Category: Congress

CPAC: Too Early to Think About 2026?

Posted on

NATIONAL HARBOR, Maryland
So I get on the hotel elevator with a couple, and the guy’s wearing a red shirt emblazoned, “RON ELLER FOR CONGRESS.” Curiosity being a journalistic habit, I ask the guy, “Who’s Ron Eller?”

“I’m Ron Eller,” he says, and then proceeds to tell me that he ran for Congress last year in Mississippi against Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, who was handpicked by Nancy Pelosi to chair the infamous J6 witch hunt committee. Mississippi has four congressional districts, three of which are held by Republicans with about 70% of the vote, whereas Thompson’s 2nd District, covering the Delta region stretching down the western side of the state, is rated D+11 by the Cook Political Report. Thompson’s been in Congress more than 30 years, and the last time any Republican challenger got as much as 40% of the vote against him was in 2004. There is no logical reason to think Thompson’s could be vulnerable in 2026, however . . .

Ron Eller got 38% of the vote last year despite being outspent more than 5-to-1 by the incumbent Democrat. The national Republican establishment didn’t lift a finger to help and wouldn’t even return Eller’s phone calls. Eller is a determined fellow who can and will give you his stump speech extempaneously, and he’s planning to challenge Thompson again in 2026. You got to like Eller’s bio — 20-year military veteran and small business owner, a deeply religious and patriotic man in a region where Bible-believing Christian faith is still nearly universal.

What could Ron Eller do in 2026, if we could mobilize grassroots MAGA activists to support his campaign? What would it mean, even in a D+11 district, to have major GOP fundraising efforts to back a candidate like Eller, the underdog against the 30-year incumbent lapdog of the left-wing Democratic Party establishment? So, after hearing Eller give his impromptu stump speech — I’m telling you, the guy’s a campaign machine — I said, “You remember the Tea Party year? Remember that campaign against Barney Frank?” Sean Bielat ring a bell?

That’s what we need — grassroots energy in a longshot campaign like the one that forced Barney Frank to spend half-a-million dollars of his own money to fend off the underdog challenger.

Even if you don’t win a campaign like that, the point is you force Democrats to play defense in otherwise “safe” districts, which limits how much money and effort they can put into fighting in the “purple” battleground races. Can MAGA generate the kind of grassroots energy in 2026 the Tea Party had in 2010? I don’t know. But what I do know is, I like this guy I met in the hotel elevator.

RON ELLER for U.S. CONGRESS



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies

Isn’t It Time We Discuss the Leading Cause of Antisemitism in America?

Posted on Comments

If anyone wishes to understand why the United States is experiencing a startling increase in antisemitism, I would direct their attention not to the pro-Hamas protesters on university campuses, but rather to Rep. Jamie Rankin (D-Md.), who is so obnoxious as to make Jehovah Himself declare, “No, sir, you are not chosen.” It is to be recalled that Raskin spent months presiding over the phony J6 “insurrection” hearings, conducted by an illegitimate committee whose membership was handpicked by Nancy Pelosi contrary to the rules of the House.

That is to say, if anyone can be considered an expert on unethical congressional proceedings, it is Jamie Raskin, and this is not incidental to recent events that made headlines. Everybody was in a tizzy this week after Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) made a remark about the “fake eyelashes” of Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Tx.). What caused that dust-up? The transcript:

GREENE: I’d like to know if any of the Democrats on this committee are employing Judge Merchan’s daughter.
CROCKETT: Please tell me what that has to do with Merrick Garland.
GREENE: Oh, Goldman. That’s right. He’s advising. Ok.
CROCKETT: Do you know what we’re here for? Do you know we’re here —
[CROSSTALK]
GREENE: I think your fake eyelashes are messing up your —

Why would Greene bring that up? The answer has to do with Jamie Raskin, but before I explain that, first we must remember why the House Oversight Committee was meeting Thursday. It was a full-committee markup where they would formalize contempt of Congress charges against Attorney General Merrick Garland. The Committee has subpoenaed the Department of Justice to turn over recordings of President Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur, who investigated Biden’s mishandling and improper disclosure of classified materials. Let us not be naive about why the Republicans in charge of the committee want that recording — they believe that audio of the interview will demonstrate the severity of Biden’s cognitive decline. Indeed, one imagines that if the committee got its hands on that recording, excerpts would be featured in GOP campaign ads showing how Biden is lost in a hopeless of fog of confusion, which is why Garland is stonewalling them.

