690

Forget Beato-how about Nancy Pelosi-Kamala Harris 2020? Now there’s a unity ticket I can get behind. But never, and I mean NEVER this:

That’s how I’m feeling post Pelosi’ publicly taking Trump over her knee in the Oval Office yesterday afternoon. 

It turns out that Congresswoman Nita Lowery wasn’t blowing smoke-as we saw in (Chapter A) when she declared ‘I have my boxing gloves on and so does Nancy!’

THE GREAT SKUNK TINKLING OF 2019: For Democrats questioning whether House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is the right leader to take on President Trump, her performance yesterday at the White House should have quashed any doubts. After the gesticular president, unaccustomed to being publicly challenged, said that Pelosi was “in a situation where it’s not easy for her to talk right now” because of the speakership race, Pelosi coolly delivered a made-for-feminist T-shirt slogan to cap off the Year of the Woman:

  • “Mr. President, please don’t characterize the strength that I bring to this meeting as the leader of the House Democrats, who just won a big victory,” Pelosi told Trump as they sparred over funding the border wall and who should own a possible partial government shutdown live on camera.

Cherry on top: Then came the behind-closed-doors leaks of Pelosi’s jabs at Trump’s manhood — the stuff that’s made of impending Trump Twitter diatribes:

  • “The press is all there! Chuck is really shouting out. I was trying to be the mom. I can’t explain it to you. It was so wild. It goes to show you: ‘you get into a tinkle contest with a skunk, you get tinkle all over you,'” Pelosi told House Democrats after the meeting, The Post’s Josh Dawsey reported.
  • “It’s like a manhood thing for him. As if manhood could ever be associated with him. This wall thing,” the California congresswoman added. 

“Unfortunately, this has spiraled downward”: Pelosi emerged from the White House emboldened as the foil against Trump that Democrats have been yearning for: unafraid to confront a president who has operated “without a clear check on his power” over the past two years, per The Post’s Philip Rucker, Josh Dawsey and Robert Costa.

The viral moment in the Oval — and Pelosi’s comments after it — are already helping the California Democrat clinch the speakership as a clutch of Democrats demand changes to House rules and fresh leadership. Pelosi has been cutting deals to ensure the opposition is diminished before a January floor vote. And yesterday is already making that easier.

Power Up talked with some of the California Democrat’s closest allies who explained why:

  •  No mansplain zone: “Trump talked over her today and she kept saying, ‘No, you don’t have the votes’ . . . But you don’t need Trump or anyone else to mansplain her — she knows what she’s talking about and she demonstrated that very clearly today,” Brendan Daly, Pelosi’s former spokesperson, told Power Up.
  • “A spine of steel”: Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Calif.) said Pelosi delivered a “master nclass in strength and leadership . . . She stood her ground with grace and moral clarity, ensuring taxpayers do not spend billions on a nonsensical border wall.” A longtime ally, DeLauro touted Pelosi’s “intellectual capacity, unparalleled strategic acumen, strong core values, and a spine of steel.”
  • “I don’t think he knows what to do with a strong woman,” Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) told us. “His actions just showed that he’s a chauvinist when it comes to dealing with women in power.”
  • “One of the things that stood out to me, was him calling her ‘Nancy, Nancy, Nancy.’ That’s Speaker Pelosi to you, punk,” Gomez added.
  • “What you saw is exactly what you’re going to need,” Pelosi’s longtime former chief of staff John Lawrence told us. “You’re going to have somebody who is resolute, skilled and fearless. And somebody who understands that her job is to stand up for her caucus and the House and not to concede power to the president.”

After her masterclass in what leadership looks like the only question left is how much longer to the anti Pelosi crusaders want to drag out their sad farce of a rebellion?

https://twitter.com/MrDane1982/status/1072618472654422016

Evidently a lot of people agree with Mr. Weeks as later the same day we get this news:

How do we wrap this up?! There’s a certain sense of urgency-they want to get this done already they realize they are looking a little silly. They must know that most of us in the Democratic base agree with with Governor Cuomo: just pick Pelosi as Speaker already. 

The crusaders are apparently getting a vow from Pelosi to serve no more than four more years:

Under the tentative terms of the deal, the top Democratic leaders would be allowed to serve for only three terms. If any leader wanted to exceed that limit by one term, he or she would need a two-thirds majority in the Democratic Caucus. They currently need only a simple majority to do so. After this time frame, the lawmaker would need to run for another position or vacate leadership altogether.

