The GOP Will Control the House of Representatives

I purposely avoided reading about politics for several weeks prior to the election–primarily because it was just causing too much anxiety. When I finally started reading reactions after the election, the overall tone was positive from many Democratic supporters. The reaction seemed based on two things: 1) there was no “red wave”–and the Democrats had a good chance of controlling the Senate; 2) many of the election deniers who ran for positions that could impact elections lost. I was genuinely happy to hear this, especially the latter.

However, who controlled the House was still undecided, and the degree to which the reaction was positive seemed out of place. To me, the GOP winning the House, while maybe not as bad as election deniers gaining control over state and local electoral processes, was almost as bad. What I found most disturbing was their likely use of their power to hold political investigations, and possibly attempt to impeach, Biden and his administration. The idea was nauseating and revolting.

Today, I heard the Republicans held a news conference that they would be investigation Biden and his family (Hunter Biden, most likely), based on disingenuous concerns over corruption. The level of cynicism and bad faith is off the charts.

I’ll have more to say, but I’ll leave with more remark. It is disheartening that so many Americans believed the Republicans deserved their vote–that the GOP is fit to govern.

13 thoughts on “The GOP Will Control the House of Representatives”

  1. On the bad faith of Republican (cont’d)

    I wish there were a relatively easy way to show Americans witch hunt claims by both parties, particularly for Americans who are uncertain or confused by these claims.

    GOP claims the following are/were witch hunts: Trump-Russia investigation; 1/6 committee; DOJ trying to get government documents back from Trump. Actually, Trump and his enablers will discredit any investigation or negative press coverage as (purely) political.

    Democrats claim the following are/were witch hunts: Hunter Biden’s laptop; Benghazi. I would include the Uranium One story as well accusations of corruption involving the Clinton Foundation. We could go back to White Water investigation as well.

    One of the best ways to analyze this question, in my opinion, is to ask how a future president (or politician) should be treated under similar circumstances. Would a serious investigation by Congress, the DOJ, or the press be warranted? If a president were guilty of the accusations, would it warrant the end of her presidency? If the answer is yes to both, then that’s a strong indicator that the issue isn’t a witch hunt. I wish that we as Americans could collectively apply this approach to the issues above.

    Reply

    1. Twitter Kept Entire ‘Database’ of Republican Requests to Censor Posts from Rolling Stone magazine.

      The obvious irony here is, the sources note, that Republican leaders and elected officials have long been committing precisely the kind of “government interference” that they are now investigating, fundraising off of, and accusing Democrats and the so-called anti-Trump “Deep State” of perpetrating. Some of the loudest conservative and MAGA voices on Capitol Hill — who’ve been endlessly demanding taxpayer-funded, high-profile investigations into Big Tech “bias” and “collusion” — were themselves engaged in the behavior they now claim is colluding.

      Reply

    2. Read this in light of GOP’s desire to investigate Hunter Biden, and judge whether the House GOP is acting in good faith:

      After helping prince’s rise, Trump and Kushner benefit from Saudi funds from WaPo

      Kushner, whose last major business foray had left his family firm needing a $1.2 billion bailout, faced his own political fallout as a senior Trump aide.

      But one ally moved quickly to the rescue.

      The day after leaving the White House, Kushner created a company that he transformed months later into a private equity firm with $2 billion from a sovereign wealth fund chaired by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

      Trump is also benefiting from his Mohammed bin Salman:

      A year after his presidency, Trump’s golf courses began hosting tournaments for the Saudi fund-backed LIV Golf. Separately, the former president’s family company, the Trump Organization, secured an agreement with a Saudi real estate company that plans to build a Trump hotel as part of a $4 billion golf resort in Oman.

      New information from congressional testimony and recently written memoirs reveal the following:

      …Kushner’s written account of persuading Trump to prioritize Saudi Arabia over the objections of top advisers and a former secretary of state’s assertion in a book that Trump believed the prince “owed” him.

      They also underscore the crucial nature of Trump’s admission that he “saved” Mohammed in the wake of the CIA’s finding that the crown prince ordered the killing or capture of Post contributing opinion columnist Jamal Khashoggi.

      Did Trump and Kushner put their own interests ahead of the U.S.’s? This seems like a legitimate and important question (and there’s more details in the article that support this). If the House GOP were operating in good faith, they would be interested in investigating this as well. (If they were genuinely concerned about corruption and the well-being of the country, they would have criticized Trump about not severing ties with his business while in office–and they would have scrutinized his foreign policy decisions.)