In his opening remarks, Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) cleverly made the point of how important it is to comply with a subpoena:

Not long ago, a Member of this Committee said:
“The lesson is, please tell your children out there in America, if you get a subpoena to go before Congress, if you get a subpoena to go to the court, go. You have a legal responsibility to go.”
That was Ranking Member Raskin in 2022. Now, Ranking Member Raskin has spent this Congress making excuses for why people like Hunter Biden or, now, the Department of Justice don’t have to comply with Congressional subpoenas.

ZING! Welcome to the New Rules, how do you like ’em? Democrats in power are always doing things that they condemn as unfair whenever Republicans in power do the same things. When Raskin was running the “insurrection” show trial, he was willing to put people in jail for refusing to comply with his subpoenas, but now that the GOP is in the majority, suddenly contempt of Congress is no big deal. After Comer finished his opening remarks, then it was Jamie Raskin’s turn:

Ladies and gentlemen, in this special nighttime episode we resume the madcap comedy mystery series called “Comer’s High Crimes and Misadventures: The Hilarious Quest to Impeach a President Who Has Done Nothing Wrong,” an avowedly low-budget but multi-million dollar taxpayer funded production which most Americans assumed had ended two months ago and everyone had completely forgotten about.
But tonight, with the cast and crew fresh back from a surprise trip to New York City itself, it’s clear the show must go on!
Now, our originally scheduled performance was supposed to be at 11:00 am today but it was postponed when members of the Majority chose to join a mass spiritual pilgrimage to the New York criminal trial of a Florida man, an adjudicated fraudster and rapist, as he faces 34 felony counts of falsifying corporate financial records to cover up $130,000 paid in hush money to a porn star sex partner.
Although some people are churlishly complaining that Members of the House should actually be here to vote on public business and should not have forced a last-minute change in the Committee schedule, our colleagues properly demonstrated for all of history their fierce devotion to this clearly reformed, devout, and pious Florida spiritual leader who many supporters are calling the Messiah from Mar-a-Lago.
Of course, in the meantime, Chairman Jordan in the House Judiciary Committee preempted our GOP colleagues on Oversight, rendering this exercise not only absurd, but completely meaningless and redundant. They have already held Attorney General Garland purportedly in contempt.
Now, when we last met on this matter, you’ll recall that the Majority still had not identified a single high crime or misdemeanor that the President had committed.
The Committee’s impressive 3.8 million pages of documents and 80 hours of testimony from 20 witnesses produced nothing but overwhelming and definitive proof that President Biden had nothing wrong. . . .

Really? There is “definitive proof” of Biden’s innocence? But notice how Raskin had to bring up the “Orange Man Bad” theme, pandering to Trump Derangement Syndrome sufferers while mocking the proceedings of a congressional committee as a “madcap comedy mystery series.”

Raskin rambled on in this vein for a while before delivering what he certainly considered his pièce de résistance:

Real obstruction happened when two members of this Committee, who may be preparing to vote tonight to hold Attorney General Garland in contempt, brazenly refused to comply with subpoenas from the U.S. House Select Committee to investigate the January 6th attack on the United States Capitol, and still have not responded to those subpoenas.
But now, it seems, Mr. Chairman, I just got passed something, that the whole obstruction gimmick may just be a fundraising ploy, which demeans the overwhelming legal integrity and impressive theatrical ambitions of this enterprise. I was just handed a mass fundraising email solicitation for your campaign that you sent out this evening, Mr. Chairman, stating that, “Biden and his advisors are terrified that I will release the recordings, forcing the media and Democrats to answer for the dismal decline of Biden’s mental state. … This could be the final blow to Biden with swing voters across the country. … The Democrats are pulling out all the stops to stop the bleeding. … Signed, James Comer, Chairman, House Oversight Committee.”
No, I must confess my disappointment to be handed this fundraising solicitation, signed by you as Chairman of the House Oversight Committee. I thought that you were serious about the legal enterprise here, and not just another political huckster calling hearings to score cheap political points and to make a buck.