Most important, Pelosi’s agreement with rebels, the deal would be retroactive. That means Pelosi, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Assistant Democratic Leader Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) would already be entering their third term in leadership during the next Congress. They would need two-thirds approval from the caucus to serve beyond 2020 — and the longest they could remain in place in their current jobs is four years.

Pelosi has agreed to publicly support this deal, which would require a change to caucus rules, the sources said. Pelosi will whip to try to pass it inside the caucus, they continued. And should the caucus reject the agreement, she has promised to abide by it anyway.

In principle this agreement would apply to the number two and number three as well as Pelosi-Steny Hoyer and James Clyburn. But clearly this is really about Nancy Pelosi

“Ultimately, their goal is to have a clear declaration for when Nancy Pelosi will exit,” the Democratic source said.

And that leaves you sort of in the same place this started-why is it only women of a certain age who have to promise they will retire soon?

So I still resent the principle behind this-that Pelosi is too old and needs to quit. But that’s the theory, in practice it’s not a hardship for her to vow to step down after 2022-after all, she had intended to step down after 2016 but then the election was stolen from Hillary. People fail to understand Nancy-she stayed on out of deep, sincere concern about our party and our country. In the age of a constitutional crisis over an illegitimate ‘elected President’ did we really want a novice learning on the job as the Dem leader?

The deal will likely cause serious tension in Democratic leadership, and, potentially, in the broader caucus. Hoyer, whose future in leadership would be jeopardized under this agreement, has made clear he wants no part of term limits.

“She’s not negotiating for me,” the Maryland Democrat told reporters at his own news conference.

Hoyer added: “I’m not for term limits. Is anybody confused? I am not for term limits. I … am … not … for … term … limits.”

But, of course, it’s not about him, anyway-the urgency is not about forcing retirement on Steny Hoyer-he’s a dude. But again, she didn’t intend to stay forever. Indeed, I think term limits on its own terms is a terrible idea. And this new rule may well not pass the caucus, but Pelosi will honor it anyway. That’s actually fine as term limits to me are a bad Republican idea. They did term limits to make sure there are no more FDRs. 

Fine, I can understand why they wouldn’t want any more FDRs but why would the Democrats agree-yet the Democrats supported the anti FDR amendment in 1948. Then the GOP Contract With America Congress of 1994 ran on term limits-and then didn’t honor them once they won. ‘Now a bunch of far too easy to influence Democrats are taking up this bad Republican idea because the GOP likes to run against Nancy Pelosi. We need a Speaker the Republicans will never criticize.

So hopefully this new rule never passes.

UPDATE: Cedric Richmond puts it succintly:

Rep. Cedric Richmond, chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, also said he opposed the idea, saying if people don’t like a leader, they can just vote them out at the end of a term.

“This whole thing about these guys needing something so that they can land this damn plane is getting silly,” Richmond said, referring to the group of rebels. “Land the plane. Vote for her. And let’s please get on.”

As for Pelosi, it is too laugh. To a man, the Republicans who led the campaign against Pelosi in 2010 will tell you they only demonized her because she was effective. 

I Helped Lead the ‘Fire Pelosi’ Campaign in 2010. Democrats Would Be Nuts to Do It Now.

Why would they drop the former speaker with a record of shepherding legislation through the House and who just raised a ton of cash to help Democrats retake it now?”

In 2010, I helped lead the effort of the Republican National Committee’s “Fire Pelosi” campaign, launched the evening of the House vote on Obamacare that then-Speaker Pelosi pushed through with a one-vote margin. The campaign exceeded our expectations; we surpassed our fundraising goals by more than 400 percent, a much needed boost for a committee struggling to raise money, and led to the Fire Pelosi bus tour, a centerpiece for 117 successful political events in the 48 continental states.

Our campaign, however, rested on one key premise: Nancy Pelosi, we believed, had to go precisely because she was so effective. Had Speaker Pelosi not been able to get Obamacare through, our campaign had no rationale.

Michael Steele as head of the RNC in 2010 will tell you the same thing.