      If Trump wins the 2024 election, how can American trust that he will act in the country’s interests when dealing with Saudi Arabia?

      3/4/2023

      Articles about the way Trump and his children profited during Trump’s presidency:

      Forbes Estimates China Paid Trump At Least $5.4 Million Since He Took Office, Via Mysterious Trump Tower Lease from Forbes, October 23, 2020

      President Donald Trump, who declared “I don’t make money from China” in Thursday night’s presidential debate, has in fact collected millions of dollars from government-owned entities in China since he took office. Forbes estimates that at least $5.4 million has flowed into the president’s business from a lease agreement involving a state-owned bank in Trump Tower.

      Trump’s children take in millions overseas as president slams Biden’s son from the LA Times, October 10, 2019

      How Ivanka profited from Trump’s time in office:

      Their sister Ivanka is a senior advisor to the president. She kept her international fashion business going for 18 months after she was given a loosely defined White House portfolio that includes interacting with heads of state and working with domestic and international corporate chiefs on economic programs.

      On the same day Trump and his daughter dined with Chinese President Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago in Florida in April 2017, China awarded her three preliminary trademark approvals for jewelry, handbags and spa services. In all, she has obtained more than a dozen Chinese trademarks since entering the White House, ensuring her access to the world’s second-largest economy if she goes back into business.

      On Eric and Don Jr.

      Eric Trump and his older brother, Donald Trump Jr., run the Trump Organization, which conducts business — and takes in tens of millions of dollars annually — around the globe and is still owned by the president. The company is forging ahead with projects in Ireland, India, Indonesia and Uruguay, and is licensing the Trump name in such turbulent areas as Turkey and the Philippines.

      In January, Eric Trump boasted of his father’s local political connections while reviewing construction of a Trump-branded property in Uruguay.

      Speaking to an Argentine website, he cited his father’s “deep respect” for Argentine President Mauricio Macri — Trump did business with Macri’s father in the 1980s — and discussed where he would like to invest when Trump leaves office.

      In August, Trump Jr. attended “pre-launch” events in Indonesia for two resorts being developed with a partner who founded one of the country’s political parties and remains highly active, with a daughter seeking a Cabinet position there.

      Indonesia, like many countries where the Trump sons do business, is negotiating with the Trump administration in Washington over trade policy. The government in Jakarta is seeking to avoid the tariffs the White House has imposed on other countries with a trade surplus.

      Reply

  2. Speaking of the “Kanye, Elon, Trump” tweet, I think this is the real GOP twitter account:

    And in the bad faith category,

    To post this strongly suggest the GOP is confident the rank-and-file members–as well as a large number of independents–are either ignorant of who Trump is and what he has done–or they’re unsure what to believe.

    By the way, Barton Gellman, from theAtlantic predicts that next year the House GOP will impeach Biden, and possibly the VP, and other cabinet officials. (I’ve heard at least one member of Congress say she’s considering this, as well.)

    Just remember: to the GOP, nothing Trump did warranted impeachment and removal. We can conclude they believe future presidents can behave that way and that should not end a presidency.

    But apparently Biden has already done things that warrant impeachment or consideration of impeachment.

    Finally, here’s something else to consider: The GOP Gets Ready to Cause Another Debt Ceiling Crisis from theBulwark. (The Bulwark is a center-right news site.)

    I really hope they don’t do this. I actually hope Democrats can do something to eliminate the need to raise the debt ceiling–make it automatic.

    OK, let’s summarize some things that GOP’s control of the House could lead to

    1. Impeaching Biden and members of his administration
    2. Using debt-ceiling as a negotiating tactic, which could lead to a government shutdown or harming the U.S. credit rating, among other things. (Note: I made a mistake here–failing to raise the debt ceiling isn’t the same a government shutdown. My understanding is that it is worse, potentially much worse, and it’s never happened before.)

    Some other things:

    3. An attempt to undermine the work of the January 6 committee and DOJ investigation into Trump taking government documents to Mar-a-Lago and minimizing Trump’s actions in both.
    4. Investigating Hunter Biden primarily to politically damage Biden (like Trump asking President Zelensky to announce an investigation into Hunter and Joe Biden).

    The cherry on top: I really think many of the GOP members of Congress, as well as Rupert Murdoch and his pundits, know a lot of the above is bogus.