Oh, ho, ho! You mean to tell us that Democrats don’t constantly do the exact same thing? Do you, Mr. Raskin, expect us to believe that you never once sent out a fundraising letter mentioning your “insurrection” show trial? Your pretended abhorrence of such fundraising reminds me of a certain Captain Renault, who was shocked — shocked! — to discover there was gambling was going on in Casablanca.

Now, perhaps, you see the point that Marjorie Taylor Greene was trying to make. Raskin and the Democrats were trying to suggest that Comer and his fellow Republicans were engaged in unethical behavior, which prompted Greene to bring up the fact that Loren Merchan, the daughter of Judge Juan Merchan, currently presiding over the Manhattan trial of Trump, is a Democratic campaign consultant. You see, Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), a member of the Oversight Committee, paid more than $150,000 to Loren Merchan’s consulting firm. Committee Democrats are up to their eyeballs in the corrupt persecution of Trump in Alvin Bragg’s Manhattan, and yet dare to accuse Republicans of wrongdoing in their investigation of Biden! And while Greene was making that point, she was interrupted by Crockett — who hadn’t been recognized by the chair — and then Greene responded with the “fake eyelashes” jab, which sent AOC into a fit of shrieking hysteria.

All of that, however, was merely the sequel to the dishonest and hypocritical performance of Jamie Raskin in his opening statement. So if anyone at the Anti-Defamation League wants to know what’s causing the rise of antisemitism in America, I’ll just show them a picture of Jamie Raskin: “Have you seen this guy? Looking for all the world like a crude caricature of a sleazy Jew published in a 1932 edition of Der Stürmer? If you guys really want to do something about antisemitism, how about convincing Jamie Raskin to retire from Congress?”

Until then, sorry, I can’t help you.



 

Shop Electronics at Amazon

Save on Groceries and Everyday Essentials

Shop Amazon Basics

Office & School Supplies

‘The Powers That Be’: Mike Johnson Elected 56th Speaker of the House

Posted on

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.”
— Romans 13:1-2 (KJV)

Ending three weeks of leaderless chaos — Matt Gaetz owes the nation an apology — and repeated failure, the Republican caucus finally united behind a little-known member whose name wasn’t even mentioned previously, Rep. Mike Johnson from Shreveport, Louisiana:

A member of the Christian right faction of the Republican Party, Johnson is known for his strong support for a nationwide abortion ban and an end to legal same-sex marriages.He has called for the Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges to be overturned and for medical marijuana to be restricted, referring to the latter as a “gateway drug”. In December 2020, Johnson signed an amicus brief in support of Texas v. Pennsylvania, a lawsuit filed at the Supreme Court contesting the results of the 2020 presidential election. In January 2021, Johnson voted to overturn the election results in Pennsylvania. Johnson has cultivated close ties to Protestant fundamentalist groups Answers in Genesis, Louisiana Family Forum, Alliance Defending Freedom, and Focus on the Family. Prior to his career as a politician, he worked with them to “represent churches, pastors and congregants whose vision of religious freedom conflicted with government regulations.”

While the Wikipedia article doesn’t mention Johnson’s denomination, his acceptance speech was profoundly Calvinist:

I want to tell all my colleagues here what I told the Republicans in that room last night; I don’t believe there are any coincidences in a matter like this. I believe that Scripture, the Bible, is very clear that God is the one that raises up those in authority. He raised up each of you, all of us, and I believe that God has ordained and allowed each one of us to be brought here for this specific moment in this time.
This is my belief. I believe that each one of us has a huge responsibility today to use the gifts that God has given us to serve the extraordinary people of this great country — and they deserve it — and to ensure that our republic remains standing as the great beacon of light and hope and freedom in a world that desperately needs it.

