Post

More from @RINOhunter1776

Missouri RINO Watch

@RINOhunter1776

Mar 13

🚨 SB 4 Just Legalized What Missouri Law Calls "Unjust and Unreasonable" 🚨

💰 Missouri lawmakers just passed SB 4, overturning protections that have safeguarded ratepayers for nearly 50 years. They claim it’s about “reliability,” but it’s really about supercharging utility profits—at YOUR expense.

📜 Missouri Law (Section 393.135) Has Banned This for Decades:
"Any charge… based on the costs of construction in progress… before it is fully operational and used for service, is unjust and unreasonable, and is prohibited."

🔎 What SB 4 Just Did to You:
⚠️ Overturns 393.135 to Let Utilities Charge You for Power Plants Before They Exist – CWIP allows utilities to add construction costs to your bill before a single watt of electricity is generated—even if the project is delayed or abandoned.

⚠️ Lets Utilities Bill You for “Future Costs” Today – FYT forces you to pay for projected expenses that may never happen.

⚠️ Expands Utility Profits at Your Expense – SB 4 fast-tracks rate base growth, letting utilities boost profits sooner by shifting financial risk onto you.

🚨 Missourians Banned This Before—Why Bring It Back?
In 1976, voters rejected CWIP to stop utilities from unfairly profiting off unfinished projects. But Ameren & Evergy lobbied to overturn that protection—not because they needed it, but because they wanted it.

🔥 What Can You Do?
❌ Tell @GovMikeKehoe: VETO SB 4!
❌ Call out the lawmakers who voted YES—they ignored you and chose corporate donors!
❌ Spread the word—every Missourian needs to know how they were betrayed!

💬 Did your rep sell you out? Drop their name in the comments!

We'll start with @RepJoshHurlbert & @MikeCierpiot

What Is Rate Base?

How Does Rate Base Grow?

Read 7 tweets

Missouri RINO Watch

@RINOhunter1776

Mar 12

“Property,” in the constitutional provision of ad valorem taxation (property tax),

means.. “an investment from which income flows”

Real Property = Immovable investments from which income flows

Personal Property = Mobile investments from which income flows.

Now when you read this, you should see it with new eyes.

“All investments from which income flows in Missouri shall be classified for tax purposes…”

Does your property meet that definition? 🤔

So when your uninformed elected officials cite RSMO 137.015 and say all property in Missouri is taxable, reply:

1. You’re not within their jurisdiction without situs (bc they’re in the Public & you’re in the Private).

2. “Property” means “investment from which income flows” & they have no evidence of said income flow.

Read 7 tweets

Missouri RINO Watch

@RINOhunter1776

Mar 11

🚨 THREAD: Who REALLY Funds Mike Kehoe? 🚨
The American Dream PAC was created to support Mike Kehoe—but who’s REALLY behind it?
Let’s follow the money. 🧵👇

1️⃣ The Big Money Players 💰
Mike Kehoe didn't build a grassroots campaign—he was installed with big donor money.
🔹 Rex Sinquefield - $1.75M
🔹 Herzog - $1.5M
🔹 Other corporate donors pushing their own agendas.
These elites don’t donate—they buy influence.

2️⃣ Where Did the Money Go?
The American Dream PAC raised millions, but who benefited?
🚨 Biggest Winner: Husch Blackwell Strategies 🚨
This firm, tied to the Blunt family, raked in $2.1M+ from the PAC.
Here’s the breakdown of their payouts: 👇

Read 7 tweets

Missouri RINO Watch

@RINOhunter1776

Mar 3

How America was captured by International Bankers:

We began as a Public Trust (nonprofit/charity), under the U.S. Constitution, that simply oversaw Commerce - and then post-Civil War and Reconstruction, D.C. was turned into a Municipality, creating a tangible "Federal" jurisdiction that could contract with other corporate fictions and take part in commercial agreements and transactions.

D.C. became a separate commercial entity, clearing the way for the Nation's capture through the creation of the Federal Reserve...

Artful and designing men were meticulous in their planning, to ensure everything was done "legally" (on paper), but in substance, was completely fraudulent and dare I say, treasonous.

Read 10 tweets

Missouri RINO Watch

@RINOhunter1776

Feb 20

📢 THREAD: How the CCP built influence in Missouri through agriculture & politics—and why it STILL matters today.

📜 Attached: The CCP Influence in Missouri Report detailing foreign agreements, lobbying ties, and ongoing threats to our state’s sovereignty. 🚨 #MoLeg

⬇️ THREAD ⬇️

1️⃣ The Midwest-China Hub Commission (MCHC) was an initiative in 2008-09 to expand Missouri’s trade ties with China. It signed agreements with CCP-controlled agencies like the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) & the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM).

🚨 Research indicates that agreements were made WITHOUT Congressional approval, potentially violating Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwest-C…

2️⃣ Former Missouri Governor Matt Blunt played a KEY ROLE in advancing Missouri-China trade agreements.
🔹 Blunt’s administration helped facilitate the MCHC’s MoUs with China, expanding Missouri’s economic ties with CCP-backed entities.
🔹 These agreements were allegedly made without formal Congressional oversight, raising concerns about their constitutional legitimacy.
🔹 Even after leaving office, the Blunt family's lobbying network remained engaged in industries benefiting from U.S.-China trade policy.
🚨 Missouri’s economic entanglements with China didn’t happen by accident.

Read 7 tweets

Missouri RINO Watch

@RINOhunter1776

Feb 10

Can an Amendment Remove the Inherent Rights to Personhood of a Certain Class? 🧵:

Missouri’s RSMo. 1.205 and Amendment 3

The issue at hand is whether Amendment 3, which grants a right to abortion in Missouri, overrides RSMo. 1.205, which recognizes unborn children as legal persons with protectable interests in life. This raises a fundamental constitutional conflict:
1. Can an amendment remove the inherent rights of a class of persons, particularly the unborn?
2. Does Amendment 3 violate Missouri’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses by arbitrarily stripping personhood from a defined group?
3. Can a constitutional amendment contradict the foundational principles of life, liberty, and property?
#moleg #ShowMeMAGA

1. The Hierarchy of Rights: Natural Rights Cannot Be Overridden by Statutory or Constitutional Amendments

According to the hierarchy of law and jurisdiction:
1. God created Man → Man is sovereign and possesses inalienable rights, including the right to life.
2. Man created the Constitution → The Constitution protects preexisting natural rights; it does not grant them.
3. The Constitution created Government → Government only has delegated, limited authority.
4. Government creates Statutes & Regulations → These must align with constitutional and natural rights.

Implication for Amendment 3:

• If life and personhood preexist in government, then a constitutional amendment cannot erase the personhood of a class of people (in this case, the unborn).

• The right to life is a natural right, meaning it cannot be eliminated through government decree.

• The Missouri Constitution exists to protect rights, not strip them away—therefore, an amendment that denies personhood to a certain class violates the entire purpose of constitutional governance.

Read 11 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Missouri RINO Watch

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @RINOhunter1776

Missouri RINO Watch

Missouri RINO Watch

Missouri RINO Watch

Missouri RINO Watch

Missouri RINO Watch

Missouri RINO Watch

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!