Author Topic: McCarthy and the House Speakership  (Read 1717 times)

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #50 on: January 05, 2023, 07:31:35 PM »
The Republicans had a chance to put people on the committe and when they chose 2 people who were very likely to be the ones investigated, it showed they were not serious.

It backfired on the Republicans and then they had no voice.

Any committee that operates under rules such as the Jan 6 committee.  Rules that take secret testimony but only release portions favorable to the partisan decisions makers, that issues subpoenas for political purposes (e.g., the subpoenas issued to the RNC's email distribution list manager), and that refuses to allow for cross examination of witnesses, is both illegitimate and un-American.

Republicans were right to refuse to participate.  What they should do in the new Congress is censure everyone who participated in those political show trials.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #51 on: January 05, 2023, 07:43:55 PM »
The full transcripts are being released.  How do you know they were not cross examined?

Repubilcans had a chance to be on the committe and help make the rules. They put up some people who were complicit in the event. You do not put Al Capone on the Grand Jury.

This was not a trial. This was an investigation. And a good number of Republicans knew they were in deep *censored* for what they had done for Truimp. Just check them all asking for pardons.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #52 on: January 05, 2023, 07:46:31 PM »
And still no comment on the chaos/fiasco that is the Republicans in the House picking a Speaker? Why does Trump have so little power over his followers? What do they want other than Never McCarthy? He has given them almost everything they have asked for and still they vote against him.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #53 on: January 05, 2023, 08:56:48 PM »
Seriati, on what grounds are you asserting that an investigative committee that does not adhere to the standards of a criminal trial is "un-American?"

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #54 on: January 06, 2023, 07:37:34 AM »
Let's not change the subject. The subject is who will be the Speaker of the House

Gaetz has now said that if the Dem join some Republicans to pick a moderate Republican to lead the House, he would resign. Great offer but if I were the Dems I would wait until Boebert and MTG made the same promise and then take them up on it. Maybe Biggs and a few others.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/matt-gaetz-says-hell-resign-085619735.html

It would be cool to see 400+ Reps vote for some Moderate Republican (if one could be found) and the Freedom Caucus sidelined into obscurity and powerlessness.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2023, 07:42:54 AM by msquared »

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #55 on: January 06, 2023, 10:04:30 AM »
Unfortunately the plan is not to be sidelined, but to become a party-within-the-party to co-govern with the rest of the Republicans--or perhaps with more say than them.

Quote
The House Freedom Caucus, Corrigan said at the Nov. 14, 2022, meeting, “has extraordinary power to negotiate a leadership arrangement” and urged them to try to extract a litany of concessions from McCarthy, some of which had been floated previously by Freedom Caucus members as they prepared for Republicans to retake the House. Freedom Caucus members should “negotiate directly with the speaker for committee positions for Freedom Caucus members,” as well as “a specific number of committee assignments and full committee and subcommittee chairmanships,” he said.

Corrigan suggested the Freedom Caucus ask for changes to the “motion to vacate” rule, which allows members to call a vote over the speakership. As of Thursday, McCarthy appeared prepared to restore the motion to vacate in accordance with conservatives’ demands.

Corrigan also made a case that the Freedom Caucus should negotiate for the chairmanship of the powerful House Rules Committee, “or at least three of the four members.”

The House Rules Committee determines how many amendments and which amendments are offered on the House floor, granting its members extraordinary power to guide the business of Congress. The rules committee is usually made up of tenured lawmakers and allies of the speaker.

In recent days, McCarthy has acquiesced to a number of the Freedom Caucus’ demands — and he may be prepared to go even further as he tries to win the speaker’s gavel. According to reporting from Politico, he has agreed to concessions that include placing more Freedom Caucus members on the House Rules Committee. Freedom Caucus members continue to push for seats on powerful committee and subcommittee chairmanships, which would further help them guide the direction of the next Congress.

I still remember C.J. Cherryh on a panel at a SF convention talking about how a lowly Roman used the power of the veto to work himself into becoming Emperor.  It looks like these RINOs are positioning themselves to become the power in the House above everyone else.

