[Video] Justin Amash town hall 5/28/19

[James Otis Jr.]

I like Rep. Amash and consider him one of only three true representatives in the U.S. Congress: Sen. Paul, Rep. Massie, and Rep. Amash. But, honestly compels me to report I believe he has fallen victim to TDS on this one.

The real issue at hand is the 4th Amendment rights of U.S. citizens being violated on the grounds of opposition research being accepted as evidence to secure a FISA warrant. I'm not sure where Massie is on all this, but I know my (and all of our) 4th Amendment rights are being protected by one person in the U.S. Congress and that is Sen. Rand Paul.

Btw, I still consider myself a supporter of Justin Amash. But, I'm very anxious for him to move off of this and stop being so useful to the worst among us.

 

[EBounding]

The real issue at hand is the 4th Amendment rights of U.S. citizens being violated on the grounds of opposition research being accepted as evidence to secure a FISA warrant. I'm not sure where Massie is on all this, but I know my (and all of our) 4th Amendment rights are being protected by one person in the U.S. Congress and that is Sen. Rand Paul.

He talks about this near the end of the townhall when a Trump supporter asked a similar question. Basically his answer is that Trump is just using that as an excuse since he doesn't actually want to reform FISA; Trump threatened to veto Amash's amendment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...on-fisa/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.cf03c3e6c70d

The townhall is really worth the time to listen.

 

[Superfluous Man]

The real issue at hand is the 4th Amendment rights of U.S. citizens being violated on the grounds of opposition research being accepted as evidence to secure a FISA warrant.

That is a real issue. But it's not the only issue. And one can oppose that and also oppose abuses of power on the part of the president at the same time. Despite all the complaints I've seen here from people saying that Amash has said things supportive of the deep state or violations of the 4th Amendment or other such things, so far I've seen no evidence of Amash doing that, and when I've asked the complainers to point to any, none have been able to.

 

[James Otis Jr.]

That is a real issue. But it's not the only issue. And one can oppose that and also oppose abuses of power on the part of the president at the same time. Despite all the complaints I've seen here from people saying that Amash has said things supportive of the deep state or violations of the 4th Amendment or other such things, so far I've seen no evidence of Amash doing that, and when I've asked the complainers to point to any, none have been able to.

This is a reasonable reply. That said, my overarching point is that, practically, Justin Amash is playing into the hands of the Left and even worse actors. I strongly disagree with Amash's approach and strongly agree with Paul's approach. I would also say the time and effort taken to take out Trump is pretty notable in its lack of evidence against him. I suspect similarly motivated and resourced investigations of preceding presidencies, by and large, would've produced equal or worse evidence. I think impeaching President Trump, under the backdrop of the current evidence at hand, would be a horrible precedent and against the long-term aims of the constitutional conservative/libertarian movement.

 

[ATruepatriot]

That is a real issue. But it's not the only issue. And one can oppose that and also oppose abuses of power on the part of the president at the same time. Despite all the complaints I've seen here from people saying that Amash has said things supportive of the deep state or violations of the 4th Amendment or other such things, so far I've seen no evidence of Amash doing that, and when I've asked the complainers to point to any, none have been able to.

And we have yet to see any factual proof of what Amash says is truly legal in interpretation. A personal opinion and interpretation is not proof, it is just rumor and hearsay until proven as fact. Even legal representation has to also prove facts behind the claims an expert witness shares in a court of law. Anything other is denying Constitutional right to due process no matter who it is. Even if you hate Trump and think he deserves it. this is a very very bad precedent to allow happen heading into the future. Amash and his staff are not infallible gods either. If Amash was pure and infallible he would have had the integrity to run as a Libertarian not a Republican and he would have lost election. What about this misrepresentation? Would this lack of integrity and misrepresentation be worthy of impeachment and removal from office using similar opinion and hearsay without any real proof? It's just a bad precedent to support no matter who it is against. I would have stuck up for even Obama or Hillary in the same circumstances, like it or not it just ain't right.

Where is the detailed compiled list of actions Amash is referring to so that we can claim it as indeed fact or not? Are we ever going to get one? Ron Paul would have already had a detailed list and explanations of why ready before he made a claim such as this against the President of the United States. This would be the honest and righteous thing to do. Amash is hoping the blind will just follow without question. And they are...

 

[Brian4Liberty]

https://www.facebook.com/fox17online/videos/618780868617444/


edit: here's another version that doesn't have the first minute cut out, probably is better

https://www.facebook.com/woodtv/videos/691087261321615

YouTube version:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsDs2fTbj1I

 

[angelatc]

He also denies that the whole investigation was based on lies etc. and tries to imply that there were underlying crimes

The investigation was about Russian interference in our election, which indisputably resulted in the indictment of several Russians.

and that Trump successfully obstructed justice.

.

He never said Trump was successful. Just the opposite, actually, due to the refusal of Trump's underlings to participate.

 

[angelatc]

Where is the detailed compiled list of actions Amash is referring to so that we can claim it as indeed fact or not? ..

It's literally the entire second half of the report.

 

[loveshiscountry]

1:21. she owns him.

Then he taps dances...

Own him? She came across as not understanding whats important.

She doesn't understand his job or she just lied. She said "your job is to directly represent the popular will of your constituents". Amash said it's his job to uphold the Constitution. And they can be mutually exclusive when the will of the people violate rights.

