In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and immigration fraud that the California government is enabling, rather than taking steps
to eliminate it, the legislature has (predictably) drafted a bill to criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley.

https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On 2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and immigration fraud that the California government is enabling, rather than taking steps
to eliminate it, the legislature has (predictably) drafted a bill to criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley.

https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen. Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the
public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered
up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of
sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the
first place.

--
Rhino

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On Tue, 14 Apr 2026 22:05:18 -0400, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and immigration >> fraud that the California government is enabling, rather than taking steps >> to eliminate it, the legislature has (predictably) drafted a bill to
criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley.

https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen. >Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the
public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered
up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so >clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of
sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the >first place.

I don't see how it matters. Foremost it doesn't have any effect until
such time as it gets passed into law. Then it will be challenged and
tossed on, at the least grounds of removing people's freedom of
speech. They may not like people posting recording made in public but
that's clearly a constitutionally protected action.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and immigration >> fraud that the California government is enabling, rather than taking steps >> to eliminate it, the legislature has (predictably) drafted a bill to
criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley.

https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen. Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the
public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered
up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of
sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the first place.

If they pass the bill and Newsom signs it into law-- which he might not
given how it'll make him look in the middle of his run for the presidency--
it will immediately be challenged on 1st Amendment grounds and almost
certainly be struck down.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 22:05:18 -0400, Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com>: >>2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and immigration >>>fraud that the California government is enabling, rather than taking steps >>>to eliminate it, the legislature has (predictably) drafted a bill to >>>criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley.

https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen. >>Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the
public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered
up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so >>clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of
sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the >>first place.

I don't see how it matters. Foremost it doesn't have any effect until
such time as it gets passed into law. Then it will be challenged and
tossed on, at the least grounds of removing people's freedom of
speech. They may not like people posting recording made in public but
that's clearly a constitutionally protected action.

You don't see how it matters?

One house of the legislature has too little respect for liberty that
it's advancing illiberal legislation for SLAPP, counting on complacent
voters not to care enough that their civil rights are about to be
thwarted to vote the bastards out of office. Even if this becomes law,
one CANNOT count on federal courts to strike something down immediately
as unconstitutional. How did you fail to notice, during Trump's second
term, that a writ granting equitable relief is ordered but, upon appeal
to both circuit and Supreme Court, the equitable relief is reversed? Furthermore, the Roberts court has made it far more difficult to be the certified class or individual plaintiff seeking equitable relief.

That leaves resolving the cinstitutionality as a matter of controversy,
which will then tie up some poor sap in court because an overzealous
district attorney took someone to court.

These are Trump tactics. Even knowing the administration's position will
not be upheld in the long run, in the short and medium run, tying
someone up in court forces an enormous loss of time and monies for very expensive legal bills.

Will this then intimidate citizen journalists from exercising their free
press rights> It damn well will.

Unconstitutional legislation is quite capable of causing real-world
harm. You got it wrong, shawn.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

BTR1701 <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:

. . .

If they pass the bill and Newsom signs it into law-- which he might not
given how it'll make him look in the middle of his run for the presidency-- >it will immediately be challenged on 1st Amendment grounds and almost >certainly be struck down.

I'm repeating in followup to you what I said to shawn. Given the anti-individual liberty bias of the Roberts court in narrowing how an individual citizen or class can seek equitable relief, and how often
during the second Trump administration equitable relief granted by a
judge has been reversed on appeal, my prediction is that the
constitutionality will not be settled till there is an actual
controversy making its way through court and appeal, which will require
some asshole overzealous D.A. throwing the book at some poor sap who
thinks free press rights apply to individuals and not just major media conglomerates who can afford the best legal counsel.

SLAPP will actually occur and people who cannot afford to have their
lives turned upside down for years will be intimidated.

Even if in the long term the legislation is found to be
unconstitutional, actual censorship will have taken place in the short
term as intended.

The individual who may eventually prevail in court still loses.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

BTR1701 wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and
immigration fraud that the California government is enabling,
rather than taking steps to eliminate it, the legislature has
(predictably) drafted a bill to criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley. >>>
https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen.
Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the
public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered
up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so
clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of
sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the
first place.