If Republicans want to actually run this country, sooner or later they will have to start working with the Democrats.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #56 on: January 06, 2023, 01:30:40 PM »
The RINO actions only make sense when you realize that they have no interest in democracy and the goal is not to govern and call it freedom. A republic ruled by one, but who will be the one and how will they dress it up as freedom?

The 'Freedom Caucus' understanding of the the idea of Freedom is absurd and they have no cognitive ability to notice thier hypocrisy/shadow they project when they use the word because of course they are right.  Thus they give away the very things they only think/imagine they stand for.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #57 on: January 06, 2023, 02:19:47 PM »
The adults have all left the room. Now we just have children battling for the remote control, throwing tantrums and wanting to watch what they want to watch. I can't imagine the progressive wing taking it this far. Then I remember how power corrupts, manchin, and such. If Pelosi had a more narrow margin, we might have seen this four years ago. She's had to vow not to step down as speaker after four years, McCarthy had to promise to step down whenever they all him to.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #58 on: January 06, 2023, 02:22:34 PM »
Well on the 12th vote 14 of the 20 voted for McCarthy, so it is just the core 6 who are holding out. The Never Kevins, who were always Never Kevins. I guess we can call them RINO's since Kevin is supported by Trump and he is their leader.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #59 on: January 06, 2023, 03:33:11 PM »
If anyone wants to indulge in a little schadenfreude, here are the 10 best jokes on the Speakership impasse according to Electrol-Vote.com:D

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #60 on: January 06, 2023, 04:24:15 PM »
If anyone wants to indulge in a little schadenfreude, here are the 10 best jokes on the Speakership impasse according to Electrol-Vote.com:D

1&2 are genuinely funny to me. The others seem anemic in terms of satire. Or maybe I just don't get some of the references. I definitely don't see the point to the avatar one. But I haven't seen the film.

Ouija Nightmare

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #61 on: January 06, 2023, 04:47:54 PM »
It’s going to be McCarthy of course, it’s only a question of how many voting sessions to get there.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #62 on: January 06, 2023, 04:49:59 PM »
And how much power he wants to give to the Freedom Caucus. Which right now is pretty much everything. He might as well tie strings to his arms and legs and hand them to Perry and Gaetz.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #63 on: January 06, 2023, 04:55:46 PM »
And how long he will be Speaker, since he's already agreed to allow the Freedom Caucus to repeat this real-life Groundhog's Day performance any time they feel like it.  ;D

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #64 on: January 06, 2023, 04:58:03 PM »
Quote
1&2 are genuinely funny to me. The others seem anemic in terms of satire.

What?  You didn't like Nancy Pelosi living the dream?  Or George Santos bragging that he never had that problem when he was Speaker? ;D

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #65 on: January 06, 2023, 05:32:00 PM »
And how much power he wants to give to the Freedom Caucus. Which right now is pretty much everything. He might as well tie strings to his arms and legs and hand them to Perry and Gaetz.

I don't understand how those not in the 'freedom caucus' (stupid name) can allow the few to dominate them like they are. After this stunt I would assume that the GOP do everything it can to crush them. But I just made a ass of myself because I'm pretty sure they won't

Ouija Nightmare

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #66 on: January 06, 2023, 06:01:48 PM »
And how much power he wants to give to the Freedom Caucus. Which right now is pretty much everything. He might as well tie strings to his arms and legs and hand them to Perry and Gaetz.

There already isn’t and won’t be a majority leader. If there were they wouldn’t be repeating this nonsense.

What he’s looking at is 2 years gambling he can cement his position while trying to manage all the challengers attempting to steal his place.

Maybe that’s his idea of a good time, people do have some peculiar tastes.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #67 on: January 07, 2023, 08:54:02 AM »
Well 4 days and 15 ballots and McCarthy finally pulls it out.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mccarthy-offers-deal-end-standoff-055730327.html

216-212 for him with 6 voting present.

Now lets see how long before one of those 6 asks for a vote of no confidence and we go through this all again.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #68 on: January 07, 2023, 10:36:54 AM »
The rumor is 5-6 senior House Repbulicans went to the Freedom Caucus members and told them that if they did not at least vote present, then these 5-6 senior members were going to vote for Jefferies and hand the Speakership to the Dems.

