Shortest Congressional Junket, Ever

So Pelosi and her Congressional minions were on their way to a Congressional junket and while they were on the bus heading towards the airport, Trump cancelled the trip and they were forced to turn around and return to the Capitol.

This is the most glorious thing I’ve ever seen in politics.

Sure, the Never Trump people are in lockstep outrage with the Democrats/MSM, but no one cares what any of them think.

Tit for tat – no more letting the Democrats be nasty and no counter-fire.

Advertisements

36 thoughts on “Shortest Congressional Junket, Ever

  1. Amazona January 17, 2019 / 10:16 pm

    I think he should have waited till the plane was in the air and then had it turn around. (I’l bet he considered this.)

    Basically, he is the Commander In Chief so he has the keys to all the military stuff. That would be a great poster—Trump in a CIC hat with that big grin and a huge key ring, and that caption.

    • Retired Spook January 18, 2019 / 4:01 pm

      Mark Stein is subbing for Rush today, and he had an even better idea. Cancel the return trip AFTER Pelosi gets to Afghanistan.

  2. Amazona January 17, 2019 / 11:57 pm

    The chamber that houses the House of Representatives is part of the Capitol building and is not “owned” by the House of Representatives nor under the control of the Speaker Of The House. It is a building owned by the government, not by either house of Congress. The President of the United States is the Chief Executive Officer of the nation and it is impossible to believe that he does not have the absolute right to choose any venue in the government for a speech.

    Therefore, I think it would be wonderful for Trump to simply announce that the Speaker does not have the authority to bar the president from using the House Chamber, and the SOTU speech will proceed, in the House Chamber, as it always does. He could say that as a courtesy the Speaker has traditionally invited the president to use the House Chamber for his State Of The Union Address, but in the absence of that courtesy the speech will still go on as planned. And he hopes that Democrat members of Congress have enough respect for their responsibilities and constituents to attend the speech.

    If he really wanted to twist the knife he could say “Although I have not been extended the usual courtesy of an invitation to give the speech in the House Chamber, I am giving the members of Congress the courtesy of inviting them all to attend”.

    What would/could Nan do? Stand in the doorway to block his entrance? Get the Dem Representatives to physically try to keep people from entering? Picket the event outside the building? (I’ll bet there are still a bunch of screeching harridans eager to drag out their genital costumes for another display of taste and dignity.)

    No, she and every other Dem member of Congress would then be faced with the choice of attending, and looking like they caved, or boycotting and looking like spoiled children who should never have been given the authority they have as national legislators, providing the Right with ammunition to use against them for years if they survive the 2020 elections and some great optics of many empty seats.

    Oh, the Howling Left would howl. It is what they do. It is who they are. They would carry on about the lack of protocol in defying the demands of the Speaker and using the chamber anyway. And they would be laughed at, given the total lack of protocol in having any member of Congress, even the Speaker Of The House, try to order the president around.

    I would still not provide an advance copy of the speech. Let them prepare their responses on the fly. And I would make sure the cameras record the empty seats in the chamber.

    • Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.] January 18, 2019 / 7:03 am

      He could simply do what many other Presidents have done; use a different venue or medium to address the American People, or, not give the speech at all and send it to the media in written form.

      • Amazona January 18, 2019 / 12:50 pm

        Why should he? The House Chamber has worked well, and should be used.

      • Amazona January 18, 2019 / 12:54 pm

        Why should he? Give one reason why a woman elected to represent a very small part of the United States in legislative matters, even though given the office of leadership of her party in the legislature, should be considered to have the authority to tell the President of the United States that he cannot use part of the Capitol Building to give a speech?

        That is simply crazy.

        Fredrick, your list of “credentials” seems familiar. Are you part of the Pitchfork crowd?

      • Cluster January 18, 2019 / 5:15 pm

        YES he is. Good call ….. I forgot about the pitchfork crowd.

      • Amazona January 19, 2019 / 12:26 am

        It was that goofy list of invented credentials that reminded me of the pitchfork delusions.