I don’t know what my NY Congresswoman Kathleen Rice is thinking about:’

“The party establishment is circling the wagons for one of two reasons: either they didn’t hear voters’ call for a generational change in leadership, or they’re simply choosing to ignore it,” said Rice spokesman Michael Aciman.

I think him and Rice maybe need to hire an interpreter as the very clear message of voters was for a check on Trump not on Nancy Pelosi. If Rice is doing this out of personal ambition it’s going to backfire-opposing Pelosi at this point is the best way for Democrats to get themselves a primary opponent at this point, to get Susan Collins-ed. 

Again, the base wants to bring the fight to Donald Trump not Pelosi. Rice’s actions now only serve the GOP obstructionists.

And those voters who gave the Democrats the biggest wave election in history-bigger even than the first Watergate wave of 1974 are feeling pretty good right now after watching the Chuck and Nancy show.

Indeed, a lot of us are ecstatic relieved that someone has finally confronted Trump and held him accountable, who insisted on talking actual facts. 

https://twitter.com/DavidJollyFL/status/1072654480364199937

See I disagree with this:

Hey, we get the government we deserve. Leon Panetta on the Oval Office fight: “We have just seen a perfect example of how not to govern the country. To have that kind of dispute and to do it openly before the press … to have everybody yelling at one another, I think that it has just sent a terrible message to the American people.”

Uh, actually I loved it and I’m far from the only one:

It was energizing, it was thrilling, and it was most of all reassuring, and relieving. 

I am certainly both happy and relieved as many in the nation are today-finally the schoolyard bully is called out-by Nancy Pelosi, the school principal. Bill Kristol also was struck by Pelosi’ performance:

Having said that, Chuck also had a great day. And I know I was a little tough on him in a few recent chapters and many Democrats are expressing thoughts similar to mine: we were a little concerned about Schumer-he just seemed like this nice guy who wants to go out for cocktails with ‘President Trump’ rather than bringing the fight to him.

But Schumer is nothing if not a master politician and he brought it yesterday, perhaps understanding his role as making it clear that he’s not Trump’s buddy but instead intends to hold him accountable.

Schumer did a great job as Pelosi’s wing man.

Indeed, he successfully goaded Trump into declaring that he’s proud to shut down the government. Schumer proved to be masterful at getting under Trump’s thin skin:

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: Yeah. Here’s what I want to say: We have a lot of disagreements here. The Washington Post today gave you a whole lot of Pinocchios because they say you constantly misstate how much the wall is — how much of the wall is built and how much is there.

But that’s not the point here. We have a disagreement about the wall —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Washington Post — (laughs) —

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: — whether it’s effective or it isn’t. Not on border security, but on the wall.

We do not want to shut down the government. You have called 20 times to shut down the government. You say, “I want to shut down the government.” We don’t. We want to come to an agreement. If we can’t come to an agreement, we have solutions that will pass the House and Senate right now, and will not shut down the government. And that’s what we’re urging you to do. Not threaten to shut down the government —

THE PRESIDENT: Chuck —

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: — because you —

THE PRESIDENT: You don’t want to shut down the government, Chuck.

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: Let me just finish. Because you can’t get your way.

THE PRESIDENT: Because the last time you shut it down you got killed.

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: Yeah. Let me say something, Mr. President. You just say, “My way, or we’ll shut down the government.” We have a proposal that Democrats and Republicans will support to do a CR that will not shut down the government. We urge you to take it.

Here Schumer does a great job as Pelosi’ wing man and totally gets under ‘President Trump’s’ skin.

HOUSE SPEAKER-DESIGNATE PELOSI: Sixty people of the Republican Party have lost — are losing their offices now because of the transition. People are not — the morale is not —

THE PRESIDENT: And we’ve gained in the Senate. Nancy, we’ve gained in the Senate.

HOUSE SPEAKER-DESIGNATE PELOSI: The morale —

THE PRESIDENT: Excuse me. Did we win the Senate?

HOUSE SPEAKER-DESIGNATE PELOSI: — is not (inaudible).

THE PRESIDENT: We won the Senate.

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: When the President brags that he won North Dakota and Indiana, he’s in real trouble.

Indeed, as Newsweek says, Trump was too dumb to realize what a sick burn Schumer’s line was. 