I guess the only people the Freedom Caucus hates more than McCarthy are the Dems.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #69 on: January 07, 2023, 08:07:27 PM »
After none of the 6 far right people who opposed McCarthy voted for him, Trump claims victory.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-takes-bow-kevin-mccarthys-234347443.html

If McCarthy had won on the next vote after Trump had said to vote for him, he might have had a claim. As it is, the Emporer has no clothes.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #70 on: January 11, 2023, 08:28:37 AM »
And if anyone was wondering what Republicans cared most about. Its letting rich people avoid paying taxes. First bill they introduce after getting the speakership resolved was to defund the IRS. Have to make sure the IRS doesn't have enough employees to answer the phones for average people and not enough people to audit rich people with an army of accountants and lawyers.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #71 on: January 11, 2023, 08:32:46 AM »
And would add $118 billion to the deficit. Then they will want to cut SS and othe social programs to offset.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #72 on: January 11, 2023, 08:38:58 AM »
Quote
And if anyone was wondering what Republicans cared most about. Its letting rich people avoid paying taxes.
And gutting the Ethics committee, of course.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #73 on: January 11, 2023, 08:41:22 AM »
Santos is thrilled about that.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #74 on: January 11, 2023, 09:31:12 AM »
And would add $118 billion to the deficit. Then they will want to cut SS and othe social programs to offset.

But fund the military but not Ukraine. The literal most efficient defense dollars we have ever spent. The money put into Ukraine is gutting Russia's military. After we finally give Ukraine enough weapons to actually win we can pivot to containing China. Russia will be licking their wounds for a while after this one.

I'm sure we'll start seeing the investigations soon. Odds on an impeachment of Biden over the classified documents while defending Trump from worse? I put it at at least 75% odds.

Investigations, bills for rich people. Wonder if they'll go for a national abortion ban after all their return the issue to the states talk. Or a new version of the The Fugitive Slave Act for people who travel out of state to get an abortion. Not sure what else the Republican policy is. Tax breaks for burning coal? Tax increases for wind/solar? Legalize retroactively paying 17 year old girls to travel between states for sex (Matt Gaetz, cough, cough). I really don't know what policy of the Republican party is anymore.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #75 on: January 11, 2023, 09:32:39 AM »
And would add $118 billion to the deficit. Then they will want to cut SS and othe social programs to offset.

Fully collecting the taxes of the wealthy is probably one of the least painful ways to put a dent in inflation as well. Causes much less harm than raising interest rates to slow the entire economy.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #76 on: January 11, 2023, 09:50:14 AM »
Their policy is to be the opposite of whatever the Dems are for.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #77 on: January 11, 2023, 10:19:45 AM »
Quote
Fully collecting the taxes of the wealthy is probably one of the least painful ways to put a dent in inflation as well.
It's actually kind of odd that, for all the constant cries from the Right to just "enforce existing law" on immigration and gun control, they really don't want to see that happen with taxation. (Honestly, though, I don't think they truthfully want immigration or gun control laws enforced, either, so this is less an instance of hypocrisy than it is a consistent pattern of dishonesty.)

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #78 on: January 11, 2023, 12:52:24 PM »
And then there's the three page secret addendum in the Rules Package, which none of us know what it contains!  (Although we can make some good guesses to some of it. :) )

Great way to start off a "transparent" Congress.  ;D

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #79 on: January 11, 2023, 02:05:31 PM »
When the end goal is not to govern and freedom comes down to getting the services that matter to you without paying for them and screw everyone else anything you can do to gum up the system is a win. Even better you can blame everything on the system your actively trying to shut down.

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #80 on: January 11, 2023, 05:37:23 PM »
The three page addendum is what McCarthy paid to get those last few votes. There are going to be a few people, and probably their friends/family, making a lot of money out of it. They set a price for their votes, and they received it.

I'm curious to learn if the various Democratic Houses ever put something like this in place. If they did, fair enough, at that level they all tend to get kind of scummy.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #81 on: January 11, 2023, 05:56:14 PM »
Retroactive censure of Liz Cheney?

