Patterico's Pontifications

7/1/2021

Minority Leader McCarthy Warns Members About Accepting Pelosi Offer To Serve On Jan. 6 Committee (UPDATE ADDED)

Filed under: General — Dana @ 7:48 am



[guest post by Dana]

Since Senate Republicans defeated efforts to form a bipartisan commission to investigate the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, Nancy Pelosi has formed a committee to do the job. As such, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy is apparently making it clear to members that they would be better of not accepting any offer from Pelosi to serve on the committee:

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy on Wednesday issued a blanket threat during a meeting with freshmen members of his caucus that he would strip any Republican member of their committee assignments if they accept an offer from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to serve on the select committee to investigate the January 6 insurrection, according to two GOP sources with knowledge of the matter.

McCarthy’s threat comes after the House voted to establish the committee. Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois were the only two Republican members to vote in favor of its formation. It’s not yet clear whether Pelosi will appoint Republicans to the commission, but the threat from McCarthy underscores how he feels about any members accepting an offer from the Democrats to serve on the committee.

After Wednesday’s vote, McCarthy refused to say if he will cooperate and offer up members to serve on the committee, telling CNN, “It seems pretty political to me.”

The select committee will consist of eight members appointed by Democrats and four members appointed by Republicans. Reportedly (and sensibly), Pelosi will veto any Republican member who has pushed Trump’s Big Lie about the election while rejecting the certification of Joe Biden’s election win.

Meanwhile, Rep. Liz Cheney believes that Pelosi’s committee is the only way to get the answers Americans need – and demand:

Our nation, and the families of the brave law enforcement officers who were injured defending us or died following the attack, deserve answers. I believe this select committee is our only remaining option.

Rep. Kinzinger said he would consider serving on the committee if asked:

“It’s not necessarily anything I look forward to doing, but if I thought my voice was needed to get to the bottom of it, it would be something I would be open to,” he told a local TV station Wednesday.

I’ll leave you with this comment from a few weeks ago:

A large chunk of the GOP is denying what happened. Many are still saying it was a false flag designed to “make Trump look bad.” Some are claiming that there was no forced entry because one police officer opened a door somewhere. Many are denying the clear video evidence of assaults on the Capitol police. Most are denying the open calls for executing “traitors.” Trumpers are claiming that Capitol police are lying about what they experienced. And most are denying that their hero did anything at all to incite an attack on the legislature.

And we don’t really know what Donald J. Trump was doing while it all unfolded. Wouldn’t it be important to know that, and what conversations he had with legislators, and why there was such a long delay in sending more security, and what communication some legislators may have had with the attackers?

Why do most Republicans not want us to know all that?

P.S. As recently as last week, you-know-who was still spouting the Big Lie before an audience of approximately 20,000 supporters.

P.P.S. Just in:

UPDATE: Lol, Kevin McCarthy:

–Dana

88 Responses to “Minority Leader McCarthy Warns Members About Accepting Pelosi Offer To Serve On Jan. 6 Committee (UPDATE ADDED)”

  1. Good morning.

    Dana (fd537d)

  2. Here’s a 40-minute video of “normal tourist activity” on 1/6.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  3. Pelosi names Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) to the 1/6 special cmte

    The Nancy Patricia Pelosi Show casts a Ted Baxter.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  4. “Why do most Republicans not want us to know all that?”

    Because the other side is worse….and anything that might embarrass my side is not a productive activity in the existential struggle to not lose the country. That, and many are too emotionally and intellectually invested in Trump to risk having that bubble burst. If they defended, excused, and applauded what amounts to be a scoundrel for four years…..what does that say about their judgment, ethics, and reasoning? They don’t want to know. The cognitive dissonance here is strong.

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  5. What happened on Jan 6 wasn’t acceptable. It’s not entirely partisan either. There are plausible scenarios where leftists would do the exact same thing. The failures that allowed this to happen need to be understood, made public, and fixed.

    Additionally there is at least one event from Jan 6 where the public needs better information; the death of Ashli Babbitt. I think, based on what I know, that the shooting was justified. But any time the state kills a citizen the public has a right and need to know the details of why it was justified. In this case it might be that sharing the officers name would expose them to undue danger. I’m skeptical but open to that argument. But if that’s the case it also needs to be explained and justified. I don’t trust the Dems to honestly investigate and report that. I don’t trust the GOP either, but maybe in the conflict between the two the information we’re owe will come out.

    Either way this should be a bipartisan investigation. From what I read Nancy gave the GOP almost everything they asked for in the negotiation for the independent commission. It’s clear that the GOP considers the political fallout and upsetting Trump to be the more pressing concern.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  6. Good for Congressman McCarthy. No Republican should participate in this sham or provide comfort to the radical left as they try and dismantle our nation piece by piece.