    1/1/2023

    Here’s Rep. Nancy Mace (R-South Carolina),three months ago, mentioning the possibility that House GOP might impeach Biden.

    (Two other things to note about Mace’s remarks. She said she opposed impeaching Trump because of the process–specifically, violating due process. If she felt Trump did things that warranted impeachment, she could have worked with Democrats to ensure the process was appropriate. She also said she would support whomever won the Republican presidential primary. We can infer that Mace believes future presidents can do the things Trump did and that would not warrant the end of their presidency.)

    More GOP members of Congress calling to impeach Biden (starting in August 2021 to November 2022):

    1/10/2023

    From March 29, 2022

    Why it matters that Jim Jordan is talking about impeaching Biden

    The conservative Washington Times reported, for example, on one goal some in the party appear to be taking seriously.

    Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee who is poised to control the panel if the GOP takeover next year, said Republicans must consider impeaching President Biden. He said the GOP should weigh impeaching Mr. Biden for failures in office, most notably his administration’s inability to stop a massive influx of illegal immigration through the southern border.

    As House Republicans huddled in south Florida this past weekend for a planning retreat, Jordan told the conservative newspaper, in reference to presidential impeachment, “I think that’s definitely a discussion we have to have.”

    Reply

    1. In light of Speaker McCarthy hinting the House GOP will start an impeachment inquiry on President Biden, please see video clips of Republicans calling for impeachment from 2021-2022. (Also, see Barton Gellman’s October 2022 Atlantic article predicting the House GOP would impeach Biden.)

      Here’s Speaker McCarthy today:

      Some comments:

      1. McCarthy (and Hannity) claim they’ve found damning evidence on Biden, but Fox News and the GOP have made similar claims about a Democrat in years past, and as far as I know almost every claim has proven false or a nothingburger. (I’m genuinely curious to see how often they’ve been vindicated, if at all.)

      2. The other mainstream outlets are not saying the same thing, as far as I know. Therefore, they’re either failing at their jobs or possibly covering up. Let’s see if the other mainstream outlets pick this up. If they don’t, and the GOP and Fox News are vindicated, then that will be black mark on the other outlets. But if the GOP and Fox News are not vindicated, it will be another example of conservative witchhunts/hyper-partisan attacks, going back to at least Whitewater investigation.

      3. McCarthy suggests that the “new information” justifies an impeachment inquiry. But as the video clips show above, the GOP was itching to impeach Biden. (In clips, there are various reasons–e.g., the handling of the Afghanistan withdrawl). To me, this is all a political. They don’t care about corruption, as their treatment of Trump demonstrates.

      4. McCarthy accuses Biden of “weaponizing the government to benefit his family, and deny Congress the ability to have oversight.” I find this despicable, as I highly doubt he has the evidence to back up these claims, and to expect people to believe he even cares about this, after four years of Trump, is breathtaking.

      Reply

  3. The calls are coming from the House.

    Former Members of Congress Demand Ethics Investigation of Lawmakers Who Sought to Prevent Transfer of Presidential Power (Note: Currently, 40 former members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, have signed the letter.)

    As is now clear, January 6th was only one event among many that together constituted an extraordinary campaign to overturn an election. The scale and audacity of the campaign is profoundly troubling. Among the most alarming findings is that various members of Congress participated in it.

    We now know, for example, that sitting lawmakers corresponded and met with White House officials and allies to plot various prongs of the campaign, including to advocate that the president declare martial law; that states submit false certificates of electoral votes to Congress; that the vice president, in contravention of his constitutional duties, interfere with the counting of electoral votes; and that federal law enforcement authorities be enlisted to interfere with the election; among other startling facts. We also now know that various sitting lawmakers sought presidential pardons.

    These lawmakers stopped short of storming the Capitol themselves. But they shared a common goal with those who did: to prevent the lawful transfer of power for the first time in the Republic’s history. As with those who stormed the Capitol, they must be held accountable.

    Some of these Representatives may be involved the actions I mentioned above. That is, Members of Congress who were involved in overtunring the election may be involved in undermining the credibility of the finding that implicate these members, and starting investigations into Hunter Biden.

    They also supposedly care about the Constitution so much that they may impeach President Biden.

    This Bulwark article has texts sent from Mark Meadows, former WH chief of staff and some of these members of Congress.

