop Nick Shirley Act," during interviews with Democratic and Republican legislators about the bill's scope and intent.

"If this bill were to get passed, instead of going after the fraudsters, they’re trying to make it criminal to go after the people that are committing this fraud," Shirley said in the video posted to his YouTube page.

The video centered on California Assembly Bill 2624, authored by Assemblymember Mia Bonta, D-Oakland, which seeks to restrict the public posting of personal information of individuals connected to immigration support services, including nonprofit organizations, legal clinics and health care providers.

The legislation also drew scrutiny in Shirley's video because Assemblymember Bonta is married to California Attorney General Rob Bonta. Shirley repeatedly framed that relationship as a potential conflict of interest while questioning lawmakers about whether the bill would make it harder to expose fraud involving taxpayer-funded immigration services.

"I actually don’t think that this bill violates the First Amendment," Pérez said when asked about constitutional concerns.

"We have ledge [legislative] counsel and ledge attorneys that talk with us about this. Constitutionality is really important to the work."
User avatar
CHEEZY17
Loves Him Some Ass
Posts: 17504
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:25 pm

Re: Stop Nick Shirley Act

#2

Post by CHEEZY17 »

If the fraud was that bad in Minnesota imagine the scale in California. Holy shit. :shocked:
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
User avatar
QillerDaemon
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Posts: 4530
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 9:35 pm
Location: Beautiful downtown OrloVista FL
Interests: Pet the damn cat!
Occupation: キラーデモン

Re: Stop Nick Shirley Act

#3

Post by QillerDaemon »

Biker wrote: Tue Apr 21, 2026 3:06 pm "I actually don’t think that this bill violates the First Amendment," Pérez said when asked about constitutional concerns.

"We have ledge [legislative] counsel and ledge attorneys that talk with us about this. Constitutionality is really important to the work."
So Caly-forny should look to Florida's legislative work, where governor executive orders and legislative proposals being unconstitutional are just last Tueday's problem. Then try to hide it even though Florida is supposed to have to most transparent government system aka "Sunshine Laws" of any state. A pride and joy they like to ignore.

This is pretty bad on CA's part; an assembly member and a state AG in a marriage can definitely cause a real conflict of interest. And a legislative councilor not seeing and pointing that out or the constitutionality of such proposed laws is a real concern about partiality on their part.
If you can't be a good example, you can still serve as a horrible warning.
“All mushrooms are edible. Some even more than once!”
これを グーグル 翻訳に登録してくれておめでとう、バカ。
User avatar
Who
We Could All Be Pretti Good
Posts: 5776
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2019 2:33 am
Location: God's Waiting Room
Interests: Breasts
Occupation: Trigger Man

Re: Stop Nick Shirley Act

#4

Post by Who »

QillerDaemon wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 3:53 pm
Biker wrote: Tue Apr 21, 2026 3:06 pm "I actually don’t think that this bill violates the First Amendment," Pérez said when asked about constitutional concerns.

"We have ledge [legislative] counsel and ledge attorneys that talk with us about this. Constitutionality is really important to the work."
So Caly-forny should look to Florida's legislative work, where governor executive orders and legislative proposals being unconstitutional are just last Tueday's problem. Then try to hide it even though Florida is supposed to have to most transparent government system aka "Sunshine Laws" of any state. A pride and joy they like to ignore.

This is pretty bad on CA's part; an assembly member and a state AG in a marriage can definitely cause a real conflict of interest. And a legislative councilor not seeing and pointing that out or the constitutionality of such proposed laws is a real concern about partiality on their part.
Wow that sounds terrible fortunately we have a Supreme Court where a Justice would never be married to a lobbyist
A Legend In His Own Mind

All Posts Fair & Balanced
User avatar
QillerDaemon
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Posts: 4530
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 9:35 pm
Location: Beautiful downtown OrloVista FL
Interests: Pet the damn cat!
Occupation: キラーデモン

Re: Stop Nick Shirley Act

#5

Post by QillerDaemon »

Who wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 4:14 pm
QillerDaemon wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2026 3:53 pm
Biker wrote: Tue Apr 21, 2026 3:06 pm "I actually don’t think that this bill violates the First Amendment," Pérez said when asked about constitutional concerns.

"We have ledge [legislative] counsel and ledge attorneys that talk with us about this. Constitutionality is really important to the work."
So Caly-forny should look to Florida's legislative work, where governor executive orders and legislative proposals being unconstitutional are just last Tueday's problem. Then try to hide it even though Florida is supposed to have to most transparent government system aka "Sunshine Laws" of any state. A pride and joy they like to ignore.

This is pretty bad on CA's part; an assembly member and a state AG in a marriage can definitely cause a real conflict of interest. And a legislative councilor not seeing and pointing that out or the constitutionality of such proposed laws is a real concern about partiality on their part.
Wow that sounds terrible fortunately we have a Supreme Court where a Justice would never be married to a lobbyist
No, we just have an non-appointed state AG Jimmy-boy (who replaced Pammie Jo) whose pie hole is permanently attached to Rhonda's ballsack.

Somehow, he managed to graduate law school and pass the bar without attending a single session on US and state constitutional theory.
If you can't be a good example, you can still serve as a horrible warning.
“All mushrooms are edible. Some even more than once!”
これを グーグル 翻訳に登録してくれておめでとう、バカ。
User avatar
Biker
Official UJR Russian Asset
Posts: 14950
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Stop Nick Shirley Act

#6

Post by Biker »

Image
Post Reply