    And that includes supporting their hideous “infrastructure” bills and pushing the rest of their radical agenda.

    The joke of their inquisition is no different than the basement hearings they held when they “indicted” President Bush.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  7. Well said, Rob!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  8. And McCarthy should provide the leadership required to successfully pushback wherever/whenever possible.

    Actually DO something, not just talk the talk. MaligNancy can go suck on a bag of pickles.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  9. That inscrutable thing is chiefly what I hate; and be the orange whale agent, or be the orange whale principal, I will wreak that hate upon him. “But what’s this long face about, Mr. Starbuck; wilt thou not chase the orange whale!”

    JF (e1156d)

  10. Kinzinger on McCarthy’s Jan. 6 investigation threat: ‘Who gives a s—?’
    ……
    “I do think the threat of removing committees is ironic, because you won’t go after the space lasers and white supremacist people but those who tell the truth,” he said of McCarthy’s threat to strip committee assignments from any members picked by Pelosi to serve on the panel.
    …….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  11. The Big Lies are those told by congresscritter Democrats, and they are exposed as such with no help from the Lambchop media…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  12. Kinzinger: family pariah and political dead man walking…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  13. Additionally there is at least one event from Jan 6 where the public needs better information; the death of Ashli Babbitt. I think, based on what I know, that the shooting was justified. But any time the state kills a citizen the public has a right and need to know the details of why it was justified. In this case it might be that sharing the officers name would expose them to undue danger. I’m skeptical but open to that argument. …..

    There is a rumor going around that the “Capitol police officer” was a cover for a Secret Service agent assigned to Pence as the shooter. Given the scandals surrounding the SS over the past decade I wouldn’t be surprised.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  14. Colonel Haiku, you asked for 1 example of a lie you’ve told. I want to make sure you didn’t miss my response.

    http://patterico.com/2021/06/28/your-crazy-uncle-donnie-rino-bill-barr-was-a-disappointment-in-every-sense-of-the-word/#comment-2523648

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  15. AJ, based on Rob’s response I think you nailed it.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  16. Anyone remember the leftists in Congress and their investigation into the “tap dancing” idiot in the bathroom stall. That was used to gain her the majority and entrench their power. Then they used that power to pass the abomination known as Obamacare. When it came time to calling out their own members for worse behavior, they passed. No different than now.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  17. Time123,

    it’s easy to claim you’re above partisanship when you’re on the other side.

    But you do you.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  18. Paul Gosar is also a “family pariah”, but he still has a political career and committee assignments despite being a white nationalist and fascist, all because he bent the knee to Trump. This is the Bizarro TrumpWorld the GOP is in.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  19. Scorched Earth. We’re seeing it here right now with the Maricopa voting machines thread. No True Trump Supporter will give an inch: “The election was stolen. Trump won in a perfect landslide. 1/16 was a normal tourist visit. Everything Trump says is Gospel. Anything that in any way deviates from Trump Gospel is blasphemy.”

    Glory, glory, hallelujah, all y’all!

    nk (1d9030)

  20. NJRob, From my POV i have leftists like AOC, Sanders and Omar trying to move the government substationally to the left. They thankfully have less power then the center left.

    On the right I see Trump trying to tear down democratic institution with lies and being supported by all of the GOP leadership and most of the GOP. I think he’s a far more pressing threat to my country then AOC. He’s even got smart, well informed people like you cheering him on.

    I hope that some sort of center right is able return because I think that constituency is needed to force the dems to appeal to the middle. I think my policy preferences lose badly in a contest between to extremes that wins on voter turn out.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  21. @17, Rob, ins’t this a reasonable example of your views?

    Because the other side is worse….and anything that might embarrass my side is not a productive activity in the existential struggle to not lose the country

    I should have been more clear that this part in particular was what I thought he’d gotten right with respect to how I interpret your position. I think the rest of the comment applies more to elected. Officials then non-elected supporters.

    WRT to what side I’m on. If 2016 had been Hillary vs any of the non-trump GOP front Runners I’ve have voted GOP.

    If the GOP had replaced with say Desantis, Dewine, or Romney in 2020 I would have voted them.

    I’m socially liberal, fiscally conservative, small government and I value rule of law, individual rights, and basic competency.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  22. it’s as if four years of sham investigations never happened

    i can think of a dozen things congress might want to set up commissions to investigate

    how about oh say covid origins and gain of function funding

    too embarrassing

    so one more sham on the dung heap has our laser focus

    warped

    JF (e1156d)

  23. Time123,

    you cannot be socially liberal, fiscally conservative and support small government. It factually cannot exist in the real world. Socially liberal creates policies like out of wedlock births, rampant sexual deviancy, and irresponsible behavior that requires government to pick up the pieces. It’s destructive.