    From Rep. Ralph Norma (R South Carolina) on January 17, 2021 to Meadows:

    Mark, in seeing what’s happening so quickly, and reading about the Dominion law suits attempting to stop any meaningful investigation we are at a point of � no return � in saving our Republic !! Our LAST HOPE is invoking Marshall Law!! PLEASE URGE TO PRESIDENT TO DO SO!!

    Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R, Georgia) on January 17, 2021 also sent the following text to Meadows:

    In our private chat with only Members, several are saying the only way to save our Republic is for Trump to call for Marshall law.

    Here’s Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) on November 6:2

    Mark, When we lose Trump we lose our Republic. Fight like hell and find a way. We’re with you down here in Texas and refuse to live under a corrupt Marxist dictatorship. Liberty! Babin

    Here’s Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.), who was apparently getting his legal instruction from Newsmax:

    Dick Morris is saying State Leg can intervene and declare Trump winner.�NC, PA, MI, WI all have GOP Leg. �

    https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/995477/220

    Reply

    1. January 6, 2021, 8:00 PM–after the Capitol was cleared of the mob that stormed it–147 Republican members of Congress–8 senators and 139 represenatives–voted to object to electoral counts from some of the states (e.g., Pennsylvannia), based on bogus claims of widespread voter fraud.

      You can’t argue these votes were harmless gestures to appeal to their base. They just saw a threatening mob rush into the Capitol, a mob incited by months of lies from Trump and his enablers–some of them, members of Congress. There are images of members of Congress lying down behind chairs, hiding, and some fleeing areas of the Capitol (including an infamous one of Senator Josh Hawley). The mob chanted, “Hang Mike Pence!” and the secret service protecting Pence called passed on last messages to loved ones.

      Please note, Kevin McCarthy, Steve Scalise, Elise Stafnik, and Jim Jordan are among the representatives who objected. (Byron Donalds, Kevin Hern and Jim Jordan all objected to the electoral votes, and received votes for Speaker of the House.)

      Also: Senators Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Rick Scott were among the 8 senators who voted to object.

      I’m not sure how many are still in office, but I suspect many are (e.g., Biggs, Boebert, Cole, Gaetz,Gohmert, Good, Perry, et al.).

      Listen to what Sen. Romney had to say about the members of Congress who wanted to object:

      Full list:
      Senators

      Ted Cruz (TX)
      Josh Hawley (MO)
      Cindy Hyde-Smith (MS)
      Cynthia Lummis (WY)
      John Kennedy (LA)
      Roger Marshall (KS)
      Rick Scott (FL)
      Tommy Tuberville (AL)

