As usual, your numbers don't add up, especially when it comes to this bill.

[khou.com]

"H.R. 6666 was introduced to the House of Representatives earlier this month. Called the COVID-19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act, it was designed to fund testing and contact tracing in medically underserved communities and hot spots.

But it has been subject to a fair share of claims and rumors.

Earlier this week, the VERIFY team fact-checked claims that the bill essentially mandated vaccines, a claim that persisted despite vaccines not being mentioned once in the bill.

Since then, people have posted videos and petitions online claiming that the bill allows the government to enter your home to forcibly test you, and remove you from home for quarantine if you test positive.

But what does the bill actually say?
THE QUESTION

Does H.R. 6666 give the government the power to forcibly test you in your home and take you away for quarantining?
THE ANSWER

No. The bill does not make testing for individuals mandatory and never once suggests that you will be removed from your home.
WHAT WE FOUND

The bill says it authorizes the “Secretary of Health and Human Services to award grants to eligible entities to conduct diagnostic testing for COVID–19, and related activities such as contact tracing, through mobile health units and, as necessary, at individuals’ residences, and for other purposes.”

So it does award grants for entities to conduct testing at people’s homes. But it doesn’t say they’re mandatory anywhere.

The sponsor of the bill, Democratic Chicago-area Congressman Bobby Rush, addressed this concern in a media release on his website. "This bill would allow the testers to come to you through mobile testing units and door-to-door outreach, as is safe and necessary, from members of your own community," he said in the statement. "However, if you don’t want to be tested for coronavirus, you won’t don’t have to be — but you should!"

He then further reiterated later, “Again, these tests would be completely voluntary.” And then said one last time, “This bill does not authorize anyone to enter your home, for whatever reason, without your permission, nor does it allow the government to remove anyone from your home because of the coronavirus.”

Which brings us to the second major claim -- that the bill would allow for the government to remove you from your home or separate you from your children for quarantine if you test positive.

The text of the bill does not say anything of the sort. In fact, the bill specifically talks about people quarantining “at their residences.”

So this bill doesn’t give the government (or any group) the authority to remove people from their homes and it’s actually trying to keep people in their homes by providing tests and supplies outside existing test locations.

Finally, a number of people have asked about the bill’s number while relating it to the biblical mark of the beast.

The U.S. Government Publishing Office says bills in each chamber are numbered in the order they’re introduced starting at the beginning of each Congress.

If you look through the House bills in number descending order, you’ll find that this was the case of this bill as it was one of many bills with a similar number introduced on May 1"

That's it. There are NO totalitarian powers awarded ANYBODY. Testing and contact tracing of positive virus carriers are vital to get a handle on the pandemic. It's not a secret plot to monitor your gun club (or whatever). The NSA doesn't care about you enough to tap your phone. And if they did, they'd simply decrypt your identity from this site and monitor all your antigovernment ravings much mre easily than by passing a House bill.

Relax. Take a deep breath. It'll be okay.

Perhaps I was wrong there. We just need to look below. Lol

I have another post I just put up on General Hellos about Trump and White Trash.

Nope. The answer is simple. Evangelicals wanted conservative judges all over. And boy they got them!!! A lot of the damage is done and we will live with its regrettable consequences for decades to come.

Ive always said that the republicans are enriching themselves under trump who is far too easy to manipulate and will eventually throw him under the bus

and senators

@whiskywoman Good point.

The cancellation of the Nov. election has been a fear for a couple of years with 45. Legally he cannot, but laws have never stopped Trump. He does not respect the rule of law, and his opponents appear too cowardly to take him on head on.

@t1nick I've said all along that he was going to find a reason to mess with the election, whether it be real or contrived.
This pandemic has given him the opening he's wanted from the beginning.
He's always been an opportunistic asshole.
No one should be surprised.

Here is the crazy part...lets say he does try to cancel the election by some contrived emergency...what is the response? He would basically declare it unsafe say....due to the Virus...how do we get him out...there is no contingency that I can see in the Constitution. He could basically play us for years with this Virus...meanwhile hundreds of thousands if not millions will die.

We can also count on Vote Trump Jr. for Prez! in 2024. It's bound to happen.

@phoenixone1 Precisely. Millions die, and he gets to play emperor indefinitely.
I have NO faith in SCOTUS overruling him with any success.
The Senate won't do anything, and the House doesn't have enough power.
He'll suspend the Constitution, if he thinks he can get away with it, and we
all know he thinks he can get away with anything.

