7 Comments
User's avatar
Abbas Michael Dharamsey's avatar

Well - it didn’t get included in the senate package, soooo looks like there were some senators that had issues too…

Time to stop fucking around and drop UAPDA as a standalone bill and force a vote on it. No more hiding behind the NDAA

Expand full comment
Joseph Felser's avatar

Does Congress even deal with standalone bills anymore? They love these huge 1000-page omnibus monstrosities where no one can possibly even read the entire thing, all kinds of pork barrel and other under the radar shit can be packed in, with maximum levels of implausible deniability preserved all around.

Expand full comment
Beth's avatar

Congress loves the anonymity of their encyclopedic BBBs, and most of them will do just about anything to avoid "the buck stops here."

Expand full comment
Joseph Felser's avatar

Maximum grift, maximum dysfunction. Only the bucks 💵💰stop there.

Expand full comment
Joseph Felser's avatar

Burly did introduce a standalone bill with the key UAPDA features (9 member panel, disclosure timeline, etc.) but Danny said that Johnson would not allow it to come to the floor for a vote. They’d need a discharge petition to work around Johnson to bring it to the floor, and we know how well that’s worked with the Epstein files. Danny also said that there’s NO ONE in the Senate willing to introduce the UAPDA as a standalone bill, including Schumer and Rounds. What does this tell you? The Congress is not willing to be serious about moving this legislation forward, they’re not serious enough about Disclosure. Either they are afraid of losing DoD money for their districts, or they’re afraid of being primaried, or they’re just afraid.

Expand full comment
Joshua Bertrand (korea_ufo)'s avatar

Thanks for being the only hound throwin in the legwork.

Excellent questioning Las (and intern army! really appreciate the transcripts)

Expand full comment
Jack Powell's avatar

GREAT Job MATT

Jack

Expand full comment