The fine GOP House majority

House Speaker McCarthy was forced to create "shadow document" that contains concessions made to Freedom Caucus members in writing... because the word of Speaker McCarthy is worth as much as the dirt on the boot of a January 6 insurrectionist.

House Republicans in the dark on McCarthy’s shadow document
https://www.axios.com/2023/01/10/republicans-mccarthy-house-rules-addendum

A private document that only some House Republicans have seen and others refuse to talk about could play an outsized role in the governance of the chamber over the next two years.

Why it matters: The document contains concessions — not included in the rules package passed on Monday night — that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) made to rebellious Freedom Caucus members to secure the speaker's gavel.
  • Those members have threatened to kill McCarthy’s speakership as swiftly as they acquiesced to it if he reneges on their handshake agreements.
Driving the news: The existence of a "secret three-page addendum" containing "the most controversial concessions" that McCarthy made in order to get elected was first reported by Punchbowl News on Monday and confirmed to Axios by multiple GOP aides and members.
  • One of those concessions is three seats set aside for conservatives on the Rules Committee, as well as representation for them on the powerful Appropriations Committee.
  • Other McCarthy giveaways include votes on congressional term limits and a select committee on the weaponization of the federal government, a debt limit strategy and a more open amendment process on appropriations bills.
  • One thing the document doesn't contain, according to NRCC Chair Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), who said he's seen it, is promised committee chairmanships for specific members: "No names, just representation [on panels]."
The intrigue: Many of the GOP members Axios spoke to about the private document said they hadn't seen it, while others who hold leadership positions were notably circumspect about any knowledge they might have of it.
  • "I'm not at liberty to discuss whether I've seen it or not," said Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), chair of the Main Street Caucus.
  • Asked if the document exists, Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), chair of the Rules Committee, told Axios, "I'm sure it exists, because I read about it from you guys [in the press] all the time. It has to be out there."
  • Both Cole and Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.) suggested it hasn’t been disseminated to all GOP members. “I don’t know if everybody has [received a copy],” said Calvert, who said he personally is reviewing it.
What they're saying: Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who briefly threatened to vote against the rules package on Monday before backing down, told Axios, "What I am raising hell about is whatever potential backroom deals may have been done."
  • "I have more questions than I do answers," added Mace, who said she plans to stand up and speak about the issue at the GOP conference meeting on Tuesday.
  • Other members, too, said they would like to see the text. "If it's related to the rules, I'd think that would be distributed," said Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.).
What we’re watching: Some members speculated that details of the document could be revealed at the GOP conference meeting on Tuesday morning.

The bottom line: Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.), expressing ambivalence about wanting to see the text of the agreement, told Axios: “Do you really want to see how the sausage is made? I’m not sure.”
 
kmgilroy89 said:
Why would they allow that in 2022? There’s very few places left that still allow it. I know a lot of people just vape so it doesn’t stink everything up. Even though it’s not allowed in my building, it’s not really enforced like smoking would be.
More...

Go ask the GOP. It's inexplicable.

But based on their behavior I can just imagine what they have been smoking.
 
TreeFrogTrader said:
Don't get too uppity just yet.

Your party went through over 30 candidates before being able to select a nominee for president.

And you are about to go through another tortuous process where the party fractures over whether to move Joe and Kamala along or to try to find a winner. And all polls show that even dems don't want Biden to run again.

So "choosing a single person to lead them" is not exactly your ilk's strong point either.

Whereas, the republicans already have their candidate.

MORE TO COME.
More...
Tree...

Is Biden in big trouble over this document scandal, or is it nothing?
Thoughts? Are we gonna see another impeachment proceeding? President Kamala?
 
vanzandt said:
Tree...

Is Biden in big trouble over this document scandal, or is it nothing?
Thoughts? Are we gonna see another impeachment proceeding? President Kamala?
More...

I don't see much happening here legally. Special prosecutor will conclude that there were missteps and violations by Biden but that there was no criminal intent. Even though the Espionage Act and the recordskeeping violation part does not require criminal intent to prove violation. The country was put through all that ad nauseum with Hillary's case. If the DOJ wants to let Biden off-and they do as they did- with Hillary, then that is where you end out.

Big winner is Donald J. Trump. The press chugs away every day with articles on why the cases are different. Nevertheless, Joe stepped in the doo-doo politically. The optics are not and will not be good politically to prosecute Trump but not Biden. The pundits and the lefties here will bloviate away on why there are differences in the cases but that is too much to digest down on main street. Biden stepped in it.

The thing that is somewhat nauseating is to hear all the repeated arguments to the effect that Joe has been a good boy by self-reporting and cooperating and all of that. Yeh, okay. But what were you doing with the documents? And what's up with the "I didn't even know I had them" routine. CMON MAN!

It is probably true that Trump's possession of documents was more extensive but he has the "I can declassify" argument that he can make. Again, lefties will argue that he does not but that is a long an intensive legal proceedings. Trump does have argument there with precedent. Joe was VP so had no such authority.

Although Camp Biden wants to argue that Trumps records holdings were greater, Biden be having another special little problem. His recordskeeping, including the classified ones, was within a Chinese funded operation. Which drives all the further inquiries that go with that mess.

Biden not in any legal problem. Trump is the winner there bigtime. DOJ has a sudden interest in downplaying the prosecution of Trump being a monster for holding classified records. (the Special Counsel is looking into that, giggle).

In regard to impeachment. Some house members will introduce bills to impeach so there will be that. But nothing serious going on there in regard real impeachment threat. BUT, again, bad, bad, bad political hit and optics for Joe on this as we go into the election run-up. Joe got self-righteous with Trump on the Mara-A-Largo thing, and King Karma put a giant turd pie right in his face. Of course, the republicans don't have the votes to impeach anyone anyway. If they did they would take out Majorkas as soon as possible, but they don't.

No one in their right frigging mind thinks that if Merrick Garland and the dems had not gone after Trump on the Mar-A-Largo thing that Garland would have felt the need to appoint a special counsel on Biden. So the dems outsmarted themselves on this one.

Biden's problem is with all the Chinese sh#t swirling around this and other circumstances. It is an ugly picture. A lot of Chinese money flowing around the so-called Penn-Biden Institute. Big Chinese dollars dumped into the university and then making its way over to the institute. Or so it is alleged.

His other problem of course is that the dems who do not want Biden to run will pile on to him on some of this stuff under the guise of "equal treatment and no one is above the law" arguments. Some of that going on already.

Oh, and Joe has another great legal argument which he is spinning which is the Corvette Legal Doctrine : "I was holding those documents with the same duty to care and security as I give my Corvette so I met my recordskeeping responsibilities." Yeh, okay Joe. In other words, they were in your garage.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top