The battle of wits had begun. And Kinzinger clearly went into a gunfight with a spork.

“Just a quick point, both parties have always accepted the presidential election until one, four years ago,” Kinzinger falsely claimed.

Jennings countered, quite simply, “False, they have not."

Curtis Houck @CurtisHouck
·
PANTS ON FIRE: Adam Kinzinger falsely claims Scott Jennings lied in saying this was the first time in our lifetime both parties won't object to a presidential election result.

Kinzinger and Ashley Allison say Jennings mentioning 2000, 2004, and 2016 are why we're so divided

1:36 PM · Jan 6, 2025. //

Democrats have objected to election results in each of the Republican-won elections this century.

In 2000, 15 Democrats, including 12 members of the Congressional Black Caucus at the time, would object to counting Florida’s electoral votes.

This was after then-Vice President Al Gore refused to accept the free and fair election results and would not concede defeat to George W. Bush. He instead tied up the election process through litigation in the courts for months.

Gore consistently lost his bid to overturn the election results in the lower courts and kept fighting in the Florida Supreme Court. He would not concede until mid-December of that year, a month and a half after Election Day.

In 2004, 31 Democrats voted in favor of rejecting electoral votes from Ohio, trying to delegitimize President Bush once again, despite the fact that he won the electoral count by a wider margin and the popular vote count over John Kerry.

In 2016, seven different Democrats objected 11 times to certifying the results of the 2016 presidential election victory for Donald Trump. Additionally, 67 Democrats boycotted Trump’s inauguration, with many claiming “his election was illegitimate.”

There was violence in the streets, and Democrat lawmakers were most assuredly trying to “obstruct, influence, impede or delay” the certification of the presidential election, just as Republicans are accused of doing on January 6.

Never forget. //

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and ten other senators objected to the certification of the 2020 election. It wasn't a unique tactic by any stretch. If anything, Democrats wrote the playbook on election denialism.

As provided by law, without objection, the 119th Congress formally counted the votes of the Electoral College, and, at 1:35 p.m. Eastern, having received 312 electoral votes, Donald Trump was certified as the 47th President of the United States (and JD Vance was certified as vice president). Vice President Kamala Harris presided over the session — something that places her in a somewhat exclusive (albeit not enviable) club.

The U.S. Census Bureau will now count refugees and border releases in its population estimates, a move that will affect congressional apportionment forecasts and demographic data. In a blog post Thursday announcing the change, the bureau noted, “a net of 2.8 million people migrated to the United States between 2023 and 2024. This is significantly higher than our previous estimates.”

The data offers a glimpse of how congressional apportionment maps could change by 2030. It also shows how, as U.S. citizens flee states with garbage leftist policies, the inclusion of noncitizens in census data allows those states to keep congressional seats because their population is propped up by illegal aliens. //

Domestically, people are leaving Democrat-led states in droves. California is down 239,575 domestically, but it gained 361,057 internationally. New York lost 120,917 people domestically and gained 207,161 internationally. Illegal immigration is slowing the loss of population and congressional seats in blues states. //

The 14th Amendment requires that “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state.” The “whole number” has traditionally been understood to provide congressional representation for every person in a district, not just citizens eligible to vote.

“Generally, we should want an apportionment that best reflects the people of the United States and where they live,” Kincaid said. “If people are voting with their feet and moving from California to Florida, that should be reflected in our apportionment.”

The new numbers illustrate how illegal immigration can shape the balance of power for U.S. voters.

The Census Bureau asks about citizenship in its annual American Community Survey, but asking about citizenship on its 10-year census became a political issue in 2018 when President Donald Trump called on the bureau to put the question “Are you a U.S. citizen?” back on the census, as it had been in past years. As Federalist contributor Ben Weingarten reported at the time, Democrats fought the request. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Trump on a technicality, and the question was not used in 2020.

The missing Congresswoman in question is Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX), who represents Texas' 12th Congressional District, which includes the Fort Worth area west of Dallas in Tarrant County. Granger's last known vote in the House appears to be in July when she voted "no" on HR8998, a bill that would reduce the salary of Deputy Assistant Administrator for Pesticides Program Ya-Wei (Jake) Lee to $1. Since then, she has no recorded votes. //

Fl family
@family_fl73222
·
Follow
Kay Granger has not been working for the past year why has she not been replaced?
2:22 PM · Dec 20, 2024. //

The newspaper discovered that Rep. Granger was now the resident of a local memory care and assisted living home and had been for some time after she was found confused and wandering around her neighborhood. Assistant Executive Director for the memory care/assisted living home, Taylor Manzeil, confirmed that Granger was a resident, saying, "This is her home."