  3. Cluster January 18, 2019 / 8:35 am

    Denying Pelosi air travel was fun to watch. Denying her botox injections would be even better.

    Kind of odd to watch Democrats throw their support behind fat, white, over paid federal employees while Republicans protect the minority victims of illegal immigrants.

    And I would like to see Trump just give a televised national SOTU address – he doesn’t need the Congress or the Senate.

    • Retired Spook January 18, 2019 / 9:47 am

      Kind of odd to watch Democrats throw their support behind fat, white, over paid federal employees

      “Non-essential” is the preferred term.

    • Amazona January 18, 2019 / 12:57 pm

      I think he should give the speech from the House Chamber, as it has been done for so many years. Why not? Who’s going to stop him? On what grounds?

      And have a camera focusing on the empty seats, after commenting that those members of Congress who take their jobs seriously and respect their constituents are present.

      I think giving a televised speech from any other location would send the message that Nan is a very powerful woman challenging the authority of the president, and that she won this battle.

      Bad idea

  4. Cluster January 18, 2019 / 8:49 am

    This is the new Democrat Party. Here is a tweet from newly elected Congresswoman Ilhan Omar from MN.

    Ilhan Omar
    @IlhanMN
    Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.

    From AOC, to Adam Schiff, to Keith Ellison, to the highly botoxed Nancy Pelosi, this party is rife with brainless incompetent bigots who are so embroiled in identity politics that they will eventually destroy each other …. and that will be fun to watch.

  5. fieldingclaymore January 18, 2019 / 11:41 am

    Seems some big news dropped last night if it is true.

    • Cluster January 18, 2019 / 11:44 am

      Watch out Fielding …. there could be a Russian behind you

      • Cluster January 18, 2019 / 12:07 pm

        How much longer do you need Fielding? 2 years? 4 more years maybe? How long do fascist investigations take?

    • Amazona January 18, 2019 / 1:00 pm

      Ooooh…Fielding is being mysterious!

      Of course there is the possibility—no, make that a likelihood—-that he really does think a report from a biased anti-Trump source that a proven serial liar with his future on the line, to be decided by an anti-Trump cabal, might say something to please the cabal by implicating Trump.

      It sounds like something Fielding would find absolutely delicious.

      True? Who cares? Relevant? Ditto. Yum yum

      • fieldingclaymore January 18, 2019 / 1:29 pm

        Cohen wasn’t the original sourcing on the story, if you believe the journalists. They got the info from Trump org sources/docs and then went back to Cohen. He then admitted it. He is not a good witness. Tru dat.

      • Amazona January 19, 2019 / 12:13 am

        They got the info from Trump org sources…

        Oh, OK, that clears it up. Just more anonymous sources claiming to be “close to Trump”.

        And Mueller is denying it all.

      • Cluster January 18, 2019 / 1:42 pm

        if you believe the journalists.

        hahahahahaha good one chief. Considering that these current “journalists” have been wrong about everything in the recent past, I will say it’s not a given …

  6. Cluster January 18, 2019 / 12:09 pm

    Fielding – is it the new Democrat platform that Allah will awaken the people? Where do you stand that chief?

    • Amazona January 18, 2019 / 1:02 pm

      Fielding must have his new prayer mat on order at Amazon, so he can be sure to avoid being branded as an infidel and put next in line after the Jews and the gays and the Christians.

    • fieldingclaymore January 18, 2019 / 1:03 pm

      It is vile antisemitism. And she is disgraceful.

    • fieldingclaymore January 18, 2019 / 1:58 pm

      You agree of course that Steve King is a disgrace as well, correct?

      • Cluster January 18, 2019 / 2:02 pm

        I think they are all self entitled scum

      • Amazona January 19, 2019 / 12:14 am

        “here here”

        What is that supposed to mean?

      • Retired Spook January 18, 2019 / 4:17 pm

        If Congressman King had actually said what the NYT reported he said, then I would condemn him as well, but I’m inclined to cut him a little slack after his explanation of his conversation with the NYT reporter.

        King used the time to say he “made a freshman mistake” talking with a New York Times reporter without recording the interview.

