On Kevin McCarthy
A lot of people on the right can’t stand Kevin McCarthy, finding him to be the rough equivalent of Paul Ryan 2.0. The latest word is that, if Republicans take the House and McCarthy becomes Speaker, he isn’t going to be impeaching anyone in the Biden administration, and I’ve seen quite a few angry responses to that news in comments around the blogosphere.
Coincidentally – or maybe not so coincidentally – last night I had just read this lengthy profile of McCarthy in The Federalist, and the picture it paints is quite a bit different than how he’s often portrayed. I suggest you read it, although I doubt it will change the minds of those who detest him.
Here are some quotes there from McCarthy on impeachment, which give a better idea of what he’s saying about it:
McCarthy also counts the first impeachment as a critical leadership moment for him and the GOP caucus.
“You learned in the first impeachment that they would use power. That they would stop to no end for their own political gain,” McCarthy reflects. “You’ve watched Pelosi do it before, but never to the extreme level that they had then. That they would lie. They’d create something.”
He continues: “Even as more information came out about the Russia dossier and how fake it was. Created from them. And they’d look into the camera and they’d say, ‘We have proof.’ And nothing. It was shocking to me.”
McCarthy says it became clear to House Republicans that what Democrats were doing to oppose Trump was destructive in ways that went far beyond ordinary political concerns. “They’re coming after everybody. It’s not just us, they’re coming after the voters. They’re coming after anyone who thinks differently than them,” he says. “They no longer respect a difference of opinion. This is a scary moment in America, and it’s only gotten worse.”…
At least now, there are some limits to what might happen right out of the gate. Will his agenda include impeachment trials of cabinet officials such as Merrick Garland and Alejandro Mayorkas? McCarthy says, “Look, everybody starts with impeachment. I think we just spent two years showing where the Democrats made it all political. If something arises that occasions impeachments, we’ll do it. But that’s not where we start with. We’re not making it for political gain.”
I have no quarrel with any of that. In fact, the way I see it, McCarthy gets the extreme seriousness of what has transpired during the Trump years. He also perceives – and you may disagree – that going immediately for impeachment will be perceived as mere political revenge, and that there are other priorities that come first. I agree. Nor has he ruled out impeachment “if something arises that occasions impeachment.”
I would add that impeachment is an empty exercise without conviction, and there’s no way to get the Senate to convict with a closely divided Senate, even one in which the GOP holds a slight majority.
Sad to say, impeachment proceedings would be a waste of time.
What’s distressing about McCarthy is that he’s a pure career politician. He landed a legislative staff job in 1987 (at the age of 22) and has been employed by legislative bodies ever since. (Paul Ryan was adjacent to that, being elected to Congress at age 29 after seven years of working for FreedomWorks and like outfits). McCarthy is a hopeless public speaker, and it’s a reasonable wager that this is so because he doesn’t know his own mind above and beyond the minutiae of legislative business. (Ryan does know his own mind; the trouble is that open borders, replacing Medicare with a voucher program, and privatizing Social Security make a program appealing to Mercatus Center employees, not to ordinary voters). There’s also McCarthy’s close professional and personal relationship with a sketchy character like Frank Luntz which rankles. Note also that McCarthy protected Lizard Cheney for months, even though she was unreasonable from the get go.
That having been said, the House Republican caucus compares favorably to the Senate caucus, perhaps because they are more interested in constituents and less interested in donors. A sharp critic of the Senate Republican caucus has offered that it does not matter how many Republicans are elected to the Senate, there will always be a sufficient number to break ranks and prevent any reform legislation from being enacted. (See the Obamacare repeal vote).
What’s wrong with Kevin McCarthy? He was great in the first “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.” He understands the stakes:
_________________________________
Listen to me! Please listen! If you don’t, if you won’t, if you fail to understand, then the same incredible terror that’s menacing me WILL STRIKE AT YOU!
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0049366/
_________________________________
What’s that you say?
Never mind.
‘we will be diligent in our oversight responsibilities of agencies like dhs and justice, and we will act accordingly, if that requires impeachment and removal so be it,
I agree with McCarthy’s description of the impeachments then and how to handle it now. However, there is quite a bit of evidence to support an impeachment of Biden. Without the votes to remove from office, an impeachment may be counterproductive. Impeachment is different than investigative committees. Start with investigations.