Then she came up with some garbage by saying he didn't give a reason for impeachment and later did?? She says impeachment could cause a civil war? She's as crazy as a shithouse rat.

He didn't do anything about FISA? She lied.

She blathered on about him wanting national attention. It's always about policy and the topic of conversation and not some poser garbage. Then she complains that he lost support because he won by the smallest amount since he started? He won by 11% like that's a bad thing. She's full of shit. He hasn't changed. She has.
Don't fall for her good looks.

 

[ATruepatriot]

It's literally the entire second half of the report.

This is what? 200 pages and we have no idea what and how Amash is personally interpreting these 200 pages? Has Amash or his staff summarized it and condensed it with the detailed specific violations list and why Amash feels they are and exposed these yet? I would objectively read a list of violations and why Amash feels they are violations. But I have yet to see one, let alone from Amash since the burden of proof is on him alone for his claims. If he really had any integrity he would supply this to eliminate any doubt of his word, interpretation, and opinion. If Amash produces some serious reasonable doubt proof point by point you know that I have the integrity to stand corrected. And if anyone else other than him tries to do this they would just be guessing at what Amash might be seeing. Until he explains his position with details, it is legally just a rumor and hearsay based on the perspective and interpretation of just one person. No one else has produced these specific details either. Know why? Because in reality they have absolutely no clue what Amash is pointing at until Amash shares what he is pointing at.

 

[juleswin]

So Amash is saying that Trump should be impeached for obstruction of justice. So the guy around minute 39 says that he spend 30 yrs in prison for obstruction of justice on a crime he did not commit and Amash just brushed it off. I know the average American would be locked up for obstruction but the man's example tells us that its not cool to automatically lock someone up for obstructing justice.

 

[ATruepatriot]

So Amash is saying that Trump should be impeached for obstruction of justice. So the guy around minute 39 says that he spend 30 yrs in prison for obstruction of justice on a crime he did not commit and Amash just brushed it off. I know the average American would be locked up for obstruction but the man's example tells us that its not cool to automatically lock someone up for obstructing justice.

Absolutely Jules... And this is exactly why presumption of innocence and due process is meant to supersede all other. They are meant to protect that one individual who might be innocent. And it is a blanket right afforded to every individual. It was once not so... There was a time when Women, Blacks, and Native Americans were not fully afforded these rights and it was fixed. Now only the President alone is denied these rights.

 

[loveshiscountry]

So Amash is saying that Trump should be impeached for obstruction of justice. So the guy around minute 39 says that he spend 30 yrs in prison for obstruction of justice on a crime he did not commit and Amash just brushed it off. I know the average American would be locked up for obstruction but the man's example tells us that its not cool to automatically lock someone up for obstructing justice.

He didn't brush him off. That guy got up because he wanted to make it about himself. He publicized his case. That was obvious.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I like what Amash is doing and I'm glad Massie and Rand are staying toward the right. I think testing a left-appealing libertarian position is a good strategy, and Amash is definitely grabbing media attention which is good. If he runs for president, I want him to run in the republican primary, not go libertarian party.

If you want him to move to the left then he should run in the Demoncrat primary.

But that would show that there is zero possibility of converting the left and that moving to the left is just a horrible idea.

 

[PAF]

Seems like he's to the right of the GOP

+ Rep

Which is why Justin seems to always have a challenger. Typically the neocon line is you can’t beat an incumbent, but they sure do try when a true liberty representative holds office.

 

[Swordsmyth]

That is the FULL-BLOWN STATIST position.

I support all people voting at the local level if that is what they wish to do. If you choose to homestead an open area, or open a business, and others in your locale also, it is up to that close-knit community to make decisions amongst themselves without state or federal interference.

Voting at the local level does not require registering with or funding "The Fed". It brings it back to the local level where it should be, and according to the 10th Amendment.

I understand why the Bill of Rights is being shredded though... it is not "invaders"... it is people like you who believe and support Restrictionism, Constitution Free Zones and government Eminent Domain - which are all communist/globalist agendas.

You support the invasion and electoral conquest of America by communist foreigners.

We know that already.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Wow. Welcome to 2008. I remember Conservatives in a complete meltdown when Ron Paul suggested we "invited 9/11 attacks".

Conservatives are not perfect but unlike the left they don't believe in ever larger big government, we can convert many of them but the left is hopeless.

 

[PAF]

You support the invasion and electoral conquest of America by communist foreigners.

We know that already.

Oh. It’s Sword-Shill again.

Carry on.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Justin: "Under the current administration spending is sky-rocketing."

The lady around the :37 minute mark who can "think for herself"... understands NOTHING about obstruction.

She said: "trump is all for limited government."

Justin said: "President trump is not at all for limited government. That's just not true at all."

The lady said: "I can't debate you on that because I haven't researched that. However he wants to get rid of the Department of Education."

Justin said: "He's free to do so. He's the president. He's the president, he could make a move to do so."

The lady said: "Ok, we'll just move on, this isn't going anywhere."

Justin seems to think Trump is a dictator.

Trump can't just get rid of the DoE by himself.

 

[juleswin]

He didn't brush him off. That guy got up because he wanted to make it about himself. He publicized his case. That was obvious.

He gave his details so people can verify that he is not just bullshi**ing. Regardless, he did not give a good reply to the guys comments and that is a problem. At first I thought he was trying to make issue of the town hall about himself but later on, I asked myself if I would have believed it if he did not give details(that I haven't verified but I am sure someone did)