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #82 on: January 11, 2023, 06:40:55 PM »
Retroactive censure of Liz Cheney?
[/quote


If need be, sure.

She made up the new rules, as she went along. Lol. Reps are in charge now, they'll be protecting their own

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #83 on: January 12, 2023, 12:10:06 AM »
The full transcripts are being released.  How do you know they were not cross examined?

Because they were denied counsel and legal privileges in their testimony.  You can look this stuff up you know.

Quote
Repubilcans had a chance to be on the committe and help make the rules.

No they didn't, that's just a lie.  The Republicans had no say in the rules.  They had no say in the rules in any of Pelosi's anti-constitutional actions.  In many many cases even when they when they participated on committees despite the unfair rules, the Democrats overruled the rules.  The Dems had a majority on every committee and used that majority over and over in blatant ways to simply create exceptions when they didn't like a result.

Not to mention how often the Dems manipulated testimony, manipulated the release of testimony and restricted any ability to disclose testimony by Republicans while leaking whatever they liked themselves.

Honestly, the fact that you're even on here "debating" that the one-sided Democrat controlled committees that refused so many legal protections that witnesses are entitled to at law and under the Constitution were okay is appalling.  NOTHING that came out of the impeachments or the Jan 6 committee represents even the barest of efforts to get at the truth of the situations they purported to cover.  I rate them up their with McCarthy in the books of most significant abuses of power in Congress's history.

Quote
They put up some people who were complicit in the event. You do not put Al Capone on the Grand Jury.

What delusion.  I assume you are referring to Jim Jordan.  Do you have some proof that he was "complicit" in something?  No you really don't.  Nor do you have a rationale explanation for the difference between encouraging protected activity - in other words encouraging a protest - and "encouraging" something illegal here.  Nothing about encouraging a protest in DC was remotely an illegal activity and nothing actually shows that any Republican member of Congress did anything remotely more than that. 

What you do have is a seemingly rock-solid belief - without any evidence or proof - that something nefarious was plotted.

We generally call that a conspiracy theory.

Quote
This was not a trial. This was an investigation.

This wasn't an investigation.  It was a show.  Investigations aren't afraid of hearing from both sides, investigations don't start with the premise that some facts are off limits, or too risky to explore.  Investigations don't start with an announcement of the guilt of the parties they are supposedly investigating.  There's a reason that trials have protections and its fundamentally a belief that you can't get to truth without someone defending both sides.  That you have to overcome the other position with evidence and facts to get there.  That's something fundamentally American and the last House and the one before that both rejected that principal, because loyalty to party was more important to them than loyalty to the principles of our country.

Maybe you can point me to where you get the idea that a real investigation is ruthlessly avoids hearing both sides of a story?  Or even better, why don't you explain to me exactly how it will be just as legitimate in your mind if the Republicans were to say open up a similar partisan enquiry to investigate the criminal negligence of Nancy Pelosi in respect of her efforts to set the situation up.  Would that investigation that assumes her guilt, denies anyone "complicit" in her guilt from participating, demands secret testimony from thousands of Democrat partisans without allowing them counsel or say allowing them to assert Congressional privilege (which for all the whining about the limits of President privilege, Congressional privilege is a 100 times larger in scope and more absolute), which leaks only the most damning pieces of testimoney and buries anything contrary to the "story" behind Congressional secrecy, and which bars Democrats from access to the records be legit to you as well?  Would you really be on here saying that its conclusions were important or fair? 

Quote
And a good number of Republicans knew they were in deep *censored* for what they had done for Truimp. Just check them all asking for pardons.

They didn't ask for pardons because they needed them under a fair application of the law.  They asked for them because there is a two-tiered justice system, and the Federal government, including the DOJ, FBI, CIA and just about every other agency is made up of large majorities of Democrats/leftists.

In investigating many of the great Democrat scandals, including for example the Obama IRS controversy and the Hillary e-mail scandal, the DOJ has made extensive use of immunity deals (for everyone who could have testified against the Democrat principal) without getting any testimony used in courts.  In investigations of Republicans on the other hand, they exclusively use plea bargains, usually for process crimes, and sometimes after blatant overcharges or threats to family members to try and generate testimony against the Republican principles.  Or maybe you can point to the immunity deals for no testimony granted to Republicans that I'm missing?