Count me among those who view McCarthy as a feckless RINO.
“You learned in the first impeachment that they would use power. That they would stop to no end for their own political gain,” McCarthy reflects. “You’ve watched Pelosi do it before, but never to the extreme level that they had then. That they would lie. They’d create something.” Kevin McCarthy
McCarthy acknowledges that the Democrats have started a ‘gunfight’ one without all decency.
Anyone care to place a bet? McCarthy will continue to bring a knife to what he now admits to be a gunfight.
A Party lacking a veto proof majority is not a valid excuse for limiting itself to obstructionism. As example, the House has the power to cut back entire federal department’s funding. It has the power to impeach, which even if conviction is denied in the Senate exposes those RINOs and purple State democrats, who in effect are supportive of the high crimes that led to the impeachment of federal officials. Deny Party support in future elections of those RINOs so exposed. The prior failures to do so is what has led to the perception that America already has a UniParty.
huxley,
One of the truly great scifi movies.
“. . . and there’s no way to get the Senate to convict with a closely divided Senate, even one in which the GOP holds a slight majority.”
Particularly since conviction requires a 2/3 majority, i.e., 67 votes.
the ending of the ’78 film makes no sense, when did sutherland’s character get podded,
so will mayorkas or garland or austin, be held accountable at all, rhetorical question,
The practical argument for impeaching Biden and several of his cabinet secretaries is that it will tie up the executive branch to an extent and maybe keep them from running amok for the next two years. There isn’t much else a Republican Congress can do to address a rogue executive branch.
Why open his stupid mouth on the subject? To what advantage?
Baby steps. Art Deco is correct that McCarthy’s career politician background probably limits him quite severely. But being in the House has forced him to directly endure Democratic excesses in a way McConnell and other GOP Senators never have. And at the very least he seems to acknowledge that SOMETHING has to be done, that some bones have to be thrown to the new Trumpian elements of the Republican Party.
That he is still around and very likely ascending to one of the most powerful positions in the U.S. government while Ryan and Cantor have essentially just been absorbed by the Beltway Blob indicates McCarthy has some connection to reality and some ambition for some degree of change. Baby steps.
Mike
Come on, people. After Biden, we get Harris. After Harris, we get Pelosi. All of them answer to the same ruling cabal.
(And on down the line (I just now looked it up): then Leahy, Blinken, Yellen, Austin, and if those don’t work out, Merrick Garland is next. He’d be our guy, no? [grin/grimace])
Impeachment of Biden would be very entertaining (I’ll get my popcorn popper out, you bring the Dr Pepper), but Leland (5:45 pm) has it right: “Without the votes to remove from office, an impeachment may be counterproductive.” Yes, “Start with investigations.”
Of course, the mainstreamers will all but ignore congressional investigative hearings, but those would be our only shot at having at least some glimmer of disinfectant light peeking through the smog.
And then, neo’s assessment of Kevin McCarthy — “that going immediately for impeachment will be perceived as mere political revenge” — is on target. If a Congress ruled by the good guys can enact meaningful measures that at least begin to reverse the horrors that the other side has visited on all of us, then perhaps at least a few more persuadables, wherever they may be, may smell the coffee.
I believe the first step is public awareness. There is ample evidence that the Biden family is a corrupt family, and has committed treason. Republican leaders need to get the word out and make their congressional agenda about uncovering this fact.
Impeachment can follow once the public understands the difference between real corruption and the political dirty tricks played by the Democrats on Trump!
It will take time, but the Republican Party needs to make it job #1 to clean up the corruption that plagues us. An informed public will support such an effort, but they are far from informed yet!!
M J R:
McCarthy was actually answering a question about impeaching Garland and Mayorkas. But your point is well-taken, in that if somehow they were convicted in the Senate (won’t happen, though) and removed, they would be replaced by Biden with similar idealogues. What’s more, the public would perceive the whole thing as a political revenge trial. So I don’t think it’s worth it at all.
Chases Eagles:
Perhaps because he said something that wasn’t stupid.
neo (6:50 pm), I appreciate the correction/clarification.