If they pass the bill and Newsom signs it into law-- which he might not given >how it'll make him look in the middle of his run for the presidency-- it >will immediately be challenged on 1st Amendment grounds and almost certainly >be struck down.

Newscum is a sociopath. He won't know or care how if makes him look.

--
Democrats and the liberal media hate President Trump more than they
love this country.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On Apr 22, 2026 at 6:22:33 PM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:

BTR1701 wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and
immigration fraud that the California government is enabling,
rather than taking steps to eliminate it, the legislature has
(predictably) drafted a bill to criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley. >>>>

https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen.
Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the
public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered >>> up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so >>> clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of
sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the >>> first place.

If they pass the bill and Newsom signs it into law-- which he might not
given
how it'll make him look in the middle of his run for the presidency-- it
will immediately be challenged on 1st Amendment grounds and almost certainly
be struck down.

Newscum is a sociopath. He won't know or care how if makes him look.

That would be completely incompatible with being a sociopath.

The *only* thing sociopaths care about are themselves. How things make him
look is Newsom's top concern.



--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

In article <10sccr7$2qh9i$2@dont-email.me>, atropos@mac.com wrote:

On Apr 22, 2026 at 6:22:33 PM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:

BTR1701 wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and
immigration fraud that the California government is enabling,
rather than taking steps to eliminate it, the legislature has
(predictably) drafted a bill to criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley. >>>>>
https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen. >>>> Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the
public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered >>>> up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so >>>> clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of
sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the >>>> first place.

If they pass the bill and Newsom signs it into law-- which he might not given
how it'll make him look in the middle of his run for the presidency-- it >>> will immediately be challenged on 1st Amendment grounds and almost certainly
be struck down.

Newscum is a sociopath. He won't know or care how if makes him look.

That would be completely incompatible with being a sociopath.

The *only* thing sociopaths care about are themselves. How things make him >look is Newsom's top concern.

Good point!

--
Democrats and the liberal media hate President Trump more than they
love this country.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Apr 22, 2026 at 6:22:33 PM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:

BTR1701 wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and
immigration fraud that the California government is enabling,
rather than taking steps to eliminate it, the legislature has
(predictably) drafted a bill to criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley. >>>>>

https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen. >>>> Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the
public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered >>>> up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so >>>> clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of
sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the >>>> first place.

If they pass the bill and Newsom signs it into law-- which he might not
given
how it'll make him look in the middle of his run for the presidency-- it >>> will immediately be challenged on 1st Amendment grounds and almost certainly
be struck down.

Newscum is a sociopath. He won't know or care how if makes him look.

That would be completely incompatible with being a sociopath.

The *only* thing sociopaths care about are themselves. How things make him >look is Newsom's top concern.

Is the hair alone enough for the armchair diagnosis?

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On Apr 23, 2026 at 9:13:11 AM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

On Apr 22, 2026 at 6:22:33 PM PDT, "Ubiquitous" <weberm@polaris.net> wrote: >>

BTR1701 wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2026-04-14 8:50 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:

In response to Nick Shirley's expose of the massive hospice and >>>>>> immigration fraud that the California government is enabling,
rather than taking steps to eliminate it, the legislature has
(predictably) drafted a bill to criminalize the actions of Nick Shirley.

https://ad75.asmrc.org/2026/04/13/ca-democrats-advance-stop-nick-shirley-act-to-criminalize-investigative-journalism/

Truly incredible! That's the complete reverse of what SHOULD happen. >>>>> Citizen-journalists should be praised when they find abuses of the >>>>> public trust and the problems they expose should be fixed, not covered >>>>> up. How can ANYONE defend a bill like this, let alone pass it? It is so
clearly corrupt and self-serving that anyone with even a smidgen of >>>>> sense would vote against and it and certainly wouldn't propose it in the
first place.

If they pass the bill and Newsom signs it into law-- which he might not >>>> given
how it'll make him look in the middle of his run for the presidency-- it >>>> will immediately be challenged on 1st Amendment grounds and almost
certainly
be struck down.

Newscum is a sociopath. He won't know or care how if makes him look.

That would be completely incompatible with being a sociopath.

The *only* thing sociopaths care about are themselves. How things make him >> look is Newsom's top concern.

Is the hair alone enough for the armchair diagnosis?

I'll allow it.



--- PyGate Linux v1.5.14
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)