    Without a cohesive social fabric where everyone agrees to one set of laws, you don’t have a nation. You’re just picking over the corpse.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  24. “Where are the insurrection charges for AOC and the other organizers of this terrorist act?”

    This was dumb when you posted it yesterday and it’s still dumb today.

    Davethulhu (13b53b)

  25. Rob, we disagree about that. I think many of the metrics show that society as improved as it’s become more socially liberal. I’m looking at things like teen pregnancy, violent crime, abortion rates, have been improving over the 40 years. I understand your point of view, we just disagree.

    Regarding your comment on the protest. There was a tweet where someone claimed they were going to barricade all 10 entrances of the White House. But did they actually follow through? I saw a picture of a couple rows of people posed for a photo in front of a gate. I’m all sorts of on board with charging them if they broke the lay but I haven’t seen any specific elevation about what they did that was illegal.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  26. I am pleased that Liz Cheney has accepted. Most of the names on that list are predictable partisan hacks, like Schiff, and of course Bennie Thompson. But Cheney’s presence ensures there will be at least one honest person on the committee.

    Demosthenes (00c1ae)

  27. i can think of a dozen things congress might want to set up commissions to investigate

    how about oh say covid origins and gain of function funding

    too embarrassing

    You mean like this?

    Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene invite Britney Spears to testify before Congress over conservatorship battle
    …….
    Reps. Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Andy Biggs, and Burgess Owens invited the pop singer to speak to lawmakers about her experience in a letter on Wednesday.

    “The United States Congress should hear your story and be inspired to bipartisan action. What happened to you should never happen to any other American,” the members wrote.

    The four will “stand with” Spears no matter what she decides, they said. A deadline was not provided for her response……..
    ………

    Talk about an embarrassment.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  28. I’ve updated the post with Kevin McCarthy’s response to Cheney’s appointment.

    Dana (fd537d)

  29. Which Republicans Should Be Put on the January 6 Committee?

    Let’s get Kevin McCarthy’s record straight:

    The House Republican leader supported Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s bogus lawsuit last December to cancel votes in swing states that Joe Biden won.

    McCarthy then voted two times against certifying Electoral College votes for Biden—even after the U.S. Capitol, his workplace, was attacked by a pro-Trump mob.

    He refused to impeach former President Trump for his role in inciting the riot.

    Days after Biden was inaugurated, McCarthy zipped to Mar-a-Lago to kowtow to the twice-impeached Trump.

    McCarthy opposed the creation of a 9/11-style independent, bipartisan commission to investigate the January 6 attack.

    He booted Liz Cheney from her leadership position because she wouldn’t explicitly mouth Trump’s Big Lie about the election.

    And this week, he led the GOP opposition against establishing a select committee within the House of Representatives to conduct a probe into those events.

    After the House voted yesterday afternoon to create the January 6 committee, McCarthy complained, “It’s all partisan, you can see that.” What. As if he weren’t doing everything within his power to make it so. ……. As if the very nature of the insurrection, in which Trump supporters stormed the Capitol, beat police officers, and invaded the Senate chamber all in the name of overturning Biden’s election, weren’t explicitly political.
    ……….
    …….McCarthy won’t even commit to providing any selections. “I haven’t decided,” he says. Which would be perfectly consistent with his record of complaining about the lack of bipartisanship in our politics while doing everything within his power to make our politics ever more partisan.
    ……….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  30. Is this the same Kevin McCarthy who opposed the House stripping MTG of her committee assignments?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  31. Maybe McCarthy has something to hide.

    Nic (896fdf)

  32. The select committee will consist of eight members appointed by Democrats and four members appointed by Republicans. Reportedly (and sensibly), Pelosi will veto any Republican member who has pushed Trump’s Big Lie about the election while rejecting the certification of Joe Biden’s election win.

    Well, no clean hands here. Perhaps McCarthy is correct in calling this a hanging jury. Only Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans allowed. Not only a fault-finding panel, but a wedge issue, too.

    Waste not, want not.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  33. McCarthy has no interest in the truth.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  34. This kind of panel is the worst possible way to find truth. MUCH better would be to try the chief perpetrators for perpetrating, in open court with rules of evidence.

    Maybe they can get Trump Jr to flip.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  35. McCarthy has no interest in the truth.

    Neither does Pelosi.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  36. Rip, when 60% of a professional politician’s voters tell you that they will elect someone else if he doesn’t toe their line, he toes their line. It’s called “representative democracy.” It’s HOW the system works.