        “But one phrase in that long article has created an unnecessary controversy,” King said. “That was my mistake.”

        The quote that King said sparked “heartburn” appeared in the article published Thursday about King’s role in the U.S.-Mexico border wall discussion and President Donald Trump’s immigration policy.

        Iowa’s Steve King has a history of controversial remarks. Here are some that riled people up.
        Learn about the Iowa district that re-elects Steve King year after year (and may do so next week)
        “White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?” King told the Times reporter. “Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?”

        On the House floor, King said the quote was taken out of context. King argued he was saying terms like white supremacist, white nationalist and Nazi were “almost always unjustly labeling otherwise innocent people.”

        “It was about how those words got plugged into our dialogue, not when the words became offensive, which is what the technical interpretation of it is,” King said. “It’s how did that offensive language get injected into our political dialogue.” (emphasis – mine)

        The 4th district representative also issued a news release Thursday denouncing white nationalism and white supremacy. However, that has not stopped the barrage of condemnations from Republicans and others over the controversial quote.

        As usual, there’s almost always an unreported other side of the story.

      • Amazona January 19, 2019 / 12:21 am

        I don’t know anything about King, but I do know that not a single thing I have heard about his alleged comments are as bad as what I hear from people like Sheila Jackson Lee and Mad Max Waters when they start in on hating white people, or the professional race baiters like Sharpton.

        I haven’t see a quote from him denigrating any race or person. I get the impression that he is trying to explain that he was trying to talk about the newly developed hyper-sensitivity about language. I for one am fed up with the term “white nationalism”. It is an insidious effort to link “nationalism” with racism, and it is despicable.

        I also don’t think “nationalism” is a bad thing. What is wrong with being proud of your nation and thinking it is the best place to live? The Left is hacking away at language a word or phrase at a time, making the most innocent words and terms into toxic commentary. I am white, and proudly nationalist, and in no way a racist or white supremacist.

        I do think that white supremacist is an accurate term for white people who hate others because they are not white, and agree that it has very negative connotations. The others—not so much. Except, of course, those constantly snouting around for something to find outrageous.

      • Amazona January 19, 2019 / 12:25 am

        Well, Fielding, the thing is, not everyone has a handy dandy crystal ball that lets him know the secret thoughts and feelings of others. So the rest of us have to go by what people say and do.

        Of course, the Grievance Community has decided that anyone who displays a Confederate flag is a racist. That’s what happens when your filters are set to turn everything that passes through them into the ugliest thing possible. The Loony Left has been working overtime to convince us that those voices in their head are really accurate assessments of reality. Just look at how often only they can hear those imagined “dog whistles”.

      • Retired Spook January 18, 2019 / 5:06 pm

        I’m actually inclined to believe King before virtually any mainstream media source. Is he an ultra-Conservative? You bet. Is he a white supremacist? I don’t think so. And even if he indeed said exactly what the NYT says he said, it pales in comparison to much of the vile language language coming from the Left, ie., “we’re going to impeach the motherfu*ker.”

      • Cluster January 18, 2019 / 5:22 pm

        Words only have the power they are given. Rather than being “outraged” and having to condemn anyone, how about if we act like adults and just ignore them? Marginalize them, don’t condemn them. Condemning them is giving them more power than they deserve. And if you do give words power over yourself, than you have bigger issues to deal with.

  7. Cluster January 18, 2019 / 2:04 pm

    Since when did lying to Congress become a crime? (Think Hillary Clinton, Peter Strozk, etc.)

  8. Cluster January 18, 2019 / 2:38 pm

    Speaker Pelosi: President Trump “outing our trip” to Afghanistan trip was “very dangerous.”

    But releasing illegal immigrant criminals back into the country is NOT dangerous. Just ask Kate Steinle’s family.

    • Amazona January 19, 2019 / 12:11 am

      Let me see if I have this straight—announcing that the trip to Afghanistan was canceled put someone in danger? I read that Nan was babbling and nearly incoherent in a press conference after the fact and this seems to support that.

Comments are closed.