This idea, that God ordains authority, is really the bedrock of Christian teaching on the rule of law. What if we are ruled by fools or tyrants? This is our fault, a curse we have earned by our own sinful disobedience to God. After all, wasn’t it God’s will that Judea should be conquered by the Romans? And it was while the Israelites suffered under the yoke of Rome that Christ was born, setting in motion a chain of events that took centuries to unfold before the Jews were finally restored to the land that God promised to Abraham in their covenant. We do not know, at any given moment, how our current woes and troubles may figure into what God has planned for our future, but if we believe that our lives have meaning and purpose — if we are willing to do whatever duty may command, to serve God even through confusion and humiliation — we are assured by scripture that everything will work out in the end.

“And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?”
— Romans 8:28-31 (KJV)

Even Satan himself is powerless to defy God’s will, and while I don’t want to say Matt Gaetz is the Devil incarnate, I’m pleased that the result of Gaetz’s infernal scheme was that this mild-mannered Christian from Louisiana has taken the Speaker’s gavel. Certainly, this must be an auspicious occasion, a sign of God’s favor. Selah.



 

Anything That Makes Adam Kinzinger Happy Is Objectively Bad for America

Posted on

In 2021, the Democrat-controlled legislature of Illinois did the nation a huge favor. In redrawing their state’s congressional districts, Illinois legislators lumped together parts of the 16th and 18th districts, thereby setting up a possible Republican primary between two incumbents, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (from the old 16th District) and Rep. Darin LaHood (from the old 18th). There was never any doubt who would win that primary in a 66% Republican district, and thus Kinzinger “retired” from Congress — immediately taking a job as a comentator on America’s least-watched news network, CNN. The anchors on CNN are always careful to introduce Kinzinger as a “former Republican congressman,” a description that is true in two senses: Kinzinger is no longer a congressman, and he hasn’t really been a Republican since November 2016, becoming a flaming bonfire of Trump Derangement Syndrome even worse than David French. So the ex-Republican ex-congressman was all over CNN today, gleefully celebrating the wretched mess in the Capitol:

CNN commentator Adam Kinzinger said Tuesday on CNN’s “News Central” that he was “very proud” of the 20 Republicans who voted against Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) for speaker.
Kinzinger said, “I’m impressed that there’s 20. I was worried this morning because a lot of the hard opposition to Jordan had been capitulating in the last 24 hours, like Mike Rogers from Alabama, Ann Wagner from Missouri. They were ‘hell no’ until they were all in. This is embarrassing for Jim Jordan.”
He continued, “I think this is going to be hard for him to fix. I mean the only thing I can imagine is if he starts cutting deals and those deals include things that he’s never supported in the past. For instance, if he says I’m committed to bringing Ukraine funding on the floor he may be able to peel off one or two of those. If he says I’m committed to whatever it is, I don’t know, maybe he can get to his number, but I think this is hard.”
Kinzinger added, “The easiest thing to do if you’re a Republican is to vote for Jim Jordan the first time and go away the second time. I think you could see even more peel away on the second round, or he consolidates. Who really knows? I think it’s going to be very hard for him to become speaker now.
He concluded, “That doesn’t mean they’re not going to use blistering pressure on Fox News, NewsMax, OAN to activate the base to scare the crap out of those people. There’s a lot of brave people in those 20 that I am very proud of them today.”

The fact that Kinzinger considers the anti-Jordan GOP congressmen to be “brave people” means that they are all knaves and fools. And the fact that Kinzinger hates Jim Jordan means that Jordan must be OK.

Make Jim Jordan the next speaker, and make Adam Kinzinger sad.



 

A Self-Inflicted Disaster as Republicans Vote to Boot Kevin McCarthy as Speaker

Posted on Comments

Perhaps some of my readers are not sad to see Kevin McCarthy voted out as Speaker of the House. And I’m here to tell you, you’re wrong.