    Now, you may argue that Donald Trump is a cancer in this sytem, and you’d be right, but the system is responding exactly as it’s supposed to.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  37. Kevin, The proposal for how the independent commission would be set up was substantially better. That was rejected also.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  38. I do think this is a mistake for Liz Cheney. She will be used as a fig leaf, behind which will be naked politics.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  39. Maybe McCarthy has something to hide but I tend to think he’s just looking to keep the base happy…and become speaker…

    Dana (fd537d)

  40. Kevin, The proposal for how the independent commission would be set up was substantially better. That was rejected also.

    Again, this is something best determined in a court of law. There’s a reason that the legislature and the courts are separate branches.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  41. Sadly, you are correct.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  42. Maybe McCarthy has something to hide but I tend to think he’s just looking to keep the base happy…and become speaker…

    More likely, trying to avoid losing half his seats to flaming Trumpists in the primaries, or to Democrats (or third parties) when half the Republican voters refuse to vote R.

    I believe that most GOP Congressfolk dislike the Trumpists, but see no way out. Replacing them with MTG clones doesn’t seem an improvement. Replacing them with Democrats (as some virtue-signallers would suggest) has other problems (e.g. back to 90% marginal tax rates and state-run everything).

    McCarthy’s plan is more likely “Trump will die soon, and then we can recover.”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  43. @36. Royalists gotta royal.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  44. Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she would consult with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy as to who would be the 4 or 5 Republican members on that committee. Now he’s saying he won’t name anyone.

    He either wants to prevent the committee from being named, or force it to be composed only of Democrats.

    he would strip any Republican member of their committee assignments if they accept an offer from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to serve on the select committee to investigate the January 6 insurrection

    So the only one who has nothing to fear is Marjorie Taylor Greene. She’s volunteered already.

    Well, maybe Liz Cheney can get away with it. She can call his bluff.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  45. Lol, Kevin McCarthy: @GOPLeader on Rep. Liz Cheney joining January 6th Committee: “I was shocked that she would accept something from Speaker Pelosi. It would seem to me since I didn’t hear from her, maybe she’s closer to her than us. I don’t know.” pic.twitter.com/5swSaNqEqT

    “LOL” indeed:

    ‘Rep. Liz Cheney scored a fist bump from President Joe Biden as he entered the House chamber for his first joint address to Congress.’- source, yahoo.com

    “If I hold you any closer I’ll be in back of you.” – Dr. Hugo Z. Hackenbush [Groucho Marx] ‘A Day At The Races,’ 1937

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  46. Kevin M @43. Trump is not going to die so soon, and he can’t rely on that.

    He can hope and pray, though, or that Trump concludes he can’t run or can’t run and win.

    I don’t kow how serious Trump is – he talks about making th e Governor of Florida his running mate. Which oresents the same problem Cheney did for George Bush the Younger.

    I suppose Trump could change his state of residence again – probably to New Jersey – but that could cost him money in taxes.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  47. Again, this is something best determined in a court of law. There’s a reason that the legislature and the courts are separate branches.

    I disagree. Under your theory, Congress cannot investigate the Executive if there is potential criminal activity (like Watergate). There will be no prosecution that would lay out all the facts and their interrelationships-what people said, what actions they did or did not take, etc. Certainly not the cases against the individual insurrectionists themselves, and there will certainly not be a Trump prosecution for the insurrection. His speech was certainly protected by the First Amendment, and no where did he say go to the Capitol and interrupt the certification process (no matter what the arrested insurrectionists are claiming).

    The impeachment managers did not tie any words or action by Trump to the assault on the Capitol. And Trump certainly did not commit treason, sedition or insurrection. Any Trump prosecution is a fantasy.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  48. 24. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 7/1/2021 @ 11:32 am

    McCarthy has no interest in the truth.

    I think this is the case, but I think it’s also true of Speaker Nancy Pelosi as long as

    1) She keeps up the pretense that Capitol Police Office Brian Sicknick was killed by the attack (Unless she wants to reason that his blood pressure was driven up and that caused his stroke – but I haven;t seen that assertion – while meanwhile there are some real examples of serious injury to policemen)

    And so long as she maintains

    2) That the impeachment resolution was accurate in ascribing the attack to Trump’s speech (!!?) that day

    and as long as

    3) She keeps the Capitol rally scheduled for January 6 in the memory hole. There seems to have been a permit given for it. That rally even actually took place – there were speakers, mostly talking against vaccinations, according to the New York Times.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/26/us/far-right-extremism-anti-vaccine.html

    On Jan. 6, while rioters advanced on the Capitol, numerous leading figures in the anti-vaccination movement were onstage nearby, holding their own rally to attack both the election results and Covid-19 vaccinations.

    Events overshadowed their protest, but at least one outspoken activist, Dr. Simone Gold of Beverly Hills, Calif., was charged with breaching the Capitol. ..