Bo French is the Tarrant County Republican Chairman. He stated the obvious about this crucial time for Republicans in Congress, who need every vote.//

Granger's constituents are also concerned about Granger's absence in Washington. But the biggest question is, why has this situation gone on as long as it has, with no one appearing to notice or even care?

It appears that this is just another example of those in Washington on both sides of the aisle hanging onto power until they are literally incapable of doing so. It is exactly the kind of thing that the American people clearly said in November they are tired of.

Nancy Mace
@NancyMace
·
Follow
It’s not the number of pages that matter - it’s what’s in those pages.

This CR had the same level of spending today as it did yesterday, but the debt ceiling was suspended, meaning there was no limit on the debt. I don’t trust Congress or the government to spend responsibly… Show more
6:50 PM · Dec 19, 2024

"Do you often like the tweets you don't agree with?" Kennedy asked.

"Those were not my words," Keys insisted.

"You can't make this cat walk backwards," Kennedy finally declared. //

Kennedy cuts through the palaver and gets down to the nitty gritty again in pointing out the difference between what witnesses say and what they do. He's not shy about holding their feet to the fire and exposing hypocrisy, and it's a great thing to see. //

Michael Piz
a day ago
My favorite Kennedy quote is "Kale tastes like I'd rather be fat.". //

Dennis
a day ago
Kennedy is the Mark Twain of today. One could literally write a book of quotes, funny and epic exchanges that man has had in the past decade alone

Hakeem Jeffries
·
Dec 18, 2024
@RepJeffries
·
House Republicans have been ordered to shut down the government.

And hurt the working class Americans they claim to support.

You break the bipartisan agreement, you own the consequences that follow.

Elon Musk @elonmusk
·
You seem to think the public is dumb.

They are not.
4:51 PM · Dec 18, 2024 //

Elon Musk @elonmusk
·
The voice of the people was heard.

This was a good day for America.

Chad Pergram @ChadPergram
GOP KY Rep Barr on CR: The phone was ringing off the hook today. And you know why? Because they were reading the tweets, the X from musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, and they were telling me that they were, that they were listening to them.. this shows the influence that president,…
5:12 PM · Dec 18, 2024

I'm asking congressional Republicans to read this slowly because it might confuse them, but they have a majority. That means they can now pass a clean CR. If Democrats then vote it down, angry that they didn't get their pork-filled 1,500-page monstrosity, then they will be the ones shutting the government down. Jeffries would be forced to eat his own words about hurting "everyday Americans."

The same thing applies to all the emotional pleas about "disaster relief."

Again, make Democrats own this. If they want to make disaster relief a marker, then pass a standalone bill and make them vote it down. What excuse would they have to do so after they proclaimed how vital it is? And if Democrats do scuttle it, then Republicans can go to the podium and place the blame where it belongs.

It's so simple, and I'm at a loss as to why that wasn't the plan in the first place. If Republicans can't grow a backbone and play hardball now, especially when the opportunity is being handed to them on a silver platter, then when can they? Democrats have no leverage, and it's long past time they are made to understand what losing actually entails. It means not getting all your priorities passed because you scream "crisis" every few months after refusing to govern in a normal fashion.

Republicans need to put their differences aside and come together to do the smart thing. Pass a clean CR and force the hand of Democrat leadership.

Townhall.com @townhallcom
·
.@RepChipRoy: "SWAMP'S GONNA SWAMP!"

"We're just fundamentally un-serious about spending. As long as you got a blank check you can't shrink government. If you can't shrink government you can't live free!"

10:51 AM · Dec 17, 2024 //

This is not the Way. And how long has it been, by the way, since Congress approved an actual budget? Oh, that's right - 1997. It would almost be funny if it wasn't so alarming; it's like they aren't even trying. //

We, and our elected representatives, would do well to remember the words of the late Barry Goldwater:

I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. //

TheAmericanExperiment
3 hours ago edited
"I'll go one step further and say that we must reduce not only the deficit but the national debt. "

Ward,

The national debt is a fiction. The interest however is very real and the owners of The Federal Reserve System (fancy name for private -for profit corporation) are raking it in.

JP Morgan financed two American wars in the late 1800s. How did he do it. He loaned the Federal Government actual dollars from his bank reserves. in the early 1900s he had an idea for the most lucrative business in the history of the world. Financing the Federal Government with monopoly money.

In 1910 he got together with eight other titans of banking and crafted the plan for The Fed. 15 regional banks all plugged into a central bank in DC but ultimately run by The Fed in New York.