Perhaps you recall the scene from Gone With the Wind in which Rhett is helping Scarlett and Melanie escape Atlanta before the Yankee invaders arrive. At one point, the road is blocked by a passing column of Confederate troops. Scarlett frets: “Oh, dear, I wish they’d hurry,” to which Rhett replies, “I wouldn’t be in such a hurry to see them go if I were you. With them goes the last semblance of law and order.”

So it is with ex-Speaker McCarthy. Some conservatives may have loathed McCarthy as a compromised, unprincipled sellout, and I have no interest in debating anyone about McCarthy’s faults. The problem is that, having created this vacancy, the GOP insurgents offer no candidate capable of filling the void. Critics may say that anyone would be better than McCarthy, but which “anyone” do they have in mind?

Some people are simply incapable of teamwork. They are so monstrously selfish that they would rather rule in Hell than to serve in Heaven. It is unfortunate that such egomaniacs are often elected to public office, where their own vanity and ambition makes them dangerous and untrustworthy. Such is the character, I suspect, of Kevin McCarthy’s enemies, whose appetite for destruction is unlikely to coincide with similar talent for creating anything to replace what they’ve destroyed.



 

House Passes Spending Bill After Democrat (Allegedly) Pulls Fire Alarm

Posted on

It’s always “allegedly” with these people:

Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) allegedly pulled a fire alarm in the United States Capitol complex moments before the House was scheduled to vote on a bill preventing a government shutdown, according to the House Administration Committee.
U.S. Capitol Police and the House Administration Committee, which oversees House operations and Capitol security, are investigating. . . .
Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) gave a long filibuster speech minutes later as Democrats attempted to delay the vote on a 45-day extension of government funding. The bill eventually passed by a large margin after the incident.
Rep. Jim Banks is among those calling for Bowman’s arrest, tweeting the possibility that Bowman’s actions could be part of a conspiracy among Democrats.

J6 protesters were sentenced to years in federal prison for “interrupting official proceedings,” and yet a Democrat thinks he can pull a fire alarm to stop a congressional vote. “Allegedly,” I hasten to add. Before the House overwhelmingly passed its bill, 335-91, Mitch McConnell had already announced that Senate Republicans would vote for the House version, rather than the garbage “compromise” bill that Chuck Schumer wanted the Senate to pass instead. So this looks like a win — even though my podcast partner John Hoge is ready for a shutdown at his contracting job (building space robots for NASA). We’ll see . . .



 

Idiot Democrat From Houston Doesn’t Have the Faintest Clue Who Bari Weiss Is

Posted on Comments

How is it that you get yourself elected to Congress and appointed to an important committee, but can’t be bothered to familiarize yourself with the subject matter of a major hearing? If the voters of the 29th District of Texas have any capacity for reflection — notice the word “if” in that phrase — they should be wondering what the hell Rep. Sylvia Garcia was doing last week instead of preparing for the Judiciary subcommittee hearing in which Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger testified about their “Twitter files” reporting. Look at that screen shot: Do you see Garcia scrutinizing her notes, which were probably prepared for her by some 26-year-old staffer? Garcia is 72 years old, and perhaps she doesn’t spend much time on Twitter. She’s a busy woman, and doesn’t have time to follow every little spat on social media. We can understand that.

What is less understandable is that Garcia doesn’t know who Bari Weiss is. This became obvious when Garcia was questioning Shellenberger — an environmental journalist who has recently gotten fed up with his “progressive” comrades — about how he got involved with Twitter:

“In… in your discussion — in your answer, you also said that you were invited by a friend, Bari Weiss?” Garcia asked, already sounding confused, as if she had no idea what she was even questioning the witnesses about.
“My friend, Bari Weiss,” Shellenberger repeated for clarity.
“So this friend works for Twitter? Or, what is, what is her, ummm—”
“She’s a journalist,” Taibbi explained, much to the irritation of Garcia, who probably should have known who Bari Weiss was before participating in the hearing.
“Sir, I didn’t ask you a question,” Garcia snapped. “I’m now asking Mr. Shellenberger a question.”
At this point, Taibbi and Shellenberger both start to laugh. I suspect they were more than just a little amused at Garcia’s cluelessness regarding the subject matter she was questioning them about.
“Yes, ma’am, Bari Weiss is a journalist,” Shellenberger interjected.
“I’m sorry, sir,”
“She’s a journalist,” Shellenberger repeated.
“She’s a journalist, so you work in concert with her?”
It was a rather dumb question, but Shellenberger eventually, after pondering it for a few seconds, responded in the affirmative.
“Do you know when she first, uhhh, was contacted by Mr. Musk?” Garcia asked.
“I don’t know.”
“You don’t know,” she echoed. “So you’re in this as a threesome?”