      Representatives

      Robert Aderholt (AL)
      Rick Allen (GA)
      Jodey Arrington (TX)
      Brian Babin (TX)
      Jim Baird (IN)
      Jim Banks (IN)
      Cliff Bentz (OR)
      Jack Bergman (MI)
      Stephanie Bice (OK)
      Andy Biggs (AZ)
      Dan Bishop (NC)
      Lauren Boebert (CO)
      Mike Bost (IL)
      Mo Brooks (AL)
      Ted Budd (NC)
      Tim Burchett (TN)
      Michael Burgess (TX)
      Ken Calvert (CA)
      Kat Cammack (FL)
      Jerry Carl (AL)
      Buddy Carter (GA)
      John Carter (TX)
      Madison Cawthorn (NC)
      Steve Chabot (OH)
      Ben Cline (VA)
      Michael Cloud (TX)
      Andrew Clyde (GA)
      Tom Cole (OK)
      Rick Crawford (AR)
      Warren Davidson (OH)
      Scott DesJarlais (TN)
      Mario Diaz-Balart (FL)
      Byron Donalds (FL)
      Jeff Duncan (SC)
      Neal Dunn (FL)
      Ron Estes (KS)
      Pat Fallon (TX)
      Michelle Fischbach (MN)
      Scott Fitzgerald (WI)
      Chuck Fleischmann (TN)
      Virginia Foxx (NC)
      Scott Franklin (FL)
      Russ Fulcher (ID)
      Matt Gaetz (FL)
      Mike Garcia (CA)
      Bob Gibbs (OH)
      Carlos Gimenez (FL)
      Louie Gohmert (TX)
      Bob Good (VA)
      Lance Gooden (TX)
      Paul Gosar (AZ)
      Garret Graves (LA)
      Sam Graves (MO)
      Mark Green (TN)
      Marjorie Greene (GA)
      Morgan Griffith (VA)
      Michael Guest (MS)
      Jim Hagedorn (MN)
      Andy Harris (MD)
      Diana Harshbarger (TN)
      Vicky Hartzler (MO)
      Kevin Hern (OK)
      Yvette Herrell (NM)
      Jody Hice (GA)
      Clay Higgins (LA)
      Richard Hudson (NC)
      Darrell Issa (CA)
      Ronny Jackson (TX)
      Chris Jacobs (NY)
      Mike Johnson (LA)
      Bill Johnson (OH)
      Jim Jordan (OH)
      John Joyce (PA)
      Fred Keller (PA)
      Trent Kelly (MS)
      Mike Kelly (PA)
      David Kustoff (TN)
      Doug LaMalfa (CA)
      Doug Lamborn (CO)
      Jacob LaTurner (KS)
      Debbie Lesko (AZ)
      Billy Long (MO)
      Barry Loudermilk (GA)
      Frank Lucas (OK)
      Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO)
      Nicole Malliotakis (NY)
      Tracey Mann (KS)
      Brian Mast (FL)
      Kevin McCarthy (CA)
      Lisa McClain (MI)
      Daniel Meuser (PA)
      Mary Miller (IL)
      Carol Miller (WV)
      Alex Mooney (WV)
      Barry Moore (AL)
      Markwayne Mullin (OK)
      Gregory Murphy (NC)
      Troy Nehls (TX)
      Ralph Norman (SC)
      Devin Nunes (CA)
      Jay Obernolte (CA)
      Burgess Owens (UT)
      Steven Palazzo (MS)
      Gary Palmer (AL)
      Greg Pence (IN)
      Scott Perry (PA)
      August Pfluger (TX)
      Bill Posey (FL)
      Guy Reschenthaler (PA)
      Tom Rice (SC)
      Mike Rogers (AL)
      Hal Rogers (KY)
      John Rose (TN)
      Matt Rosendale (MT)
      David Rouzer (NC)
      John Rutherford (FL)
      Steve Scalise (LA)
      David Schweikert (AZ)
      Pete Sessions (TX)
      Jason Smith (MO)
      Adrian Smith (NE)
      Lloyd Smucker (PA)
      Elise Stefanik (NY)
      Greg Steube (FL)
      Chris Stewart (UT)
      Glenn Thompson (PA)
      Tom Tiffany (WI)
      William Timmons (SC)
      Jefferson Van Drew (NJ)
      Beth Van Duyne (TX)
      Tim Walberg (MI)
      Jackie Walorski (IN)
      Randy Weber (TX)
      Daniel Webster (FL)
      Roger Williams (TX)
      Joe Wilson (SC)
      Rob Wittman (VA)
      Ron Wright (TX)
      Lee Zeldin (NY)

      Reply

  4. Well, they’re not exactly in control yet.

    Here are some thoughts on the opposition to Kevin McCarthy’s speakership, and some of the GOP reaction to this opposition. But first, here is some of the GOP responses to those opposing McCarthy:

    In my view, the day when principled, patriotic Republicans would have to face off on these Trump Republicans was totally foreseeable. Most of the Republicans either weren’t principled or they convinced themselves that they could either avoid this situation (and this latter scenario might have been based on the wishful thinking that someone else would do their dirty work).

    But whether someone else does their dirty work, in my view, if Republicans really believed in personal responsibility, they would have took a strong public stand against the Trump and his followers. Yes, it would have been politically painful, but to attempt to avoid this was not only abdicating their responsibility for this mess, it put the country in danger–and I believe most knew Trump posed a threat to the country.

    On a related note, this is an interesting observation that seems highly plausible, if not likely:

    I also wanted to comment on this tweet from Larry Hogan, the seemingly more reasonable GOP governor from Maryland:

    The problem is that the Republicans that wanted to win and get their way also concluded they had to enable the circus performers, who weren’t serious about governing. They also knew that the ring leader was a totally unfit demagogue. In other words they wanted to win even if it hurt the country and potentially threatened our democracy. To me, they’re just as bad, if not worse, than the Trumpists.