Actually, while it may be a moral imperative to impeach the current incumbent, it’s not a practical one. If one accepts the contention that the ruling cabal will still be running the show whether it’s the incumbent or Harris or Pelosi (or . . .), I think there’s a lot to be said for allowing the incumbent to “twist slowly, slowly in the wind”*.
He’d be an embarrassment to our country (as would/are Harris and Pelosi), but he’d continue as an albatross around the ruling party’s necks. A gift that keeps on giving. Bring on the popcorn and the Dr Pepper.
* a Watergate oldie-but-goodie from 1974
Ray Van Dune (6:45 pm) believes that “An informed public will support such an effort, but they are far from informed yet!!”
With all respect, I cannot concur. My point of contention lies in the phrase “an informed public”. I believe Ray Van Dune is severely underestimating the extent to which the opposition *refuses* to be informed.
Well, okay, maybe not “refuses”: it relates to the extent to which the opposition has successfully demonized our side, to an extreme extent such that nothing we put forward will be taken seriously.
For far too many otherwise persuadable people, our points will be dismissed out of hand, if the opposition ever even see/hears about them at all.
Neo, why say this? How is it an advantage? How does this gain votes. Why not dodge the question and change the subject?
Chases Eagles:
I don’t think anyone strongly on the right – the people who want impeachment the most – will suddenly not vote for GOP candidates, or vote for Democrats, just because he says this. But there are plenty of people in the middle who are longing for an end to a politically motivated revenge cycle of lawfare and/or impeachment. They are the ones more likely to be on the fence. He’s not ruling impeachment out, he simply is saying that it’s not his first order of business but that he would do it if the facts call for it, not just for political revenge. In this way he differentiates himself from the Democrats, who are doing just that and are turning off quite a few people in the process, and hopefully he appeals to those other voters I mentioned.
Let’s start by finding out who “the big guy” is.
“The first family’s arrangements with CEFC are among the most scrutinized of Hunter Biden’s overseas business interests after a May 13, 2017, email — also revealed by The Post in 2020 — showed that Bobulinski, Hunter Biden and two other business partners planned to split equity in a planned business venture with the company four ways.
According to the email, each of the foursome would get 20% of the shares in the new company, with 10% going to James Biden and the remaining 10% “held by H for the big guy?” — a phrase Bobulinski and another partner, James Gilliar, used to refer to Joe Biden.”
If true, would that be impeachable?
https://nypost.com/2022/10/18/bidens-5m-china-loan-part-of-pay-to-play-scheme-sen-grassley/
Brian E:
From the McCarthy profile:
It would be impeachable, Brian E (7:32 pm), in my judgment and I’m guessing in yours. But I don’t believe that those in this forum are debating whether impeachment is justified legally or morally or ethically.
I think the issue is whether it’s wise to do that: would it further
– acceptance of the sociopolitical worldview of our side, and
– enhancement of the welfare of our beleaguered nation?
On impeachment, I agree with McCarthy (and Neo). We saw the impeachment-as-show routine the Dems did, which wasted lots of time and did them no political favors. If there’s something that is (1) impeachable and (2) looks like there’s some chance of getting through the Senate, then have at it. Otherwise, far better to focus on restoring Congressional control over spending.
McCarthy is a career politician, true, but being one, he can see where the trend is. We can hope he knows that he has to play ball with the rising conservative sentiment in his party.
MJR: IF R’s win the House and Senate, the order of succession:
Biden
Harris
K McCarthy
On one hand seems. Sundowner and son pulled in millions from the Chinese
And has yet to do anything the Chinese won’t want.
On the other the 2 impeachment by the Democrats was all Propaganda so if you have something solid and proof do it if not going to go the distance don’t bother.
If the Rs take the House, then a R becomes Speaker. So, Pelosi is out of the chain of command.
If I remember the 25th amendment, if Biden is removed due to inability of performing the duties, Harris would only be the acting president. If Biden resigns, then Harris does become President and chooses a new VP.
“Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.”
I would think that the people running the show behind Biden (Obama 3?) would prefer that Biden stays in office. The people behind Harris would prefer the impeachment process since Harris would then move up to be #47.
One thing about Biden always turning to the right after a speech and then having to do a 180 to get off the stage – you would think that the staff would have people at both ends of the stage so that Biden sees them and walks toward them.
https://nypost.com/2022/10/21/after-the-jan-6-committee-finishes-maybe-a-gop-congress-can-probe-some-actual-threats-to-democracy/
There are a great many things for a GOP Congress to investigate, that do not smack of revenge and where answers are needed.