What's cost of printing money? Inflation.

If the Federal government was printing money into existence that would be the cost. Inflation.

So why do we have a national debt in addition to inflation? The Mandrake Mechanism. The Federal Government doesn't print money. In 1913 they granted The Fed a charter to do that and then loan the money to the government at interest. The Fed literally creates money out of this air and then loans it to the American people. Now The Fed can only finance debt and what was their model? Financing wars. The US Congress was very debt averse but one thing you could count on them for... financing a war. The story goes on and on.

For the last 110 years we've had a State Department and CIA fomenting trouble all over the world. Starting fires and then putting them out. And back home we have an FBI always vigilant for any member of Congress, the press or the public for that matter who questions the lucrative arrangement.

So there is no national debt. It's all stolen money. Call it the crime of the last century. //

Leitmotif Sam Grant
an hour ago
Understood. And I do not disagree that the Creature From Jekyll Island has been a manifest cancer on the body politic of the republic
But, I'm less inclined to agree that it's principal goal has been to forment foreign wars.

Rather, it's principal goal has been to privatize the profits of big member banks, while simultaneously socializing xing the risks and financial busts that are a direct result of the inherently fraudulent fractional reserve banking paradigm that is, alas, at the very core of our modern financial system. //

anon-qacb Billy Wallace
4 hours ago edited
In 2008 our National Debt was around 10 Trillion, that's the year Obumer took office. The Democrats have held the Presidency 12 out of the last 16 years and our deficit is now 36 Trillion. So it took us 240 years to get to 10 trillion and only 16 years to add another 26 trillion more. How does that even happen, That is NUTS ! Regardless of which party you belong to we all should have enough brains to realize this can't continue. Name calling does nothing to help the cause and bring people together.

Despite her age and frailty, she comes from a solidly blue San Francisco area district that would send a chicken pot pie to Congress if there was a "D" carved into the crust, so she's probably safe to hold her seat as long as she wants.

And, we must also note, she has grown monstrously rich while in office, in no small part due to uncanny success in investing; the Pelosis, Nancy and her husband Paul, have an investment portfolio that has returned an uncanny 700 percent over the last 10 years. //

(N)o.(B)ody.(C)ares
10 hours ago
Crooks? I’m inclined to think “Crooks” is small potatoes term for small crimes.
Pelosi’s grift makes the mafia look tame. Clinton’s know to ride Auntie Nans coat tails.
They are the quintessential “Government Mob” Bosses. They know where the bodies are buried and know how to keep their money flowing.
If one considers how Public Officials become Multimillionaires while in office, need to follow the money and how it flows. They sent Martha Stewart to prison for the very thing they have perfected.
They hate competition, and the laws prove it

Another line of criticism focuses on Hegseth’s personal life. To be sure, Hegseth wouldn’t meet the qualifications to serve as an elder or pastor in a church, and he has admitted to poor decisions in the past. But this raises a broader cultural question: When did Americans stop celebrating redemption stories? Today, Hegseth is happily married, active in his church, and a devoted father who embraces classical homeschooling. He served his country in combat and earned the respect and loyalty of those who worked with him in both military and civilian life.

Redemption is a deeply American ideal, but it often seems selectively applied. I recall reading about convicted bank robber Shon Hopwood, who, after release, earned a law degree and went on to teach at the Georgetown University Law Center—a story presented as an inspiring tale of growth and perseverance. But do the same people who applauded that story extend the same grace to Hegseth, a man who has overcome personal failings to achieve admirable success? If we value growth and change, shouldn’t we apply this principle consistently?

Evaluating someone’s past for predictions of future behavior is fair, but the recent past matters just as much as the distant past. //

Ultimately, the debate over Hegseth’s nomination reflects deeper societal tensions: between forgiveness and accountability, between ideological loyalty and open-mindedness, and between traditional and unconventional leadership. Whether or not one believes Hegseth to be the right person to serve as the next secretary of defense, this debate forces us to confront how we choose leaders and what values we prioritize in doing so.

As for me in this moment, I echo what Abraham Lincoln said of Ulysses S. Grant. “I can’t spare this man, he fights!” The bureaucrats had their turn. We would do well to have a warrior like Pete Hegseth leading the military as soon as possible.

Steven Dennis @StevenTDennis
·
In one of their final acts in office, Sinema and Manchin nuke a Biden pick for the National Labor Relations Board in a big loss for organized labor.
1:57 PM · Dec 11, 2024. //

Well, payback is rarely kind, and Sinema and Manchin just delivered a well-deserved helping of it. Voters rejected the Democratic Party labor agenda in November. Giving McFerran another five-year term would have been a slap in the face to the American people who do not want unions being given special carveouts at a cost to everyone else.