    Reply

  5. GOP wants to overturn monies to upgrade the IRS

    Thread from Lawrence Summers, former Treasury Secretary:

    I just learned @HouseGOP’s first initiative may be to protect tax cheats by trying to rescind last year’s investment in IRS modernization. On what sane ground can they object to restoring audit rates for millionaires when they have fallen by ~80% in the last decade?
    @IRSnews #IRS
    Why isn’t giving the IRS money to answer the phones, use 21st century technology, and collect taxes from cheaters appealing to all but deadbeats? Does today’s Republican Party really believe too much effort goes into collecting taxes from families like the Trumps?
    There will always be unethical people, ideas and acts. What makes all significant ethical failures happen in public and private life is that people who know better won’t rock the boat, and acquiesce. House Republicans know better, and I hope they vote accordingly.

    To respond to one of Summers’s questions–there are a lot of wealthy deadbeats, and I think protecting their money is the primary job of many Republican members of Congress. Maybe this is wrong, but it would explain a lot of their behavior.

    For example, when the FBI went to get government documents from Mar-a-Lago, the Republicans quickly formed the talking point that connected what the FBI did to what the IRS, with new funding and personnel, would do to average Americans.

    (The following is post from the The GOP’s and Conservative Media’s Irresponsible and Dangerous Response to the FBI Executing a Search Warrant of Mar-a-Lago. )

    Regarding the “87,000 IRS workers coming after you” line

    The Dems’ big Inflation Reduction Bill includes monies to beef up the IRS. Why? Because analysis has shown that wealthy individuals get away with not paying taxes because the IRS doesn’t have the manpower and resources to analyze their complex tax returns. For example, from the WaPo editorial board:

    While the pandemic certainly caused additional strain on the agency, the core problem is that Republicans slashed the IRS budget about 18 percent in the past decade. That’s not belt-tightening, it’s gutting an agency. It’s no wonder staffing declined 20 percent, and the IRS now has the fewest auditors since 1953.

    With regard to the last point about the fewest auditors, the number of audits have decreased significantly over the last ten years, going from over 80% audits for corporations with over $20 billion in assets to under 40% in 2020.

    Please also check out this WaPo description of the outdated technology and processes within the IRS. It’s almost comical.

    Finally, read this WaPo op-ed by five previous IRS commissioners, advocating for an increase in resources and why that’s important. Here’s one reason:

    There has also been a substantial decline in enforcement scrutiny of high-earners and large corporations with complex returns: Audit rates for millionaires have fallen more than 70 percent since 2011; audits of large corporations decreased from essentially 100 percent a decade ago to less than 50 percent, according to the most recent IRS estimates.

    The result is that wealthy individuals and corporations end up not paying the taxes they owe. I think a high percentage of Americans, including Trump supporters, would support increasing resources to the IRS.

    The GOP’s tactic seems clear to me: They’re want to scare Americans and they don’t care if they undermine the trust and faith in the federal government to do so. Why? To me, it comes down to protecting the money of the wealthy, not keeping taxes low because it’s good for the economy. It’s a scam, and I’m afraid a lot of their supporters will fall for it.

    By the way, here’s another post supporting the increase in the IRS budget.

    Reply

    1. This NYT article confirms that one of House GOP’s first acts is to rescind IRS funding.

      I haven’t heard arguments denying cuts in spending, antiquated equipment, that rate of audits for millionaires has declined by about 80% in the last decade. Nor have I heard the GOP arguing how they will address these issues.

      Instead, the GOP is relying on scaremongering (as evidenced above)–pushing the narrative that the IRS is going after the middle class and small businesses, referring to the agency as a “shadow army” and emphasizing the fact that they carry weapons.

      In reality,

      …despite claims on social media that the I.R.S. hires will be heavily armed, a Treasury official said that just 1 percent of the new employees would be agents working in jobs that require carrying guns.

      Also, the following really exposes the GOP’s concern about deficits as a sham:

      The money will be used to hire 87,000 new I.R.S. employees and modernize the agency’s antiquated technology systems. The investment is expected to generate $180 billion in revenue over 10 years.

      Yet Republicans, who have spent months denouncing the federal budget deficit and calling for more fiscal responsibility, have dismissed any revenue gain and instead falsely accused the administration of trying to create a “shadow army” to shake down small businesses with assault rifles.

      On Monday, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the Republican bill to rescind I.R.S. funding would actually increase the deficit by $114 billion through 2032.

      (emphasis added)

      This is not about increasing taxes. This is about properly equipping the IRS so that they can actually collect taxes that people already owe. The GOP opposes this, even if it increases the deficit.