M J R: ” After Biden, we get Harris. After Harris, we get Pelosi.”
No, we don’t get Pelosi. Not through impeachments, anyway. The House that impeaches Biden and Harris will have replaced Pelosi as speaker.
They shouldn’t waste their time on impeachment of Biden, it’s better to have him there to show the world how awful the Dems are. He can still do damage but can be sent into hiding with extensive hearings on Hunter’s business deals, especially the ones with the CCP, the Russians, and of course the Ukes. The NYT, etc., won’t cover it but it’s amazing how much talk radio does, which is on 24/7, even here in deep blue MA.
If I were in charge of the House I would go back to the old way of budgeting by having one bill per department. Kill off junk departments by starving them or just not funding them at all. We will get to the DOJ 11/1/2024. Here’s 20% to tide you over until then. BYW, the FBI gets no appropriation until then. Ditto the Department of Education, …. Saves the tax payers lots of money too. I know, but a man can dream.
Oh, one other thing, if the Reps do win big, this time it’s different. A lot of the new members will owe their allegiance to
Donald Trump. You can be sure he is going to be working them to do things his way. McCarthy won’t have the kind of control Pelosi has.
Going after shambling is a quixotic exercise but its obligatory to at least try to go after the most reprobate cabinet members which many gop senators supported sadly
Mike Smith (8:22 pm), got it. bof (9:03 pm), got it.
Everyone, don’t ever count on M J R for prognostication scenarios.
Oh, one other thing, if the Reps do win big, this time it’s different. A lot of the new members will owe their allegiance to Donald Trump
Paul in Boston:
It’s easy to be wrong and say, “It’s different this time.” But I agree it is different this time.
__________________________
No man ever steps in the same river twice.
–Heraclitus
__________________________
Not only will there be candidates with allegiances to Trump, there will be moderate Republicans possessing sufficient self-preservation to see that go-along-to-get-along is no longer a viable strategy.
It’s existential this time.
My question was mostly rhetorical.
Maybe Project Veritas will uncover a video of Hunter carrying a CCP embossed suitcase into the White House, which falls open revealing stacks of $100 bills. Even then we probably couldn’t get 67 votes.
Even with a Republican congress, Biden can do immeasurable damage to the Republic. He needs to go.
I would trade an impeachment trial for Congress returning to regular order, though.
What’s the chance of that happening? Mostly rhetorical.
OK. I’d even trade it for McConnell being replaced as majority leader. More likely we’d get an impeachment conviction against Biden than that!
Neo avers “ What’s more, the public would perceive the whole thing as a political revenge trial. So I don’t think it’s worth it at all.”
Yeah.
The Left controls the media narratives. Even when the establishment steal major elections. Whose gonna know better?
Just take it like the “Good Guys.” Otherwise, just STFU!
I don’t believe you really mean that. But you do seem to be saying as much.
That special weapon ignored (above) is Trump’s gift: Truth Telling where others have no courage to tread.
But there are plenty of people in the middle who are longing for an end to a politically motivated revenge cycle of lawfare and/or impeachment.
I used to be one. Unfortunately, Republicans tried to end the cycle under Obama. The result was two impeachments of the next President. Plus prison time for staff members and significant backers. Yet it wasn’t enough to satiate Democrat revenge, so under the next President, they went after local Republican backers with FBI raids of their homes for any infraction of federal law.
No point showing fangs during the election cycle, I get it. But come January, a new sheriff needs to show up in DC.
Talk about “political change.”
Here is Hu Jintao–former President of China, former General Secretary of the CCP, former Chairman of the Central Military Commission, and former member of the Politburo’s Standing Committee–being pulled out of his front row seat next to XI, and being very publicly hustled out of the final closing ceremony of the Chinese Communist Party’s People’s Congress.
Very public humiliation in a land obsessed with “face,” and political theater engineered, no doubt, by Dictator Xi, and a lesson to everybody else.
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQAxkh8-O-E
P.S. This scene above played out in front of an audience of many thousands of the powerful in China.
