Good for her!

The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has said “Hell No!” to Jim Jordan and Jim Banks being part of the Select Committee charged with investigating the January 6th Attack on the Congress. She is absolutely right. This work is too important to allow it to be polluted by such egregiously dishonest Trump enablers.

Leader (and probable witness) Kevin McCarthy says that the Republicans will boycott the proceedings if these partisan trolls are not accepted. Good! Things will go much quicker and much smoother without GOP delaying tactics and obfuscation. I hope he sticks to his guns. But, I wonder. Has McCarthy been played by the wily Speaker? Maybe.

46 thoughts on “Good for her!

  1. Ha, ha, ha. Pelosi’s ultra-partisan sham won’t produce a product worthy of toilet paper except in the eyes of uber left wing extremists like you know who. If she is too whimpy to be able hold a truly bipartisan effort then screw her. McCarthy will hold his own investigation that will produce facts, not Pelosi rubberstamped fictitious drivel from desparate Democrats. Hint: the “report” is already written by her before any “investigation” been begins. Spare us the silly drama….


    1. I wonder what rules the McCarthy “investigation” will be operating on. As far as I know they will have not subpoeana powers or staff for this kind of effort. Can you lie to such a “hearing” and be charged with perjury? I don’t think so. Hopefully, he has better sense than to try but, maybe not.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Didn’t know that Liz Cheney was a Democrat all of a sudden.

      Pelosi offered McCarthy EVERYTHING he asked for wrt the original bipartisan commission and then McCarthy, on the orders of his master in Florida, reneged on the deal.

      Putting Jordan or any other GOP Representative on the panel who supported the idea of decertifying the election results is akin to putting the fox in the hen house and NO TRUTH will be allowed to come out.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Well, there goes the fig leaf of bipartisanship.

    Tell you what. If Pelosi is to have veto power over the GOP members, then should not McCarthy have veto power over the Democrat members?

    Fair is fair.


    1. “Fair is fair” and votes is votes. I have three words for you . . . Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!

      Pelosi, unlike Obama or Biden, does not harbor any illusions about the kind of people she has been dealing with for decades. They are neither honest nor trustworthy. And the spineless Trump ass-kissing weasel McCarthy is one of the better ones.

      The Democrats negotiated in good faith and gave the GOP everything they asked for on the original Commission Bill. The rest is history. Bi-partisanship in the investigation was killed by the Mar-a-Lago Mussolini. Just another phase in the ATTEMPTED cover-up of his countless crimes. The truth is out there and it is going to be made public with or without Trump Republican participation.

      Liked by 2 people

        1. Nope.

          I got my facts right. I do not lie to support my opinions.

          I was referring to the Commission and how it was going to be organized and staffed. Everything the Republican negotiators asked for, they got. It was a done deal until McCarthy got “straightened out” by the Instigator-in-chief.


          1. Tell him? No.

            But as a Republican he has his right to express an opinion. Pelosi can do the same, bt neither should she be able to dictate who the Republicans can choose.


          2. …”he has his right to express an opinion.”

            When HE expresses an opinion, his minions and toadies JUMP. If you don’t believe that you are just not paying attention to reality.


          3. “How would anything between McCarty and Trump cause Pelosi to meddle in the choice of the Republican members of the commission?”

            You seem really confused. The Non-Partisan Commission which had been agreed on between Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate was to be created by legislation. The deal was struck but then killed by Trump who forbade McCarthy to proceed.

            We are now talking about a Select Committee of the House. It was Pelosi’s Plan B after Trump killed the Non-Partisan Commission. By trying to appoint Jim Jordan McCarthy showed a total lack of seriousness. No one complicit in the January Attack on Congress or subsequent Cheerleader for it can have a role in a Select Committee which will be looking into his role.

            Liked by 2 people

          4. “But as a Republican he [Trump] has his right to express an opinion”

            Anybody who sought his opinion – much less obeyed it – has no place in this process. It would be like saying to John Gotti . . . “Who do you think should investigate your crimes?”

            Liked by 1 person

      1. Why? Is he from the Whig party?

        Paul mentioned Benghazi, which he does for no apparent reason from time to time, but no one blocked Pelosi’s appointments to the Benghazi Commission when she was the minority leader.

        You may not like Jordan, Pelosi may not like him, but neither of you is minority leader, and it is his place to make that choice.

        If that is not honored, it is not a bipartisan commission , it is a witch hunt, and the public will see that.


        1. We both know why I mention Benghazi. It was a hyper-partisan exercise forced on the nation by the GOP House majority who openly admitted its purpose was to kneecap Hillary Clinton politically. So your whining about Pelosi not caving to those same people falls on deaf ears.

