Blue Dogs push for further action on domestic terrorism

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: The Hill

Members of the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of fiscally conservative Democrats, are calling for the passage of two bills aimed at combating national security threats in the wake of the deadly insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6.

The group of moderate Democrats argues that additional action needs to be taken to prevent similar instances in the future and hold those responsible for the attack accountable, opting to officially endorse Rep. Brad Schneider's (D-Ill.) Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act and Rep. Stephanie Murphy's (D-Fla.) Security Clearance Improvement Act.

Murphy's bill would bar those who took part in the riot and those who support QAnon - a sprawling conspiracy theory that centers around the baseless belief that former President Trump and his allies are working with the military to expose a shadowy cabal of elites who control U.S. politics and run child trafficking rings - from obtaining or maintaining a federal security clearance.

Murphy, a co-chairwoman of the coalition, argued that steps need to be taken to prevent conspiracy theories from infiltrating the government.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/blue-dogs-push-for-further-action-on-domestic-terrorism/ar-BB1dHK7F?li=BBnbfcQ&ocid=DELLDHP

---

Don't know why the concern about domestic terrorism would would be limited to the Blue Dogs but then this article is from The Hill. I'm sure the more liberal Dems share the same point of view.

[soothsayer]

1. Maybe it's notable that even conservative types want an end to this nonsense?

Idk.

[Warpy]

5. Very, they know damned full well it will be used against the left, exclusively

We have adequate laws against insurrection and it's high time to use them, throw the book at the thugs who organized this and the creeps in suits who funded it, including DJT to the tune of $35 million.

Unfortunately for the country, these conseravaitve snowflakes will get their way.

[pandr32]

2. Barred from "federal security clearance" at the very least

[RKP5637]

3. I don't know how, but I would like to see something done about HATE media and the spewing of

endless lies about things that have self-evident truths. Yes, we have free speech, but the way it is being used as a domestic terrorist tool well might really take the US under.

[appalachiablue]

11. + 1

[summer_in_TX]

12. Badly needed.

I've been wondering how to get the American people behind that. Maybe a high level commission doing its work transparently with those whose credentials for nonpartisanship are strong.

First Amendment issues are valid concerns, but we need some legal remedies ASAP against the fomenting of hate and misinformation.

[RKP5637]

13. I often think of the damage Rupert Murdoch has done to the US. And nothing is done to stop it as he

hauls zillions of dollars to the bank from spreading his propaganda for profit.

[Bucky]

14. Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine

There's some places where it can't reach, like social media. But it could definitely be imposed on the editorial broadcasts of cable news networks like OANN, Newsmax, and Fox (and it would mean equal time for conservative responses on MSNBC and mainstream news networks as well).

[summer_in_TX]

16. I think a public interest standard could be applied to even social media.

I figure if we have those principles embedded in our media legislation we might be able to force changes to social media algorithms so they cannot serve up disinformation and hate through automatic systems.

Maybe it will even give us a basis to get cable news channels to remove lies. That should be a minimum thing we could all expect from our news sources. Truthfulness.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

4. Remembering when invention meant something helpful.

Inventing a cockamamie "theory" to stoke violence is very 21st century and definitely not helpful.

[central scrutinizer]

6. Fucking "blue" dogs

They weakened the ACA and helped enable the ReQop takeover of the Congress in 2010. Weasels!

[Magoo48]

8. Blue lapdogs of corporate America.

[Hekate]

7. Good for them for spearheading these bills. There is plenty of work to go around. nt

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. Hey Blue Dogs! You might have to kill the filibuster to get that Domestic Terrorism bill passed! Nt

[Magoo48]

15. Oh no. What next, suppose workers will want $15 per hour for their labor?

[keopeli]

10. We need a new security clearance category: unable to be overridden by the President!

It does no good to mark insurrectionists so they can not receive a security clearance if the NEXT President can just ignore it and give the clearance anyway.

Certain strikes must carry such a weight that no one (not even a President) can then issue the clearance. If you have such a mark against you, there is no hope of ever getting a clearance.

I'd be willing to entertain a sunset clause on such a mark - say 10 years - after which a future President 'could' opt to provide the clearance anyway (perhaps only under certain conditions, like having no other incidents/felonies/etc. on your record.)

I say all this before pointing out the obvious: we need an overhaul of how security clearances are issued. There must be less power given to the President (or more restrictions). I'm also willing to agree that certain marks against a person would disqualify you from running for elected office or holding a position of public trust.

A new law like this would preclude certain individuals (i.e. Jared, Ivanka, etc) from ever working in government again, one way or another.