      1/10/2023

      House Republican youtube channel captions the clip below as “Rep. Adrian Smith on Defunding Biden’s IRS Army”

      Smith actually doesn’t say those words, but his tact seems to be, making a moderate and reasonable proposal–namely, admitting that customer service is a problem, so Democrats and Republicans should focus on that. He doesn’t say anything about the decrease in audits to wealthy Americans, limited personnel, or outdated equipment. Keeping the IRS hamstrung so that wealthy individuals and businesses need not pay their fair share seems like the GOP position on this.

      Reply

  6. House Republicans form committee to investigate the government from WaPo

    The subcommittee, approved on a party-line 221-211 vote, will be empowered to investigate any federal agency that collects information about Americans, even in cases of an ongoing criminal investigation — a carve-out at odds with the Justice Department’s long-standing practice of not providing information about ongoing investigations.

    Note: The so-called moderate Republicans also voted for this.

    The broad resolution also explicitly authorizes the select committee to seek access to highly classified information provided by intelligence agencies to the House Intelligence Committee. Members of that panel are often briefed on extremely sensitive information with contents that, if widely shared, could damage national security and endanger the lives of American intelligence officers and their assets.

    Surely, Republican voters would condemn GOP members if they shared such information. I think Republicans members of Congress will likely do this, but their supporters will likely not punish them for it.

    I agree with Rep. Nadler below:

    “Jim Jordan and Kevin McCarthy claim to be investigating the weaponization of the federal government when, in fact, this new select subcommittee is the weapon itself,” Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “It is specifically designed to inject extremist politics into our justice system and shield the MAGA movement from the legal consequences of their actions. In order to become Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy sold out our democracy by handing power-hungry Jim Jordan subpoena power and a green light to settle political scores under the phony pretext of rooting out conservative bias.”

    It’s hard to grasp that some members of Congress could have aided and abetted the insurrection—and some may be under investigation for this—but they will also be investigating these investigation. For example,

    Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), whose phone was taken as part of a Justice Department investigation of the use of illegitimate electors in efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in 2020, declined to recuse himself from possibly sitting on the subcommittee, telling ABC News over the weekend that being a subject of an investigation shouldn’t be disqualifying.

    “Why should I be limited, why should anybody be limited, just because someone has made an accusation? Everybody in America is innocent until proven otherwise,” Perry said. “I would say this: The American people are really, really tired of the persecution and instruments of federal power being used against them.”

    Perry and others are under investigation. I’m pretty sure almost no American thinks the people under investigation should be in a position to investigate the investigators.

    Reply

  7. Speaker McCarthy gives security footage to Tucker Carlson. from the NYT:

    “I promised,” Mr. McCarthy said on Wednesday in a brief phone interview in which he defended his decision to grant Mr. Carlson exclusive access to the more than 40,000 hours of security footage. “I was asked in the press about these tapes, and I said they do belong to the American public. I think sunshine lets everybody make their own judgment.”

    They belong to the American public, but Tucker Carlson will be able to shape the narrative first. This makes me think of Bill Barr commenting about the Mueller report before it was released, in order to shape the narrative–and doing so in a misleading way.

    Senator Schumer responds:

    “By handpicking Tucker Carlson, Speaker McCarthy laid bare that this sham is simply about pandering to MAGA election deniers, not the truth,” Mr. Schumer wrote. “Tucker Carlson has no fidelity to the truth or facts and has used his platform to promote the Big Lie, distort reality and espouse bogus conspiracy theories about Jan. 6.”

    Rep. Jamie Raskin:

    “We have tremendous security concerns about what’s happening and we want to know what rules are in place for the viewing of this material, which goes right to the heart of how we protect the Capitol and our staffs,” said Representative Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland, who was a member of the now-defunct Jan. 6 committee. “We want to make sure we are not giving a blueprint for attacking the Capitol.”

    Reply

  8. I don’t think I’ve focused on Marjorie Taylor Greene very much because even though she made outrageous claims and statements she was more not really an influential Republican.

    But that doesn’t seem to be the case now, as her support for Kevin McCarthy’s speakership seemed crucial. As a party, the GOP not only has not condemned her, but they–and Speaker McCarthy–seemed to have embraced her. As evidence of this, Greene sits on three committees–Oversight and Accountability; Homeland Security; and a subcommittee on the pandemic response.

    One justification I’ve heard is that she has renounced and moved past the type of reckless statements she’s made in the past. But that doesn’t seem to be the case.

    She still seems to be pushing voter fraud claims:

    Also, she recently called for a “divorce” between red and blue states:

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *