The level of corruption has been unprecedented under Trump rule and you want to put one of his chief allies into the position that is 2nd in line for the Presidency. Pelosi was "guilty" of insider trading? I don't remember the trial and the verdict, care to refresh my memory?
To be fair, isn't this also the second defeat for Hakeem? Is sure seems like he isn't being elected....
She was caught twice, and it was in the news. Nothing happened because for members of Congress, it was not illegal at the time. Martha Stewart went to jail. This is the game you guys play, and I am tired of it. Google “Nancy Pelosi insider trading.” Another one you refused to acknowledge that New York and Illinois have cashless bail. I was supposed do the research for him only to be told I am an SOB. I am tired of progressive advocate games.
He also has zero success in anything he's brought forward by way of bills. He doesn't know how to negotiate...likely the most important part of the job. Seems to me there are more and more republicans saying 'how hard could that be' and then find out that it is much harder than they thought.
BINGO. Any one from democratic side is far left , guilty. Only people qualified are GOP politician who wanted to overthrow US democracy. Thank you for proving my point in post # 14
Moderate Republican believe in election and the MAGA don’t. let’s start with those who believe in democracy.
No rule says that the Speaker needs to be in the majority party. In all the votes for Jordan so far, Jefferies has gotten more votes.
Oh yes that’s what we need. Reagan, the drug dealing for guns guy. The country could always use another crack epidemic.
This guy is my favorite, actually. Very photogenic and speaks as though he isn't insane. It's awesome.
LOL-- Jordan's whole reason for being in government, is to destroy government!!! First off, it is never the responsibility of the minority party, in the House, to vote in favor of the majority party's choice for Speaker. If any party cannot even, on its own, elect a leader-- then it has no governing majority. That said, I had, all along, been against Democrats' voting to dump McCarthy-- absolutely, against doing so, before the House has passed all necessary appropriations bills. But that ship has now sailed. While McCarthy would need but few Democratic votes, and there may well be a handful of Dems who feel, no matter how protean are Kevin's shifting allegiances, he would still be an improvement over most other realistic options (most definitely including Jordan, as well as the "no leader" option; I would even say, over Steve Scalise) for the time being, at least-- nevertheless, the Democratic Caucus remains remarkably united, and there are just too many other Dems, who strongly object to McCarthy. To my mind, the most logical course, is to vote the Speaker pro tem, Patrick McHenry, the necessary powers to conduct all House business, for a given, short-term period. This serves the interests of both parties. Just today, however, I overheard commentator Nicole Wallace-- who one would expect had some idea, as a former Republican, of that which she was speaking-- saying that Republicans had no interest in this obvious course. I'd not heard anything she'd said, leading up to that conclusion. I am just now hearing that Republicans had among themselves, rejected the McHenry idea. Can you Steve, enlighten me as to what Republicans are thinking?
Yeah, I too, loved his comments about the "clown show" Freedom Caucus, who won't take "yes," for an answer. But he is a New York Democrat, from a Biden district, I'm pretty sure. So Dems would naturally be very satisfied (I would hope) with that choice, but I don't foresee Che GOP, putting him on their a la carte menu.
Her husband was taking care of the family investments. There was no blind trust set up while while he was doing that. They made over $100 million. I am sure she never told him about any pending legislation. Never. I remember one time when she was caught, and it was reported, but my memory is not perfect. Naturally it must be or else your people are innocent.
It’s over for him. I’m sure you enjoying the advent of one party rule. You want no checks and balances on the Democrat Party.
I would have been fine with Scalise. I don’t agree with him but he is a man of principle. Jim Jordan is not. He was a key figure in organizing the January 6th riot. To this day he claims the 2020 election was stolen. Jordan is also a snake in the grass. I believe he worked with Gaez to oust McCarthy so he could make a play for the speakership. Jordan publicly expressed support for McCarthy while plotting his demise behind his back. He did the same to Scalise when he first got the nomination. How can you support such a sack of ****?
Au contraire-- you seem confused. It is the Party in the House majority-- which could provide a check on the Democrat-controlled Senate and White House, but which, instead, can't even elect a leader-- which, to any rational assessment, would be the one which "wants no checks and balances on the Democrat (sic) Party." I would guess that Fresh Air, who you erroneously accuse of this, only wishes that we had a second Party that was competent enough, to provide a responsible counterweight, to prevent excesses, on the liberal side.