          Jordan is not qualified to be on ANY serious committee. Not only is he a clown, he is one of the worst of the Big Liars and his role in the Attack on Congress could well be a matter the Select Committee will be looking into.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Jordan’s qualifications are not your business, nor or they Pelosi’s. they are McCarthy’s.

            Just as Pelosi was allowed her choice of Democrats on the Benghazi Commission.


          2. I have two words for you:

            LIZ CHENEY. Who, by the way, was appointed by Ms. Pelosi.

            None of the Democrats on the Benghazi committee tried to whitewash what happened on there.

            Jordan’s only qualification for appointment to the committee is he is just another lap dog who cares nothing for the truth, just what he can get by kissing the 239 lb. backside of a two-time losing (popular vote), twice impeached, ex-President who thinks love consists of beating the crap out of police officers and calling for the lynching of his own Vice President.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. It is not up to you, or Pelosi, or me.

            It is up to the Congressional Republicans to decide who will represent them on the committee. Anything else makes a sham of the proceedings.


          4. “Anything else makes a sham of the proceedings.”

            Putting ANYONE who supported the attack on the Capitol and call trespassing or a rowdy tourist group are the ones that would make it a sham. Ms. Pelosi wants serious people to do serious work. If the GOP can’t find any serious people, then Ms. Pelosi did the right thing.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. This is not a commission. That was scrapped by the Republicans even after they got every detail they wanted with regards to a 1/6 investigation. Including subpoena powers.

          So now we have a bipartisan House investigation with two Republicans already on, including one of the most conservative.

          McCarthy blew it on the commission and he is now doing the same for this investigation.

          Simply put Republicans would just as soon forget that 1/6 even happened. Gaslighting about “tourists” and only “patriots” marching. 140 police hospitalized, some beaten severely, a rioter shot and killed, others died also as a probable result of the horrible event.

          We must never, ever forget 1/6. The last time anyone attacked our government capital was in the War of 1812. They were not tourists or patriots either as I recall.

          The conservative caucus supported the insurgents and tried to overturn the election because they lost and can’t admit it.

          Liked by 3 people

      2. “Jordan’s qualifications are not your business, nor or they Pelosi’s. they are McCarthy’s.”

        You talk like you know what you are talking about. You do not. Appointing the members of a Select Committee is a perogative of being Speaker. There are no limits or rules constraining her choices. The invitation for McCarthy to nominate some GOP members for the Select Committee was a COURTESY. He abused that courtesy by appointing Big Liars and, frankly, clownish grandstanders who would have done their best to sabotage the proceedings.

        Sure, there will be squealing that she took this tough stance to make the committee more effective and serious. Let them squeal. I really don’t care. Do U?

        Liked by 2 people

    2. ,,,”there goes the fig leaf of bipartisanship.”

      McCarthy pulled that off as soon as he reneged on the original commission where his negotiator got him E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G he wanted. It is McCarthy who is anti-bipartisan.

      As far as veto powers, let me remind you that “elections have consequences”. Until the GOP is able to gerrymander and voter suppress their way to the majority, Ms. Pelosi, at current, IS the Speaker of the House.

      AND it was Liz Cheney who told Kevin McCarthy on January 6th, while barricading the doors to the House Chamber to prevent the trespasser and tourist from gaining access, “You fucking did this.”

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Being the majority allows Pelosi more control over the committee, but not over who the Republicans choose to represent them.

        While she may be able to enforce her will, the GOP does not have to validate a corrupt process. If the GOP is not free to appoint its choices, or if the structure of the committee does not allow them to participate ethically, it is their duty to walk away, explain why, and let the voters pass judgment


        1. Ethically? Republican insurrectionists? That’s a laugh. If they were ethical they would not have encouraged insurrection or voted to reject the results of the election.

          Read the rules of the House. Select committee members are appointed at the sole discretion of the Speaker.

          There is your favorite word again – “corrupt.” Maybe you use it a little too freely? It now means nothing coming from you and doubly so since you NEVER apply it to actually “corrupt” people who are not Democrats. For example, I would apply it to a coach who witnesses sexual assaults on the students he is responsible for but keeps it to himself and takes no action for career reasons. Now, THAT’S “corrupt.”

          Liked by 1 person

          1. As I wrote. Pelosi can do as she chooses. but the people aren’t stupid and have an inherent preference for fairness.

            Violate that end there is a price to be paid at the polls.


          2. And it should be McCarthy, Jordan, Gosar and Paul who should pay that price. Along with the other 140-plus GOP members who signed on to “cancel” votes in the election or who have not called out the rioters for what they are.

