Posted on 10/06/2023 6:27:56 AM PDT by cotton1706
This shuffle came about after Jordan, along with Rep. Mark Meadows (R.-N.C.), forced Speaker John Boehner (R.-Ohio) to resign, by filing a vacate the chair motion on the last day before the August 2014 recess.
Boehner did resign right away, and it did not seem like Jordan and Meadows would succeed until House Republicans came back to Washington--having heard in their districts a growing frustration with the speaker.
In a fateful meeting, Jordan, Meadows and Boehner agreed to let Boehner, a Catholic, hang on to his speakership until after the visit of Pope Francis to Washington. Boehner resigned the next day.
Interestingly, Boehner had engineered Jordan’s departure as the chairman of the Republican Study Committee, then a conservative bloc inside the House Republican Conference, in 2013.
Boehner did it by encouraging moderate House Republican freshmen to join the RSC by exploiting the rule that allows new members to join without a review of their voting record. Boehner told the freshmen that joining the RSC, founded in 1973 by Paul Weyrich, would protect them from primary challenges from the right.
Jordan became the RSC chairman after the Tea Party wave in 2010, and throughout the 2011-2013 congressional session, Jordan used the RSC to make trouble for Boehner's program of working with President Barack Obama.
In the next congressional session, 2013-2015, Boehner had enough and he lobbied the moderates inside the RSC to force Jordan out--and Jordan was replaced by Boehner’s pick: Scalise.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Quote:
Are you sure? This does not sound like “Gaetz already agreed to this” as you stated.
“I’m leaning against changing our existing rules for any particular purpose,” said Gaetz. “Though, I am open-minded and would be willing to hear anyone’s presentation if they were offering a rules change.”
____________________________
Gaetz ‘open-minded’ on rules change to eliminate motion to vacate, would support Jordan or Scalise as speaker
https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/gaetz-open-minded-rules-change-174013178.html
“”The fix has been in place for decades.”
Does this include 2016?”
___________________________
If you have reason to believe the 2016 election was stolen, feel free to challenge it Billy, or should I say Stacy. But a word of advice before you do, lawyer up. Election challenges are illegal.
What are you doing? I sent a quote that Gaetz was open-minded about changing the rule, not that he already agreed to change the rule. Then you send an article stating the same thing I said. What’s your point?
You asked, I answered. See post #62
I don’t believe any recent election has been “stolen.” You’re the one who said the fix has been in place for decades. I simply asked if you think the fix was in place during the 2016 election. Was it in place?
Was the fix in place during the 2016 election? Yes or no.
My point is, Gaetz is not the villain!
The villains are those that stand in the way of productive change.
From surrendering to rinos to weakening the rino class.
Gaetz has taken that lead and utilized the tools afforded him.
If we get the outcome America I’d demanding, then the Motion to vacate can be removed. Unless of course you object?
Eight members of Congress thwarted over 200 other members on Congress. I don't exactly think that's what "America is demanding." You really think America should simply bend to what you want. Republican voters do not seem to want what you want anymore. Your time might just be at its end. And you still have not answered my simple question if the fix was in during the 2016 election.
“I don’t believe any recent election has been “stolen.” You’re the one who said the fix has been in place for decades. I simply asked if you think the fix was in place during the 2016 election. Was it in place?”
__________________________
Yes, election interference as well as election engineering has been in place. If you can’t see that, then you need to have your head examined.
From 2016 - 2020 every effort was made to alter the decision of America’s choice. The same is said of the 2016 election. The problem with the dnc’s efforts however, is that the groundswell for Trump was so strong that it was impossible to overcome at the last minute through corrupt election changes.
Any more questions?
The WILL of the American voters differs from the will of a rino class majority in the House.
And I answered YOU’RE question regarding ‘16 in post 62
Thank God the “8” had the fortitude to see that.
Here’s a thought, perhaps McBoehnor should not have agreed to the Motion to vacate clause if it wasn’t the WILL of the nation’s voters.
It does seem to me that any election results you agree with is free and fair, and any election you disagree with was "stolen."
You just can't grasp that people might have opinions that vary from yours and they may vote accordingly. You are convinced that everyone who votes must agree with you, so any election that does not mirror your vote must be fraudulent. Very, very strange.
According to recent polls and surveys, the American people believe as I do, that elections are not secure. There’s YOU’RE majority!
Thank you very much.
That’s because the Dems have the advantage that ALL their voters believe in a gov’t handing out lots of bennies, whereas the Pubbies’ voters are much more, shall we say, “diverse” group.
Even here on FR, one often sees the argument that $$ being sent to Ukraine should be spent domestically.
I believe Lee Atwater was the first person to call the Republican party a “big tent” in the late eighties.
Yes. It was. However, Hillary Clinton underestimated how much she needed to cheat.
Boehner is a drunk, IMO.
Boehner likes the ganja now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.