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #84 on: January 12, 2023, 12:14:07 AM »
Seriati, on what grounds are you asserting that an investigative committee that does not adhere to the standards of a criminal trial is "un-American?"

From the principles that generated the bill of rights. 

Honestly, though it's just a lie to pretend the Jan. 6 committee was engaging in a legitimate function.  Congress has no authority to investigate what they believe are crimes that's a function of the Executive branch.  They structured the committee solely to achieve a goal of spreading political disinformation and controlling a narrative.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #85 on: January 12, 2023, 12:19:23 AM »
And if anyone was wondering what Republicans cared most about. Its letting rich people avoid paying taxes. First bill they introduce after getting the speakership resolved was to defund the IRS. Have to make sure the IRS doesn't have enough employees to answer the phones for average people and not enough people to audit rich people with an army of accountants and lawyers.

Sure, that's why the bill only defunded the auditors and not the money to improve response times.  Oh wait that's odd.  The reality is - and anyone applying logic would understand - the auditors were never about targeting the rich, they're about targeting the middle class.  It takes big numbers to squeeze a big population not big numbers to squeeze the rich.  And honestly the Democrats are the party of the rich, they openly favor tax deductions that benefit only the wealthy.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #86 on: January 12, 2023, 12:38:28 AM »
And would add $118 billion to the deficit. Then they will want to cut SS and othe social programs to offset.

Fully collecting the taxes of the wealthy is probably one of the least painful ways to put a dent in inflation as well. Causes much less harm than raising interest rates to slow the entire economy.

Except that there's actually not that much value in going after the rich.  They mostly pay their taxes in accordance with existing law - which is why the IRS loses those cases and what the accountants are for.  It's the middle class where there are significant errors that can be caught. 

When they go after the rich its often not the truly wealthy but rather those on the fringes of wealth or with newly created wealth.  Those cases are heavily weighted to the government trying to dispute things that were unclear because of the government's own rules.  Read a few actual cases.  I mean heck there's one in front of the court this term related to FBAR filings.  Where the government is trying to collect something like $2.5 million dollars for a failure to report foreign accounts where the taxpayer was confused but ultimately did self-report.  The government's taking the position that the failure was not willful on the taxpayer's part (i.e., they weren't trying to hide the accounts), but that there is no excuse for not understanding the law - which is confusing to everyone.

I can't remember the case, but there was a similar one where a woman inherited money and wasn't even aware of a filing requirement (the rule didn't come up on turbo tax for many years in which it applied).  The government is trying to take half of her inheritance as a penalty.  Thats even though there is no actual tax liability owed in respect of the inheritance or the account even if it had been reported.

That's the kind of "cheating" they actually go after.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #87 on: January 12, 2023, 08:15:21 AM »
"Because they were denied counsel and legal privileges in their testimony.  You can look this stuff up you know."

Obviously you did not watch any of the hearings.  Every video deposition I saw the person being questioned had counsel.  Many Trump supporters even took the 5th.

So your statement is obviously false.

The winesses who testified live may not have had counsel but they were testifying voluntarily and basically summarizing their earlier testimony.

As to the rules, they had no say since they did not want to play? Are you going to complain about how the Republicans are going to make their own rules, with out any input from the Dems on the Committes they are putting toghether now? Of course you wil not complain about that.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #88 on: January 12, 2023, 08:56:33 AM »
Quote
From the principles that generated the bill of rights.
Honestly, though it's just a lie to pretend the Jan. 6 committee was engaging in a legitimate function.
So let's indulge in an intellectual exercise for a moment and believe that there was a legitimate function for the committee to perform, namely: to conclude whether there is sufficient cause to suspect multiple high-ranking officials, including members of the legislature, of having conspired to overthrow the government, and refer those individuals to the DOJ for actual criminal investigation.

Let us acknowledge at the same time that this process was not in fact itself a trial, but merely investigative, and assume that anyone referred to the DOJ who then had to undergo a trial for the alleged crimes they may have committed would receive the typical legal protections accorded to a defendant.