    It was the same rally advertised here on the far right of the screen.

    The “wild protest”

    Initially, it was the only rally scheduled for January 6. The rally at the Ellipse (and the rally the night before) was added later.

    These anti-vaxxers supported Trump, but Trump was not an anti-vaxxers. He wanted to take credit for the vaccine. Of course, he didn’t want to throw away any political support, either.

    There are real mysteries about Trump’s scheduled participation in that Capitol rally. Why and when his speech at the Capitol was cancelled, or was it maybe falsely announced by Alex Jones. I read that the Secret Service told him not to go. When? Did he think he could satisfy them?

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  49. So, the Trump organization and their CFO is indicted for tax evasion. I’m sure the newspaper reports have things wrong, but the charge that they fraudulently failed to disclose certain executive income seems mixed. Lots of companies offer executive cars, and even crash pads in the city, without it being declared income. These may not qualify as such, but disallowed items are different that fraudulent ones.

    The company-paid tuitions at private schools seems a better charge, but I’d be interested to know what perks the executives of Citicorp or other NY financial firms receive that aren’t included in income.

    This all seems, if not political, as a wedge to get people to flip on Mr Big.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  50. I disagree. Under your theory, Congress cannot investigate the Executive if there is potential criminal activity (like Watergate).

    That’s impeachment, and it’s constitutional. And political, not a judicial matter. They can believe him guilty and not convict, or even beleive him innocent of the actual charges and still convict. In Andrew Johnson’s case, the stated charges had little to do with the reason he was on trial.

    There will be no prosecution that would lay out all the facts and their interrelationships-what people said, what actions they did or did not take, etc.

    A trial of Trump and his inner circle would.

    Certainly not the cases against the individual insurrectionists themselves, and there will certainly not be a Trump prosecution for the insurrection. His speech was certainly protected by the First Amendment, and no where did he say go to the Capitol and interrupt the certification process (no matter what the arrested insurrectionists are claiming).

    So you say. The first amendment argument was easily refuted in the impeachment trial. And no, he did not say “go to the Capitol and interrupt the certification process by violence” but he did say words, perhaps in separate sentences, that a reasonable wingnut would interpret as such.

    “Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong….

    I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

    And lots more of this, including demanding that Pence commit treason. That he couched it in terms of peaceful protests is no more convincing than the same words from Antifa, or Henry II line about being rid of that turbulent priest.
    In context

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  51. You can incite a crowd without spelling everything out. For example:

    Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
    I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
    The evil that men do lives after them;
    The good is oft interred with their bones;
    So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
    Hath told you Caesar was ambitious:
    If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
    And grievously hath Caesar answer’d it.
    Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest–
    For Brutus is an honourable man;
    So are they all, all honourable men–
    Come I to speak in Caesar’s funeral.
    He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
    But Brutus says he was ambitious;
    And Brutus is an honourable man.
    He hath brought many captives home to Rome
    Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
    Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?
    When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept:
    Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
    Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
    And Brutus is an honourable man.
    You all did see that on the Lupercal
    I thrice presented him a kingly crown,
    Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
    Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
    And, sure, he is an honourable man.
    I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke,
    But here I am to speak what I do know.
    You all did love him once, not without cause:
    What cause withholds you then, to mourn for him?
    O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
    And men have lost their reason. Bear with me;
    My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar,
    And I must pause till it come back to me.

    Marc Antony, Julius Caesar, Act III, Scene II.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  52. @52. Fiction. But then, well scripted- as is most memorable entertainment:

    “Men, you are about to embark on a great crusade to stamp out runaway decency in the west. Now you men will only be risking your lives, whilst I will be risking an almost certain Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor… now go do that voodoo that you do so welll!” – Hedley Lamarr [Harvey Korman] ‘Blazing Saddles’ 1974

    [Romans/Britons/Americans, etc.,] don’t want to be governed; they wish to be entertained.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  53. 50. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 7/1/2021 @ 12:14 pm

    The company-paid tuitions at private schools seems a better charge, but I’d be interested to know what perks the executives of Citicorp or other NY financial firms receive that aren’t included in income.

    The tuition was for his grandson, which is not a tax free fringe benefit when you think about it. It has to be considered salary, even if it is not in the contract and the company should have withheld income taxes on it, and he should have reported it as income. If the tuition paid had been that of a stranger, then it could be a gift by the corporation, but this has to be considered earned income on the part of Weisselberg.

    But such cases are never prosecuted. Giuliani pointed out that the federal government didn’t bring this case even though it’s the same tax law. It is political.

    This all seems, if not political, as a wedge to get people to flip on Mr Big.

    That’s exactly what it is.