Here it might be helpful to recall that Trump was the inspiration of Biff-the bully in Back to the Future. Remember? Why don’t you make like a tree and go away? And-helloooo… 

He took it as a straight line:

THE PRESIDENT: I did.

HOUSE SPEAKER-DESIGNATE PELOSI: Let me say this.

THE PRESIDENT: We did win North Dakota.

HOUSE SPEAKER-DESIGNATE PELOSI: This is the most unfortunate thing. We came in here in good faith, and we are entering into this kind of a discussion in the public view.

Here he backed up Pelosi’s strong pushback-one of the best parts, where she told him not to detract from her party’s great victory.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, we’re going to see. We’re going to see. Look, we have to have the wall. This isn’t a question; this is a national emergency. Drugs are pouring into our country. People with tremendous medical difficulty and medical problems are pouring in, and in many — in many cases, it’s contagious. They’re pouring into our country. We have to have border security. We have to have a wall as part of border security.

And I don’t think we really disagree so much. I also know that, you know, Nancy is in a situation where it’s not easy for her to talk right now, and I understand that. And I fully understand that. We’re going to have a good discussion and we’re going to see what happens.

HOUSE SPEAKER-DESIGNATE PELOSI: Mr. President —

THE PRESIDENT: But we have to have border security.

HOUSE SPEAKER-DESIGNATE PELOSI: Mr. President, please don’t characterize the strength that I bring to this meeting as the Leader of the House Democrats who just won a big victory. But let me —

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: Elections have consequences, Mr. President.

But this was Schumer’s best moment-where he got Trump to essentially brag: Yes I called Code Red. 

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: The one thing I think we can agree on is we shouldn’t shut down the government over a dispute. And you want to shut it down. You keep talking about it.

THE PRESIDENT: I — no, no, no, no, no. The last time, Chuck, you shut it down —

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: No, no, no.

THE PRESIDENT: — and then you opened it up very quickly.

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: Twenty times. Twenty times.

THE PRESIDENT: And I don’t want to do what you did. But, Chuck —

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: Twenty times you have called for, “I will shut down the government if I don’t get my wall.” None of us have said —

THE PRESIDENT: You want to know something?

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: You’ve said it.

THE PRESIDENT: Okay, you want to put that on my —

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: You said it.

THE PRESIDENT: I’ll take it.

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: Okay, good.

But what was truly priceless was the great smile on Schumer’s face as he said ‘okay, good.’

THE PRESIDENT: You know what I’ll say: Yes, if we don’t get what we want, one way or the other — whether it’s through you, through a military, through anything you want to call — I will shut down the government. Absolutely.

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: Okay. Fair enough. We disagree.

THE PRESIDENT: And I am proud — and I’ll tell you what —

SENATE MINORITY LEADER SCHUMER: We disagree.

THE PRESIDENT: I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck, because the people of this country don’t want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs pouring into our country. So I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it. The last time you shut it down, it didn’t work. I will take the mantle of shutting down.

There you go: I’m proud to shutdown the government. I will be the one to shut it down, I won’t blame you for it. Schumer’s smile was from ear to ear and it kept getting bigger.

Finally, all hail the Queen. It’s official:’

Pelosi strikes deal with Dem rebels, paving the way for her speakership

The California Democrat has agreed to limit her time as speaker to four years at most.”

Ok so she has until 2022 and it’s unlikely she intended to stay longer anyway-again she was ready to leave in 2016 but thankfully stayed on.

Here let’s give Congressman Cedric Richmond the last word:

Rep. Cedric Richmond, chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, also said he opposed the idea, saying if people don’t like a leader, they can just vote them out at the end of a term.”

Yes term limits are a bad-Republican-idea and hopefully they don’t pass here. Why is there this desire for a leadership that’s in constant flux and transition?

“This whole thing about these guys needing something so that they can land this damn plane is getting silly,” Richmond said, referring to the group of rebels. “Land the plane. Vote for her. And let’s please get on.”

Exactly. Let’s get on. We’ve got very important business to attend to. Enough time has been wasted on this vanity project, now lets’ get to work on the job the American people elected this Congress to do.

What the Dem House can now do is ask what Michael Cohen’s being sentenced to three years means about what they need to do about so-called ‘President Trump.’ But for that, read chapter A. 

 

License

October 28, 2016: a Day That Will Live in Infamy Copyright © by . All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book