Speaker of the House Vote Thread

[Anonymous]

Fun times. The term of the Clerk of the House has expired. A new Clerk cannot be appointed until a Speaker has been elected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this was all about money? The Dussian funds must really be drying up.

To clarify, the Cingressional Leadership Fund is the SuperPAC “aligned” with McCarthy. It’s not like they’re legally permitted to coordinate horse-trading like this:

And if they are not who would prosecute them…there are laws for some but not for republicans.

The GOP defanged the FEC and they’re coming for the Office of Congressional Ethics next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this was all about money? The Russian funds must really be drying up.

Told y’all it was all FAKE. But everyone laps up this fake nonsense all year. Reality tv for dorks.

It’s not fake if the whole reason that the 20 R members against McCarthy are pissed is because he’s directing dark money towards more normal Rs so there won’t be more crazy Rs voting against McCarthy.

Certainly not the whole reason. Gaetz hates McCarthy and the HFC understands that they’re in a position to wield significant power at the committee level and should be rewarded for it in terms of assignments and chairmanships. It’s a raw power struggle led by insurgent bomb throwers.

[Anonymous]

So this mess just happened:

[Anonymous]

It’s interesting that Jordan played his hand in a way that allowed him to stay largely above the fray. Expecting to see Scalise put forward tomorrow for Speaker now that McCarthy blinked. Gaetz learned directly from Trump how to exploit weakness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this was all about money? The Russian funds must really be drying up.

Told y’all it was all FAKE. But everyone laps up this fake nonsense all year. Reality tv for dorks.

It’s not fake if the whole reason that the 20 R members against McCarthy are pissed is because he’s directing dark money towards more normal Rs so there won’t be more crazy Rs voting against McCarthy.

Certainly not the whole reason. Gaetz hates McCarthy and the HFC understands that they’re in a position to wield significant power at the committee level and should be rewarded for it in terms of assignments and chairmanships. It’s a raw power struggle led by insurgent bomb throwers.

One of the reasons Gaetz hates McCarthy is that McCarthy doesn’t want loons like Laura Loomer elected and has money to spend against them, and Matt Gaetz likes the loons but does not have the money.

Tomorrow should go well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this was all about money? The Russian funds must really be drying up.

Told y’all it was all FAKE. But everyone laps up this fake nonsense all year. Reality tv for dorks.

It’s not fake if the whole reason that the 20 R members against McCarthy are pissed is because he’s directing dark money towards more normal Rs so there won’t be more crazy Rs voting against McCarthy.

+1. The CLF supports moderates running against the MTGs in primaries. By freezing the primary funding for moderates, it increases the chance that the crazies make it through to the election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fun times. The term of the Clerk of the House has expired. A new Clerk cannot be appointed until a Speaker has been elected.

Where can I read more about this?

[Anonymous]

Who thought the New Year would ring in with Beavis and Bobo aligned in opposition to LargeMarge whilst running circles around Kev? And all the while Dems are sneaking out to mingle in the cloakroom to sip cocktails.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a way, I kind of admire the hold outs. We know what McCarthy will bring: more tax cuts for the 0.01%. The guy from Florida with one marijuana bust in his childhood can't be worse? maybe he would actually support the working class?

You mean the GQPer that also has a felony bank fraud conviction? In 2000? That guy?

It was expunged. Do you know what that means?

Also, he seems to have reformed since then. Whatever his politics, he's a success story. In no way qualified to be third in line, but not a felon.

Pretending it never happened didn’t mean he didn’t commit the crime for which he was convicted.

So you don't know what expunged means. Or success story.

I’m well aware of its meaning — that is, records relating to the crime are to be destroyed by law enforcement and he is permitted to deny the fact of his arrest for purposes of things like job applications unless he is applying for certain positions such as on law enforcement. It doesn’t negate the fact he defrauded a bank through the act of bribery for which he pled guilty. Add to this the fact it was granted purely on the basis of politics. And I don’t consider chss asngung his party affiliation from D to R so as to grift at the teat of the racist Tea Party Movement to be a success. It’s just another con.

If you look more closely at his history, he pled guilty to bribery in a plan to defraud a bank in 2000 and then the conviction was expunged in 2016. In between, he worked in finance. So a lot of people thought his story was convincing. Not you, but lots other people.

“A lot of people”? A dozen? A hundred? A thousand? And his “story” was “convincing” in exactly what way? You’re just pulling stuff from your posterior..

It’s also unclear how someone with a back fraud felony was working in “finance.” He certainly wasn’t a CFP or hold a Series 7 and 63.

I read the wiki page. You can too. Make of it what you will. Before the conviction was expunged, he was able to get several jobs in finance. Those people decided to hire him.

George Santos also had a bio on his “wiki” page.

So maybe it's all fake. Clearly you dislike the guy so there's no point in having a discussion. I'm not on board with his politics but I don't hold his non-criminal history against him.

Do you hold his criminal history against him? Clearly you hold him as a shining example of goodness and decency in the GQP, so you're right, no use in talking with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fun times. The term of the Clerk of the House has expired. A new Clerk cannot be appointed until a Speaker has been elected.

Where can I read more about this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fun times. The term of the Clerk of the House has expired. A new Clerk cannot be appointed until a Speaker has been elected.

Where can I read more about this?

https://clerk.house.gov/About#OverviewContact

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fun times. The term of the Clerk of the House has expired. A new Clerk cannot be appointed until a Speaker has been elected.

so who runs the votes now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fun times. The term of the Clerk of the House has expired. A new Clerk cannot be appointed until a Speaker has been elected.

Where can I read more about this?

https://clerk.house.gov/About#OverviewContact

Along with the other House officers the Clerk is elected every two years when the House organizes for a new Congress. The majority and minority caucuses nominate candidates for the House officer positions after the election of the Speaker. The full House adopts a resolution to elect the officers, who will begin serving the House membership after they have taken the oath of office.

She is no different than the Speaker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fun times. The term of the Clerk of the House has expired. A new Clerk cannot be appointed until a Speaker has been elected.

so who runs the votes now?

As a technical matter someone should make a motion to appoint her as Acting Clerk until such time as new House officers are elected and sworn.