    Had Donald Trump never been elected president, his company wouldn’t even have been investigated. If somehow this was discovered they would do a civil settlement. They did it to put pressure on Weisselberg.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  54. 39. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 7/1/2021 @ 11:39 am

    I do think this is a mistake for Liz Cheney. She will be used as a fig leaf, behind which will be naked politics.

    She doesn’t understand – yet – that the Democrats are not being honest here. I don;t think she understands that some of the spin about this is not honest.

    It’s OK for her to be on the committee, as long as she understands that she’s going to have to fight for the truth (which does not mean force or violence by the way)

    If she can’t even dissent on some points she has got to be prepared to resign.

    I think the facts themselves will draw the Democrats toward investigating a pre-Jan. 6 conspiracy to storm the Capitol building, so it might do some good.

    One of the questions is: Who planted the (dummy or inactive?) pipe bombs by the Republican National Committee and the Democratic National Committe?

    There is a theory that that was done to draw police attention away from the Capitol.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  55. I think Kevin McCarthy is hoping Trump will jump the shark.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  56. nk (1d9030) — 7/1/2021 @ 9:37 am

    We’re seeing it here right now with the Maricopa voting machines thread. No True Trump Supporter will give an inch: “The election was stolen. Trump won in a perfect landslide.

    Who said that in that thread?

    frosty (f27e97)

  57. @57 You haven’t. You’ve been clear on that.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  58. Sammy, you’re wicked smart. But I’m going to guess that Liz Chaney is a few moves ahead of you in knowing stuff about congressial politics. 😀

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  59. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 7/1/2021 @ 11:39 am

    I do think this is a mistake for Liz Cheney. She will be used as a fig leaf, behind which will be naked politics.

    Not “used” exactly. There are several R’s trying their best to implement the McCain maverick playbook. It’s a profitable business model.

    frosty (f27e97)

  60. @52-

    Not under the federal criminal code.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  61. The first amendment argument was easily refuted in the impeachment trial….. (And) demanding that Pence commit treason

    Impeachment is not a criminal prosecution, it is a political act, so the Bill of Rights does not necessarily apply. Also, arguing for Pence to disqualify electoral votes is not treason, nor is it sedition, or insurrection. It may have been impeachable, but not a criminal offense.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  62. @59. Which is why she lost her leadership gig. 😉

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  63. Time123 (9f42ee) — 7/1/2021 @ 1:25 pm

    I didn’t see anyone saying that. This seems like one of lying situations but I could have missed a comment.

    frosty (f27e97)

  64. Kevin, I get you point about criminal charges. But I think there was plenty that happened that wasn’t criminal but still merits improvement.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  65. Given how active you were in that thread your concern is reasonable

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  66. Democrats on Thursday expressed their displeasure with the Supreme Court’s final decisions of its 2020-2021 term, accusing the justices of doing “severe damage” to the political system and in some cases re-upping their calls to pack the court with liberal justices appointed by President Biden.

    I think that among the lasting damage wrought by Trump is the mainstreaming of fringe ideas. The idea of packing the Supreme Court is just as terrible as overturning the election in Congress. It is just as much a coup, and just as Constitutional.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  67. Impeachment is not a criminal prosecution, it is a political act, so the Bill of Rights does not necessarily apply

    Yes, but that was not the argument. There are laws that criminalize some speech, such as inciting to riot, such as calling for the overthrow of the government.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  68. Also, arguing for Pence to disqualify electoral votes is not treason, nor is it sedition, or insurrection. It may have been impeachable, but not a criminal offense.

    For the Vice President to assert powers he does not have, in order to subvert the Constitution is not, I agree, treason. But only because we have a strict definition. It would be impeachable, and it would be quickly overridden by the Congress on a parliamentary appeal. But if it isn’t a criminal act, it should be.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  69. You haven’t. You’ve been clear on that.

    Time123 (9f42ee) — 7/1/2021 @ 1:25 pm

    No one has. It’s a strawman argument.

    NJRob (b172fa)

  70. Who said that in that thread?

    frosty (f27e97) — 7/1/2021 @ 1:20 pm

    They also serve who noodge, kvetch and nudnik.

    nk (1d9030)

  71. NJRob, Trump has explicitly stated that the election was stolen. It’s not a straw man argument. It’s mainstream republican thought.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  72. It should be obvious to any multicellular organism that Trump is a bigger vote-getter for the Democratic Party than he is for the GOP. It is not the future of the Republican Party that McCarthy is worried about. It is his own personal little Bakersfield rice bowl.

    nk (1d9030)

  73. But he owns the gop primary

    Time123 (4e5a7b)

  74. 57. Time123 (9f42ee) — 7/1/2021 @ 1:27 pm

    Sammy, you’re wicked smart.

    I am close to what Joe Biden pretended to be.