If that were the case, what would your objections continue to be?

Quote
Investigations aren't afraid of hearing from both sides...
As a side note, what exculpatory testimony do you think would have been presented by someone who wasn't called before the committee?

-----------------

Quote
Except that there's actually not that much value in going after the rich.  They mostly pay their taxes in accordance with existing law...
To the best of my understanding, this is not true. Of course, if a given tax hurdle gets too onerous, the rich often have the power to bribe legislators to change the law, but it turns out that most don't bother. (For the same reason, most rich people do not in fact respond to higher taxes by moving their income and assets somewhere else, which is why higher taxes on the rich do generally produce higher net revenue.)

Quote
And honestly the Democrats are the party of the rich, they openly favor tax deductions that benefit only the wealthy.
You've used the word "honestly" in a number of posts the last few days, and I'm coming to believe that you don't know what it means.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #89 on: January 12, 2023, 09:26:09 AM »
I mean many Trump supporters testified, under oath and took the 5th. Which Trump says is only taken by mob bosses and criminals.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #90 on: January 12, 2023, 09:56:34 AM »
I'm getting confused
Is the argument that all House Investigations invalid and witch hunts or just the Investigations we don't agree with. 

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #91 on: January 12, 2023, 10:39:41 AM »
Eh. Went out there and pushed it in their faces, conservatives looking for literally anything to argue against. You and us know how they really are.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #92 on: January 12, 2023, 11:38:13 AM »
Eh. Went out there and pushed it in their faces

Who pushed what in whom's faces?

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #93 on: January 12, 2023, 01:41:11 PM »
Lloyd. Do us both a favor, would you?

A) You've shown yourself perfectly willing to play the willing idiot on defense of conservative BS. Is it your hobby? Eh. Nevermind.

B) I can be a bit of a dick at times. It's literally saved on the server of our little party here. Choose your battles carefully.

This is a really stupid hill to die on. Do us both a favor and don't.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #94 on: January 12, 2023, 01:48:07 PM »
Lloyd. Do us both a favor, would you?

A) You've shown yourself perfectly willing to play the willing idiot on defense of conservative BS. Is it your hobby? Eh. Nevermind.

B) I can be a bit of a dick at times. It's literally saved on the server of our little party here. Choose your battles carefully.

This is a really stupid hill to die on. Do us both a favor and don't.

Wow, did you just threaten me?

I legitimately didn't understand what you were referring to in your prior post.  Maybe you need to go outside and get some air.

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #95 on: January 12, 2023, 02:08:10 PM »
Sorry. If you didn't understand, that's my fault. Perhaps I jumped the gun.

Conservatives have been pushing a bunch of BS because they weren't in charge. They didn't have to follow through. They have the House now, and a good portion of what they've been running their mouths on will be super embarrassing if they apply any kind of real consideration to it. So...they won't. It will have just disappeared.

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #96 on: January 12, 2023, 02:11:07 PM »
No, I won't list out what we both know about. There's an argumentative technique where you throw so much BS at the other side that they spend all of their time defending against obvious BS. I'm not going to get involved with that here. If you think that means you won, congrats.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #97 on: January 12, 2023, 02:12:59 PM »
Maybe an example.  Biggs of AZ is out there saying they have gotten rid of the $80 million that Biden got for the IRS. While it is true the House passed something like that, the Senate is not even going to bring it up and Biden would never sign it.

So Biggs and the Freedom Caucus really did not do that they said they did.

The same thing with all of the investigations. My guess is 99% of them will go nowhere. They may try and impeach people but they will not get the votes. Tehy are doing show/theater governance.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #98 on: January 12, 2023, 02:24:42 PM »
In his defense, Biggs doesn't get to vote in the Senate.  I don't see what's wrong with house members taking credit for bills they pass.  Democrats do it all the time as well.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: McCarthy and the House Speakership
« Reply #99 on: January 12, 2023, 02:26:36 PM »
He was telling people that they did it. That they defunded the new agents/employees.

That is a lie. He could have said they attempted but were thwarted by Dems in the Senate and the President. But he did not say that.