@p-nullifidian He can achieve this by declaring "marshal law" using the pandemic as the reason. Given the present make up of the Senate and the SCOTUS, he just might get away with it. Afterall, it would benefit McConnell as he is presently losing his re-election bid in his state

@Sgt_Spanky Or Princess Ivanka. He's already mentioned that one.

@Sgt_Spanky Hopefully we will never spiral that low.

@t1nick Marshall Law would not work for him because as long as the Courts are open for Business he cannot hold power...if the country were under siege and the Courts were unable to function then YES he could hold power ...BUT... Only until the Courts open back up...

@phoenixone1

This has been an object of debate recently. Not respecting the rule of law, he could marshal enough support in the military and his political sycophants to potentially force the issue.

Plus I can imagine a scenario whereby he could disband the SCOTUS for their own protection from the virus and possibly render them moot and mute by controlling their access to the public and each other.
Sequester in controlled environment.

I'm not into conspiracy theories, but this guy gives one pause to think.

@phoenixone1 Martial Law would require the compliance of the military.
If 45 were to suspend the Constitution, and declare martial law, we can
only hope that the military would turn against him and stage a coup.

@KKGator

He has a few Generals, Admirals and high level military personages on his payroll. A well timed action could bring enough military into play, even if many in the ranks are not comfortable with the action. Make for an interesting novel unfortunately.

@t1nick SCOTUS has already been meeting virtually, toilet flushes and all, so I doubt there would be a 'safety' concern. It seems to me that a second wave, including sheltering in place, would not demand a military response, particularly if the first wave didn't require a heightened alert posture. The question is, if Trump loses the election in November, will he accept the result, and what might he do during his lame duck session?

@p-nullifidian SCOTUS is ready to support conservative causes and hundreds of lower courts have also been filled with conservative judges. It was never about the guy himself. People never understood they were not voting for Clinton but for a sane America. Kind of late to realize that now.

@Rodatheist

"People never understood they were not voting for Clinton but for a sane America."

Bullshit.
They had PLENTY of warning that 45 was a disaster waiting to happen.
There was sufficient factual evidence to prove he would be the worst possible choice. There were many who repeatedly expressed that 45 was temperamentally unfit and completely lacking in the education and expertise to do the job. All things that have been more than adequately proven to be true.

They just chose to be ignorant and wallow in their Clinton-hate.
Many of them are still doing it.

@KKGator I don't see him able to suspend the Constitution...it can only be suspended because of a) Invasion or b) rebellion. What he might try to do is if he loses in November ... Start screaming "massive voter fraud" and all he has to do is utter the words "the people should rebel" and there you have it...his base are ready to go to battle. They start a skirmish and he then uses that to attempt Marshall Law and then try to suspend the Constitution...but I think Congress has to be the ones to actually Suspend it and that just isn't going to happen. I don't like thinking about this because it is getting so damn crazy my head hurts...but this guy is INSANE and capable of anything and the Republicans are WORTHLESS. Guarantee they are going to regret this once we get rid of his bloviated ASS.

@KKGator I've said all along we need a coup. My only worry is that the military will follow him even if his "orders" are wacky and illegal. For instance, he might very soon start a war with China for the distraction, will the military follow him? China does not want a war, it would cripple their economy and they're all about the money also.

@KKGator Oh, I’m sorry if I was not clear. I meant that the American electorate did not understand that in rejecting Clinton they were ushering in a time of insanity.

You were doing great until you had to add, " the Democrats are only marginally better."
BS.
Who's going to start a coup (!), pray tell?
Surely not the Democrats! According to you they're not much better than the boot-licking Pubs!
You?
I got it!
Bernie Sanders!
So the Pubs are going to cancel the elections now, huh, and these people are actually agreeing it's actually possible!
What a hysterically paranoid and delusional fantasy!
You people really need to get out more.

@Storm1752 Trump has floated the idea of extending his presidency beyond its first term. including speculating on president for life. If such an idea is in his diseased brain there's nothing outlandish about thinking he might actually try it. Fortunately the Constitution states definitively the day and time a president's term ends -- the 2nd of January at 12:00p after the general election in Nov at the end of the fourth year and that includes the VP as well So if he tries it, he'll be in violation of Constitutional law

But that doesn't bother him so, yeah, he'll try it if he thinks it could work.

@Storm1752 I was never a Sanders supporter.
Just someone who has been paying attention.