See https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/view-of-the-closing-ceremony-of-the-party-congress-at-the-great-hall-picture-id156353107
I think the smart thing to do is not talk about impeachment and investigations now. Focus on voter issues like inflation, crime, etc. Do that and get elected with the largest majority as possible. A large majority minimizes backsliding. Guys like Romney are important in a 50/50 Senate. Meaningless in a 53-47 Senate.
When you have your majority you go in the offensive. You impeach Garland and Mayorgas. You investigate Hunter to get obvious Biden crimes. You investigate Pelosi for 1/6 crimes. You do this openly and publicly so that Joe and Jane Citizen follow it.
But you don’t talk about it till after the election. The issues to get elected are obvious. Use them.
Neo is right. Impeachment is all sound and fury signifying (i.e. accomplishing) nothing; or, nothing useful.
What I want from Republicans when and if they take Congress is for them to go vigorously on the offensive, to really kick out the jams against the Dems, and to do it in ways that will actually address GOP/conservative voter concerns and desires and be beneficial to the Republic. I don’t think impeachment will achieve this goal. At least not at first.
“If something arises that occasions impeachments, we’ll do it.”
I simply can’t ignore the fact I have a laundry list of serious High Crimes and Misdemeanors that already warrant impeachment. Let bygones be bygones? Like hell. Garland lied when he said he wouldn’t use the counter-terrorism apparatus of the FBI against angry parents at school board meetings. Then did exactly that. This is simply one example and I’ll stop there so I don’t write a book-length comment.
Suffice to say that the Soviet Union had its “Uncle Joe.” Now we have our own Uncle Joe, and our own Levrentiy Beria to go with Uncle Joe Biden. Think I’m being hyperbolic? Merrick Garland has the exact same approach to “justice” as Beria. To paraphrase what Beria supposedly told Stalin (as I must as I don’t speak Russian or write in Cyrillic although as a retired Naval intelligence officer I can decipher the names of Soviet/Russian ships written on their fantails), if you want a man convicted I will come up with the evidence. If you want a man acquitted there will be no evidence. Hence our two-tiered justice system. A whole host of Democrats referred to the DoJ by Republican-controlled Congresses for contempt are never charged by our thoroughly corrupt, politicized, weaponized DoJ (yes, Eric Holder, I’m looking at you). Only Republicans like Bannon are charged and get jail time for that non-crime.
Finally, if Biden and Harris get impeached we do not get Pelosi (should the Democrats by some miracle hold the House) as President. I don’t care how many Succession Acts Congress passes, they can’t pass a statute that trumps the Constitution. The Succession Clause of the Constitution makes it crystal clear that after the President is removed and replaced by the VP, if the VP is then removed the next in line is an Officer of the United States.
“Article II, Section 1, Clause 6:
In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.”
The Appointments Clause of the Constitution (Article II, section 2, clause 2) defines who is an Officer of the United States.
“… and [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
Stop me if I’m wrong, but Pelosi wasn’t appointed Speaker by any President nor confirmed by the Senate. As a 2007 DoJ OLC memo, which I’m sure the corrupt Garland regrets was ever written, agreed that “Officer of the United States” was defined:
“a position to which is delegated by legal authority a portion of the sovereign power of the federal government and that is ‘continuing’ in a federal office subject to the Constitution’s Appointment Clause. A person who would hold such a position must be properly made an ‘officer of the United States’ by being appointed pursuant to the procedures specified in the Appointments Clause.”
Only appointed officials of the judicial and executive branch, nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, qualify. Pelosi doesn’t qualify. No member of the legislative branch can. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the Democrats are subversives hostile to the Constitution.
Simply horrible, awful optics for McCarthy in refusing to meet with Texas Congressional candidate Carmen Maria Montiel, who is challenging Sheila Jackson Lee.
RINO WATCH: KEVIN MCCARTHY SNUBS GOP CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE
“What I want from Republicans…”
How ’bout just getting the country up and running again?
Tearing down the barriers and over-regulation?
Bushwhacking through all the bull.
Overturning the perversities—in ALL realms.
Giving “the People” hope?
Screw the roller-derby one-upsmanship.
Show “the People” just how much the Democratic Party and the elites who support them have been ROYALLY screwing them—and show them HOW MUCH MORE those elites intended—and intend—to screw them…and let “the People” make their free choice….
(Well, one can dream…)