Consider this another example of Democrats overplaying their hand. They don't know how to do anything in moderation, and in their lust for power, they gave up two formerly solid votes (when it comes to confirmations) to appease the far-left. Those chickens have come home to roost. I don't know where Sinema and Manchin go from here now that they are leaving office, but their preservation of the filibuster and rejection of the Democrat status-quo has done the country a great service.

The theatrics around Kavanaugh's confirmation were Democrats trying to play the long game, but they overplayed their hand so severely that the sympathy built up for the embattled nominee. Sure, the narrative survived in too many people, but anyone remotely paying attention found themselves disgusted by the Democrats, effectively giving Republicans and Kavanaugh the PR victory.

But while Kavanaugh was and still is technically a threat to the left, Trump's incoming cabinet is one built for one purpose, and that's deconstructing the deep state and exposing the corruption within the government so it can be reduced and its power decreased. The Democrat Party, whose entire concern is maintaining that power and influence, considers this a nightmare scenario. This is a code red situation for them.

As such, I see the Democrats going absolutely overboard in ways that make the Kavanaugh hearing look like an elementary school stage production. The fearmongering they will resort to will be such that future generations will want to study it.

There is no way that the Democrats will want their deepest secrets uncovered, and they will do what they always have done in order to avert losing even an ounce of their power: they will resort to lies, drama, and fear. Schumer's letter confirms this for me, as it sets the tone for the Democrats being "the adults in the room," and as such, any overblown accusations they resort to will be taken with some form of belief by onlookers.

But this won't work this time around. The Kavanaugh hearings came at a time when voter's fatigue with Democrats hadn't reached its height and the orange man effectively passed off as "bad." Now, Democrats are going into these hearings with the public actually behind Trump, and excited about this nominees. Democrats are going to be fighting an uphill battle in both Washington and the public square.

Neither House Speaker Mike Johnson nor soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader John Thune had the power to call a recess and force through a nomination. While they both indicated they would allow that to happen, that was never the question because it wasn't up to them.

Instead, it would have taken a full vote by both chambers to recess. In the House, that can happen with a simple majority. In the Senate, a recess vote can be filibustered, making 60 votes the threshold. What that means is that Democrats and the Republicans who opposed Gaetz could easily block any attempt at a recess appointment.

But what about the theory that Trump could force a recess with executive power? That would have also been precarious because the Constitutional language specifically applies to a disagreement between the chambers on when to recess. To trigger that, you would first need both chambers to vote to recess on different days. That wasn't going to happen. It's also worth noting that three of the five conservative justices on the Supreme Court have already made it clear they believe recess appointments are unconstitutional, which means any challenge would have likely succeeded given the makeup of the court.

On one level, I don't blame the Dynamic Duo for not wanting to show up. The trial of Laken Riley's murderer just wound up (Laken Riley's Family and Friends Give Heartbreaking Impact Statements; Judge Sentences Jose Ibarra), and I can understand why they don't want to talk about immigration. I can also understand that both of these guys know they are leaving office in the next couple of months, and they don't see any use in taking the public beating this hearing would entail.

Paradoxically, this move could boost Trump's upcoming showdown with the Department of Justice, DHS, and the FBI. They are showing themselves to be a pampered, privileged group that doesn't think they have to answer to even a senior senator in the ruling party. I predict this will not work out well when the hammer falls, and they come running to guys like Peters to make the pain go away.

Under House rules, the Speaker has “general control” of facilities in the chamber, giving him the authority to issue the policy surrounding bathrooms.

“All single-sex facilities in the Capitol and House Office Buildings — such as restrooms, changing rooms, and locker rooms — are reserved for individuals of that biological sex,” Johnson said. “It is important to note that each Member office has its own private restroom, and unisex restrooms are available throughout the Capitol.”

“Women deserve women’s only spaces,” he added. //

Johnson’s ruling, which occurred on the “Transgender Day of Remembrance,” is sure to make liberals’ heads explode. But he is the Speaker, and the Speaker has spoken. //

etba_ss
40 minutes ago
This is good for Johnson. I'm glad to see him step up to the plate and actually lead, using the power he has been given.

The second part is what happens when it is violated. That has to be known and ready to act on it. The left will violate it to see if Johnson is serious or if he is just blowing smoke to keep his spot as Speaker. He better have a plan for action.

The punishment should be the same as what would happen to me if I did it. These men should be treated like any other men who invade these spaces.