            By the way, the “other” Jim that Pelosi vetoed has a son who works for Tucker Carlson. As I recall, you were very worried about leaks from the committee. Right there is the biggest potential leak available.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. Corrupt process? You just described what the GOP has been attempting to do to ANY Congressional investigation by Commission or Select Committee, Good faith negotiations to establish a Commission where the GOP got all it asked for. Then after a field trip to Mar-a-Lago, McCarthy ordered his caucus to vote against it. Deny that FACT and anything you have to say after means BUPKES.

          Serious work requires serious people. When the GOP assigns serious people to work on the Committee, then it will move forward. But putting election lie spreaders and riot deniers on the Committee is NOT being serious.

          And what exactly is their explanation? “We can’t have representatives who supported the election lie and insurrectionists so why bother?” BIG FAT YELLOW BS FLAG!

          Liked by 1 person

          1. It is not your place, or Pelosi’s, or mine, for that matter, to tell the GOP who should represent them.

            If the Democrats don’t let them send who they choose, the GOP should walk away to deny any appearance of legitimacy to the farce.


          2. …”the GOP should walk away”

            Yes they should. They should ALL walk away form their duties to be serious about something serious. This ain’t some silly Post Office in Podunk, OH. The gentlemen from Ohio and Indiana would not be anything but flies in the ointment of getting to the truth. The alternative view of facts constantly on display by these two “representatives” is enough to disqualify them from anything serious.

            Which begs the question: What is the GOP trying to hide?

            Liked by 1 person

          3. Well, if the Democrats are going to silence them, I guess we’ll never know.

            Is it a bipartisan inquiry or a propaganda Kibouki? Pick one,


          4. Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, and probably Denver Riggleman are posed to be part of the committee. The GOP isn’t being silenced; they are being held to a higher standard than what they hold themselves to.

            Your baseless cries of partisanship are being laid to waste by Pelosi. And no matter how many times you try to say otherwise, the Speaker is doing her level best to get to the truth and will be damned if she allows lying liars to lie their way thru on this committee.

            McCarthy is the one blowing up the chances for bipartisanship. You just refuse to acknowledge the FACTS of this story. Pretty said.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. Again, only the Republicans are entitled to choose who represents them.

            Someone hostile to their point of view, or who is in a politically vulnerable district and can’t be assertive is unlikely to be their choice, regardless of party label

            Pelosi already gets to appoint 8 of the 13 members of the committee. Banks and Jordan will not be able to dictate the outcome of the proceedings. So, one must wonder what they might possibly ask of a witness that so terrifies the Democrats that they must be prevented from asking it?


          6. With the spin you are now pushing, you could rotate windmill to provide the compound and any neighbors within 10 miles, with electricity for a year.

            “Someone hostile to their point of view”…

            That would be hostile to the TRUTH.

            Banks’ son works for Tucker Carlson. As I pointed out before, you complained about leaky proceedings. HEre is the BIG LEAK, to go along with the Big LIE.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. Farce?

            What part of “someone organized, summoned and dispatched a mob of violent insurrectionists to storm the Capitol and attack the Congress” do you not understand?

            A non-Partisan Commission was the appropriate way to investigate this extraordinary assault on our country but – for some obvious reason – Trump did not want this to proceed.

            Liked by 1 person

          8. “Is it a bipartisan inquiry or a propaganda Kibouki? Pick one.”

            It should be a bipartisan inquiry. Too bad Trump does not want that – for obvious reasons. But in spite of his cover-up we will have a bipartisan Select Committee with responsible and honest Republicans such as Liz Cheney and others playing an important part if some “patriot” does not murder them first.

            Why are you people so fearful of an honest investigation of this extraordinary event – the President violently attacking the Congress through surrogates? Never mind. It is a rhetorical question with an obvious answer – since the coup failed you don’t want the truth coming out.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. “Again, only the Republicans are entitled to choose who represents them.”

            They are not entitled to anything. The Select Committee is a creature of the Speaker. She is responsible for it and she is entitled to have on it people who she believes will advance its purpose. The purpose here is to get to the truth. Jordan and Banks have zero interest in that purpose as they have demonstrated over and over again.

            Speaker Pelosi has made clear why Jordan and Banks were not acceptable. Their statements and actions after the Electoral College had voted are disqualifying. There is a long list including Jordan stating that the election was not legitimate and that Trump should “never concede” even after the EC had voted.

            After McCarthy announced the choice of Banks for the committee he issued a snarling press release including this gem . . .

            “Make no mistake, Nancy Pelosi created this committee solely to malign conservatives and to justify the Left’s authoritarian agenda.”

            Go ahead and pretend she should have accepted him anyway. We could all use a good laugh.

            Liked by 1 person

  3. I was putting dinner on the table when I heard that news & it totally made my day! I wanted to run outside and scream – “YOU GO NANCY!”

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s