    But I’m going to guess that Liz Chaney is a few moves ahead of you in knowing stuff about congressional politics.

    She knows that at least after consulting her father. So she’s not risking all her other committee memberships by agreeing to be on that committee. If that happened she could get put back on committees by the Democrats – she could even caucus with the Democrats. I don;t know what that would do to her prospects for re-election, but the Democrats could agree not run a candidate against her in 2022.

    But from what she has said about it, I don’t think she understands what went on with Jan. 6 and afterwards. It’s not like you believe one party or the other.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  75. Trump has explicitly stated that the election was stolen. It’s not a straw man argument. It’s mainstream republican thought.

    Time123 (9f42ee) — 7/1/2021 @ 4:04 pm

    No one on here has made that argument. Unless you’re just shouting into the abyss, your discussions are designed to engage people here. You stated it was said in a previous thread. It wasn’t.

    NJRob (b172fa)

  76. nk (1d9030) — 7/1/2021 @ 3:46 pm

    They also serve who noodge, kvetch and nudnik.

    What’s a little lying to keep the noodging, kvetching, and nudniking in perspective?

    frosty (f27e97)

  77. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 7/1/2021 @ 3:10 pm

    . It would be impeachable, and it would be quickly overridden by the Congress on a parliamentary appeal.

    But that itself would change the default from needing a majority of both houses to reject Electoral votes to needing a majority of both houses to accept them. In this Congress, on January 6, it wouldn;t have made any difference.

    Giuliani seems to have overlooked one thing. He was sold on a strategy of having Congress reject some Electoral votes and then having the states in question replace their electors. Besides the fact that that wasn’t going to happen, there was not just the deadline for choosing the Electors (Nov 3 or if that failed some other way) there was also the date for the Electors to vote, which was, this time, December 14.

    Now I think in some states, a slate of wanna-be electors assembled and voted to try to take care of that on spec that they’d be chosen later and they would have voted on December 14.

    https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/12/14/arizona-groups-fake-electors-try-cast-11-electoral-votes-trump/6536056002

    These weren;t even the regular Arizona Republican elector candidates.

    In another sign of the lingering unrest over President Donald Trump’s election loss, an Arizona group sent the National Archives in Washington, D.C., notarized documents last week intended to deliver, wrongly, the state’s 11 electoral votes for him.

    Copies of the documents obtained by The Arizona Republic show a group that claimed to represent the “sovereign citizens of the Great State of Arizona” submitted signed papers casting votes for what they want: a second term for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence.

    That doesn’t even sound like their legal reasoning was that they’d be picked later and voted in the past. It sounds like their strategy was that the Electors are whoever Congress says they are.

    Anyway, I don’t think this happened in enough states to reverse the outcome.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  78. Eliding my comment to take out the meaning a reasonable person would get from it is the strawman. And a lie.

    It should be obvious, again to any multicellular organism, that the Trump supporters in the Maricopa County voting machines thread were having their million monkeys on their keyboards pound out walls of text in reaction to any aspersion, express or implied, on the “”audit””* which would, by extension, be an aspersion on their orange conspiracy theory.

    *An “”audit”” which calls for double scare quotes.

    nk (1d9030)

  79. Akshually, I heard McCarthy’s fuller statement on the radio a bit ago (yeah, I drive at night) and it sounded reasonable to me. His complaint was that the Republican leadership assigns Republican Representatives to committees and the Democratic leadership assigns Democratic Representatives. Cheney as a Republican had no business accepting an assignment from Pelosi and Pelosi had no business giving it to her.

    nk (1d9030)

  80. NJRob, that’s a good point.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  81. 80. 81. nk (1d9030) — 7/1/2021 @ 8:56 pm

    His complaint was that the Republican leadership assigns Republican Representatives to committees and the Democratic leadership assigns Democratic Representatives. Cheney as a Republican had no business accepting an assignment from Pelosi and Pelosi had no business giving it to her.

    What Nancy Pelosi is doing amounts to false bipartisanship. Getting a dissenting Republican on the committee might make it a bit more credible but it is not bipartisanship and if she pretends that it is, that’s another lie.

    And Liz Cheney is not skeptical enough about the Democratic narrative about Jan 6. It’s not that one side is lying and the other is telling the truth. No such luck.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  82. Donald Trump told Fox News yesterday that he has made a final decision on whether or not run for president in 2024. Unless he starts building a campaign organization within a few weeks, that means his decision is no. He probably doesn’t want to file any more financial disclosure statements or get investigated. If he felt he would be investigated regardless, he’d probably run because that could act of protection.

    Regarding the Manhattan DA indictment. It’s large scale but falls well short of Allen Qeissl=elberg’s salry. They were helped by his estranged former daughter-in-law.

