TexasCHLforum.com

Either the House can fail to vote to concur, or not even have a concurrence vote at all.

This will probably come as a shock to you, but this forum is not operated by the government. Thus your 1st Amendment rights are irrelevant here.

Well okay you type-A personalities win, this topic brought you out of the wood work.
I'm done with this thread.

This isnt the Natuinal Inquirer. Take this stuff to OCT's Facebook page where it will sell.

Chas.

I'm not affiliated with OCT, I'm just exercising my first amendment rights, and you have a right to disbelieve all the evidence pouring in about Benghazi if YOU choose.

Bladed wrote:
Corruption isn't nearly as prevalent as are baseless conspiracy theories about corruption.

That's conjecture.

In this scenario, there is absolutely nothing to be gained by offering to pay off a legislator.

Furthering his agenda.

What would Bloomberg gain by bribing someone

Furthering his agenda.

(at the risk of a felony conviction

"I am not a crook."

"I didn't have sex with that woman."

"It wasn't a terrorist action, but an out of control protest due to a youtube video."

Bladed wrote: Nobody is being paid off. Campus carry has enough opponents who will gladly and freely throw up procedural challenges, without the need for anyone to risk an ethics violation.

Don't be so naive. Corruption is alive and well in government. It happens. It's hard to prove if somebody brings up formal charges especially if it's some politicians acting in the best interest of the liberal media who will not cover it.

Benghazi?

The anti gun crowd can't stop anything at this point. They're greatly outnumbered in emails, faxes and calls from those who believe in the constitution and don't drink the sheep kool aid.

What I fear now is clerical error sabotage and certain representatives paid off by bloomberg to stall for time with amendments, procedural gimmicks and other legislative tactics.

Are some of you insinuating campus carry was added to the HB 910 bill? I heard it was not.