The files are all exhibits to a motion filed in a defamation case in Florida related to the sex trafficking allegations levied against Gaetz - allegations the US Department of Justice investigated for 18 months before declining to pursue charges because, sources told the Washington Post, the two main witnesses weren't credible. Some of the exhibits, including deposition testimony from a woman who claims she had sex with Gaetz when she was 17, have been sealed by the judge presiding over that case. //

In reply to ABC's "story," Gaetz said:

"These allegations are invented and would constitute false testimony to Congress. This false smear following a three-year criminal investigation should be viewed with great skepticism.". //

As I wrote back then, after Gaetz blistered Wray over the FBI's harassment of COVID whistleblower and Chinese defector Dr. Yan Li-Meng during a congressional hearing:

Is it any wonder that the entire Democrat/Media Complex is trying to destroy Matt Gaetz? Think about when the questions into his supposedly improper relationships with females started flooding the airwaves and which government organization is “investigating” Gaetz. I’m sure it’s all just a big coincidence and not an attempt to silence or intimidate Gaetz.

Kyrsten Sinema @kyrstensinema
·
What’s the one tool that requires the Senate to work in a bipartisan way?

Oh look, the filibuster.

Burgess Everett @burgessev
Schumer to Republicans: "Take care not to misread the will of the American people"

"Do not abandon bipartisanship. It's the best and most effective way to get things done"
2:22 PM · Nov 18, 2024 //

The less Washington gets done, the better for everyone involved. We don't need a Congress that can make sweeping, dramatic changes to the nation based on winning an election by a few percentage points. That's how you end up with internal unrest under the tyranny of the majority.

It may not be a popular position on the right given we just won a sweeping victory, but strengthening, not removing the filibuster is the right move. There's nothing the government can do for me that is that important. I'd rather the behemoth stay out of my way more often than not, and the moment the filibuster ends, it's never coming back. That'd be very bad news the next time Democrats take power. Republicans should use their current leverage to ensure that can't happen.

Harris’ campaign is promising that if she is elected and the numbers in Congress work, Democrats will eliminate the Senate filibuster. //

The Dems are not promising to eliminate the filibuster to break a few ties, with the understanding that there will likely be future turnabout and their worst Republican policy nightmares will come true. This time they are playing for keeps.

If they can broadly eliminate the filibuster, buy four more senators, make millions of illegal aliens citizens with a 51-senator vote, rig our voting system processes, and rejigger the Supreme Court to create a roster of 13 mostly leftist justices, then they can entirely stop speaking to the Republican side of the aisle because they will have a permanent filibuster-proof Senate majority. And the Republicans will never have enough voters to reinstate legislative bumpers for both sides. It is not that Democrats have evaluated the likely conservative counter-offensive and determined that the risk is a good one. They perceive no risk. With all these sweeping changes, they can do whatever they want until the end of time with no practical oversight or influence of the people. The only two things holding them back are a Harris victory in November and a conscience they sorely lack. We will be a functional leftist autocracy. //

The question is who wants to live in a place in which only a single point of view is mandated from the top of government down by people who have proven themselves to be too ineffective to lead under the rules that have existed for generations? Who will support a Republican Party that sees all of this partisan rule breaking coming and does nothing to stop it? This presidential election is a referendum on both parties, neither of which seems able to look to the future to understand its gravity. //

Regardless of how many times Democrat candidates tell us that they are protecting democracy, they are not doing anything of the sort. Democracy is mob rule, one more vote than the other team. The filibuster is not contained in the Constitution but instead is the logical outgrowth of the long-developed Senate rule-making process. For a bill to be filibuster-proof, it required the support of 67 senators until a rule change reduced that number to 60 in 1975. Legislative processes are not designed so one party or the other, with 51 votes, can trade radical swings in our country’s laws and policies. They are designed for the opposite result, to force legislation down the middle and away from both ideological extremes.

Our Constitution and Senate and House rules are written to compel legislators, who work for the people, to stand eye-to-eye, communicate, and compromise for the greater good. The 60 votes serve as an effective buffer against radicalism. Harris and her party have utter disdain for that rule book.

A new documentary on the vice presidency gives a fresh perspective on the complications of American governance. //

No constitutional structure can know or predict every possible scenario that leads down the road of autocracy and anarchy. For this reason, Ben Franklin reportedly told a passerby at the end of the Constitutional Convention that the delegates had created “a republic, if you can keep it.” It falls on all of us — each successive generation of Americans — to rise to Franklin’s challenge. //

“The American Vice President” is available on PBS stations (check your local listings) and can be streamed online and via the PBS app.