Bari Weiss is certainly not an obscure figure, but maybe Garcia can’t figure out how to use Google to find a Wikipedia page.

Like her Democratic colleagues on the subcommittee, Garcia seemed to be trying to promote a narrative that there must be some kind of sinister conspiracy behind the production of the “Twitter files” stories, so that by questioning how Taibbi and Shellenberger became involved, she was “exposing” something relevant. In fact, of course, this was just a diversion, a way of trying to deflect and distract attention from the content of what Taibbi and Shellenberger have reported about how government agencies pressured Twitter to censor and suppress information on the platform. Trump Derangement Syndrome has destroyed whatever modicum of good sense Democrats ever had.

Ed Driscoll quotes Taibbi talking about how Brooklyn Rep. Dan Goldman — viewed as a “rising star” in his party — spent part of his allotted time in the committee trying to claim that mere accusations of “Russian interference” made by former special counsel Robert Mueller are tantamount to proof of such interference:

The irony is that what Goldman was doing, confusing accusations with proof — as Thomas Jefferson said, the phenomenon of people whose “suspicions may be evidence” — was the entire reason for the hearing. Michael and I were trying to describe a system that wants to bypass proof and proceed to punishment, a radical idea that this new breed of Democrat embraces. I think they justify this using the Sam Harris argument, that in pursuit of suppressing Trump, anything is justified. But by removing or disrespecting the rights to which Americans are accustomed, you make opposition movements like Trump’s, you don’t stop them.

Which is to say, “If you want more Trump, this is how you get more Trump.” This danger seems to be invisible to Democrats, as Taibbi suggests. How is it that we can see it, but they can’t? The former FBI director filed indictments against 12 named members of Russian military intelligence, asserting that they “engaged in a sustained effort to hack into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic National Committee, and the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, and released that information on the internet under the names ‘DCLeaks’ and ‘Guccifer 2.0’ and through another entity.” Maybe this actually happened, but (a) the indictment does not prove that it happened, besides which (b) any prosecutor can proverbially “indict a ham sandwich,” and also rather conveniently (c) there has not been, nor is there ever likely to be, an actual arrest and trial in such a case, because (d) Russia is never in a million years going to turn over their intelligence agents to U.S. law enforcement.

But don’t bother citing facts or arguing logic to Democrats. They have their beliefs — “Russian collusion” is as important to their belief system as the resurrection of Jesus is to Christianity — and any effort to dissuade them of this political theology is a waste of time and energy.



 

 

James Baker’s Amnesia Problem

Posted on Comments

James Baker testifies on Tuesday

My podcast partner John Hoge calls attention to the Nixonian quality of the FBI-turned-Twitter-lawyer’s testimony this week:

Rep. Jim Jordan asked James Baker, the former FBI general counsel who moved to work at Twitter, whether he communicated with the FBI about the Hunter Biden laptop story before the New York Post was censored on Twitter for reporting about it.
“To the best of my recollection, I did not talk to the FBI about the Hunter Biden story before that day,” Baker said.
Jordan followed up: “Did you talk to them after? Your response was real specific… I assume ‘that day’ is October 14. I want to know if you talked to them on the 13th or before, or the 15th and after.”
“I don’t recall speaking to the FBI, sitting here today, I don’t recall speaking to the FBI at all about the Hunter Biden matter,” Baker replied. “The laptop.”

Something about being required to testify under oath seems to induce a strange type of amnesia among big-shot lawyers. The things they “cannot recall” are very specific, and they never deny anything without preceding their denial with the qualifying phrase “to the best of my recollection.”