    There seem to be two issues: One is that some f perks were recorded in some company document as money paid because of him, which might make it income.

    The other is the claim that he was a New York City resident and thus owed local income taxes.

    The company provided an apartment in New York City for his use and paid utility bills etc. That is not considered income as it is done “for the convenience of the employer” Board for butlers and maids, or a super in a building, or a house for a college president is not income for them even if they have no other home. Governors of states and the president of the United States do not have to pay income tax on their free housing. But the charge is the use of that home made him a New York City resident and not a resident of Long Island.

    By the way, also non-taxable is de minimis, like providing lunch, or a taxi to take someone home who works late. (Maybe that also might be covered by the “convenience of the employer” exception.)

    https://www.irs.gov/government-entities/federal-state-local-governments/de-minimis-fringe-benefits

    In general, a de minimis benefit is one for which, considering its value and the frequency with which it is provided, is so small as to make accounting for it unreasonable or impractical. De minimis benefits are excluded under Internal Revenue Code section 132(a)(4) and include items which are not specifically excluded under other sections of the Code. These include such items as:

    Controlled, occasional employee use of photocopier
    Occasional snacks, coffee, doughnuts, etc.
    Occasional tickets for entertainment events
    Holiday gifts
    Occasional meal money or transportation expense for working overtime
    Group-term life insurance for employee spouse or dependent with face value not more than $2,000
    Flowers, fruit, books, etc., provided under special circumstances
    Personal use of a cell phone provided by an employer primarily for business purposes

    In determining whether a benefit is de minimis, you should always consider its frequency and its value. An essential element of a de minimis benefit is that it is occasional or unusual in frequency. It also must not be a form of disguised compensation.

    The whole thing is a grey area. And probably they err on the side of not taxing.

    The most complicated part of tax law is distinguishing between a gift, a bargain and income. It’s income if you do something for it in exchange.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  83. It’s not that one side is lying and the other is telling the truth. No such luck.

    Ever.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  84. Donald Trump told Fox News yesterday that he has made a final decision on whether or not run for president in 2024.

    He still will weigh in on other candidates, based on their fealty. But even a candidate who supported the same policies, but knew how to act in public, would be preferable.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  85. It isn’t absolutely certain that he won’t run, but that’s how it probably is. Summer 2021 is too early to announce and if not, he couldn’t have made a final decision unless it was no. He may be reassuring his family.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  86. Note to 83:

    The company provided an apartment in New York City for his use and paid utility bills etc. That is not considered income as it is done “for the convenience of the employer”

    That is true, but it was included in the indictment. His son’s apartment, near the Wollman rink, which his son managed, was not. His son Barry and his son’s wife Jennifer lived for half a dozen years or so in an apartment evidently paid for by the Trump Organization. Later they moved to the Upper West Side, but still lived rent free because rent was paid for by the father.

    I suppose if they really wanted to stretch things that could charge his son’s job was really compensation for the father and should be taxed at a higher marginal rate, but nobody second guesses business decisions like whom to hire or how much to pay them because then how could any closely held family owned business be assured they weren’t violating the law? The only time this comes up is when a principal in a business is paid too little, because there is no upper limit to Medicare tax.

    Allen Weisselberg, according to his ex-daughter-in-law, did not initially take advantage of perks offered by the Trump organization, like free vacations. But later he did. It could look like he was afraid to ask for a salary increase and preferred to split his compensation into smaller pieces – he still kept a record of what was really for him in case Donald Trump later raised some questions about it, and even had Donald Trump sign some checks. He crossed out notations that it was for him in certain cases..

    I don;t know what kind of a case they would have that Allen Weisselberg didn’t live in Long Island, but in the apartment provided for him by Trump.

    Allen Weisselberg owned a condo in Florida not far from Mar-a-lago, The indictment apparently does not raise any questions about that but does say he accepted a new bed, furniture and a flat screen TV paid for by the company without including it in income. The company is accused, I assume, of falsifying business records and avoiding payroll taxes although the last can’t be part of the indictment since it would be a federal crime. (whether salary or a free fringe benefit, it’s a legitimate deductible business expense in either case)

    All this is to put pressure on Weisselberg to co-operate in the investigation of the “real crime” they are investigating Trump for: Using different valuations of property for different purposes – less if it was for taxes, and more if it was for insurance or bank loans. They reason that either the high or the low valuation has to be fraud. (They would want Weisselberg to testify that the appraisals weren’t honest)

    Except that there are many real estate companies that do the same thing and use the same lawyers and accountants.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  87. thank God Liz Cheney is actually like a real republican. Nothng says “Conservative” like helping Nancy Pelosi.

    rcocean (fcc23e)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4125 secs.