Senate Republicans boost Elizabeth Warren’s run for the 2020 Dem nomination

 

Say hello to the new superhero of the Democrats: Elizabeth Warren, cast for the role by Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans.  All is going according to plan.  By means of Republicans enforcing an old Senate rule on decorum, she has achieved martyr status, and in a party that worships victims, this could be the key to lining up donors, mailing lists, and momentum toward the nomination to run against Trump.

The background, for those unfamiliar with the "gagging," as it is being called, is explained by Jordain Carey of The Hill:

The Senate voted to bar Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) from speaking on the floor Tuesday night, after Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said her blistering comments about fellow Sen. Jeff Sessions, President Trump's pick for attorney general, broke Senate rules. 

Senators rebuked Warren in a 49-43 party-line vote, rejecting Warren's push to overturn a ruling by Senate Republicans that she had violated the rules during a Senate floor speech. (snip)

"The senator has impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama," McConnell said from the Senate floor. "I call the senator to order under the provisions of Rule 19."

Under the Senate's "Rule 19," senators are not allowed to "directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator."

Paul Mirengoff of Powerline explains why the specifics of Warren's charges were covered by Rule 19:

Warren asserted that "to put Senator Sessions in charge of the Department of Justice is an insult to African-Americans."

To support this claim, roundly disputed by African-Americans who know Jeff Sessions, Warren resorted to quotes from 1986 when the Senate did not confirm the Alabama man as a federal district court judge.

She cited Coretta Scott King who claimed that Sessions had "used the awesome power of his office to chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens." She also quoted Ted Kennedy who said that Sessions is "a disgrace to the Justice Department." ...

It seems to me that Warren did impute to Sessions conduct unbecoming a Senator. If he tried (per Mrs. King) to chill the rights of African-Americans ( he didn't; he was acting on a complaint filed by local African-American officials), that was conduct unbecoming a Senator. So too if (per Kennedy) Sessions was a disgrace to the Justice Department.

Conduct unbecoming a senator was Ted Kennedy's lifestyle.

Warren now has a tremendous boost in her fundraising, speaking engagements, and star power among the angry left, whose frustration keeps mounting.  She will undoubtedly seek to exploit her "victim" status among the party's base and could find herself on the way to the Democrat nomination.

I have to believe that in the judgment of GOP senators and probably the Trump administration, Warren would be an easy opponent to defeat.  She will appeal to the educated urban, coastal elites, but their support and turnout can be taken as a given.  Energizing them does nothing to drive turnout among minorities, who don't see a rich, stern, arrogant white lady from Harvard "with high cheekbones" as a compadre or a soul sister worth getting up and voting for.

 

From my standpoint, the best thing about Warren is that she knows she is a hypocrite when it comes to money.  She worked for financial firms as a lawyer and lives in a multi-million-dollar mansion near the Harvard campus.  William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection explains her guilt-signaling over her leftism by pointing out that she had a ground rule for reporters covering her 2012 run for the Senate:

I recalled that Warren had a ground rule for reporters allowed into her home; the inside of the house was deemed "off the record" and could not be reported on. It must be quite impressive for her not to want people to know about it given her political persona demonizing people who got rich:

"I hear all this, you know, 'Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever,'" she said. "No. There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.

"You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.

"Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along."

What did she build?

And, as was recently discovered by the Free Beacon:

A U.S. senator who took advantage of a loophole in ethics laws to avoid disclosing a $1.3 million credit line against her home is now warning that incomplete financial disclosures from cabinet nominees put the country at risk.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D., Mass.) warning came in the Washington Post, where she wrote that "it is critical that each nominee follows basic ethics rules to ensure that they will act for the benefit of all the American people."

Warren argued that financial disclosures are needed to "reveal potentially damaging information that may undermine fitness to serve" and that nominees with "complex financial histories" need to be "forthcoming and transparent."

Warren, meanwhile, continues to skirt congressional ethics laws by failing to include a $1.3 million line of credit against her Cambridge, Massachusetts, home on financial disclosure forms.

The line of credit was extended to Warren and her husband Bruce Mann in 2007 through financial giant Bank of America. It was first noted by the Boston Herald after Warren failed to included the line of credit as a liability on her 2014 financial disclosure filing. It was also absent from her 2015 filing.

An aide for Warren, who is worth millions, defended the omission, stating at the time that a home equity line of credit like the one that Warren received from Bank of America doesn't have the same reporting requirements as a typical home mortgage, which would have to be reported.

The STOCK Act, which was signed into law in 2012, mandated that all members of Congress disclose details of any mortgages on their personal residences in their annual filings.

The legislation, however, does not mention home equity lines of credit, which banks offer as alternatives to a mortgage.

The Warren aide said that the senator had yet to borrow on the line of credit, which allowed her to leave it off disclosure forms.

She had a contractual commitment from the baddest of the bad boys (in leftist demonology) to pony up a mill and a half at her demand.  And she kept it a secret.

In my mind, Elizabeth Warren is the perfect casting choice to play Margaret Dumont to Donald Trump's Groucho in the television theatre already being cast by President Trump's team.  Never forget that he is  the man who created and starred in the highest rated reality TV series in American history.

 

Having a phonied up, fake Indian affirmative action recipient who lives in a house so gorgeous that the peasants aren't allowed to see the interior is perfect for the wisecracking Donald Trump.  She will seek to rely on her dignity as she is outraged by the "un-presidential" criticism from her opponent.

That posture was always good for laughs when Margaret Dumont took it toward Groucho, and the humor will work just as well with the target minority constituencies the Democrats need to motivate to turn out in overwhelming numbers in order to win national elections.

 

Say hello to the new superhero of the Democrats: Elizabeth Warren, cast for the role by Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans.  All is going according to plan.  By means of Republicans enforcing an old Senate rule on decorum, she has achieved martyr status, and in a party that worships victims, this could be the key to lining up donors, mailing lists, and momentum toward the nomination to run against Trump.

The background, for those unfamiliar with the "gagging," as it is being called, is explained by Jordain Carey of The Hill:

The Senate voted to bar Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) from speaking on the floor Tuesday night, after Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said her blistering comments about fellow Sen. Jeff Sessions, President Trump's pick for attorney general, broke Senate rules. 

Senators rebuked Warren in a 49-43 party-line vote, rejecting Warren's push to overturn a ruling by Senate Republicans that she had violated the rules during a Senate floor speech. (snip)

"The senator has impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama," McConnell said from the Senate floor. "I call the senator to order under the provisions of Rule 19."

Under the Senate's "Rule 19," senators are not allowed to "directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator."

Paul Mirengoff of Powerline explains why the specifics of Warren's charges were covered by Rule 19:

Warren asserted that "to put Senator Sessions in charge of the Department of Justice is an insult to African-Americans."

To support this claim, roundly disputed by African-Americans who know Jeff Sessions, Warren resorted to quotes from 1986 when the Senate did not confirm the Alabama man as a federal district court judge.

She cited Coretta Scott King who claimed that Sessions had "used the awesome power of his office to chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens." She also quoted Ted Kennedy who said that Sessions is "a disgrace to the Justice Department." ...

It seems to me that Warren did impute to Sessions conduct unbecoming a Senator. If he tried (per Mrs. King) to chill the rights of African-Americans ( he didn't; he was acting on a complaint filed by local African-American officials), that was conduct unbecoming a Senator. So too if (per Kennedy) Sessions was a disgrace to the Justice Department.

Conduct unbecoming a senator was Ted Kennedy's lifestyle.

Warren now has a tremendous boost in her fundraising, speaking engagements, and star power among the angry left, whose frustration keeps mounting.  She will undoubtedly seek to exploit her "victim" status among the party's base and could find herself on the way to the Democrat nomination.

I have to believe that in the judgment of GOP senators and probably the Trump administration, Warren would be an easy opponent to defeat.  She will appeal to the educated urban, coastal elites, but their support and turnout can be taken as a given.  Energizing them does nothing to drive turnout among minorities, who don't see a rich, stern, arrogant white lady from Harvard "with high cheekbones" as a compadre or a soul sister worth getting up and voting for.

 

From my standpoint, the best thing about Warren is that she knows she is a hypocrite when it comes to money.  She worked for financial firms as a lawyer and lives in a multi-million-dollar mansion near the Harvard campus.  William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection explains her guilt-signaling over her leftism by pointing out that she had a ground rule for reporters covering her 2012 run for the Senate:

I recalled that Warren had a ground rule for reporters allowed into her home; the inside of the house was deemed "off the record" and could not be reported on. It must be quite impressive for her not to want people to know about it given her political persona demonizing people who got rich:

"I hear all this, you know, 'Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever,'" she said. "No. There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.

"You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.

"Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along."

What did she build?

And, as was recently discovered by the Free Beacon:

A U.S. senator who took advantage of a loophole in ethics laws to avoid disclosing a $1.3 million credit line against her home is now warning that incomplete financial disclosures from cabinet nominees put the country at risk.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D., Mass.) warning came in the Washington Post, where she wrote that "it is critical that each nominee follows basic ethics rules to ensure that they will act for the benefit of all the American people."

Warren argued that financial disclosures are needed to "reveal potentially damaging information that may undermine fitness to serve" and that nominees with "complex financial histories" need to be "forthcoming and transparent."

Warren, meanwhile, continues to skirt congressional ethics laws by failing to include a $1.3 million line of credit against her Cambridge, Massachusetts, home on financial disclosure forms.

The line of credit was extended to Warren and her husband Bruce Mann in 2007 through financial giant Bank of America. It was first noted by the Boston Herald after Warren failed to included the line of credit as a liability on her 2014 financial disclosure filing. It was also absent from her 2015 filing.

An aide for Warren, who is worth millions, defended the omission, stating at the time that a home equity line of credit like the one that Warren received from Bank of America doesn't have the same reporting requirements as a typical home mortgage, which would have to be reported.

The STOCK Act, which was signed into law in 2012, mandated that all members of Congress disclose details of any mortgages on their personal residences in their annual filings.

The legislation, however, does not mention home equity lines of credit, which banks offer as alternatives to a mortgage.

The Warren aide said that the senator had yet to borrow on the line of credit, which allowed her to leave it off disclosure forms.

She had a contractual commitment from the baddest of the bad boys (in leftist demonology) to pony up a mill and a half at her demand.  And she kept it a secret.

In my mind, Elizabeth Warren is the perfect casting choice to play Margaret Dumont to Donald Trump's Groucho in the television theatre already being cast by President Trump's team.  Never forget that he is  the man who created and starred in the highest rated reality TV series in American history.

 

Having a phonied up, fake Indian affirmative action recipient who lives in a house so gorgeous that the peasants aren't allowed to see the interior is perfect for the wisecracking Donald Trump.  She will seek to rely on her dignity as she is outraged by the "un-presidential" criticism from her opponent.

That posture was always good for laughs when Margaret Dumont took it toward Groucho, and the humor will work just as well with the target minority constituencies the Democrats need to motivate to turn out in overwhelming numbers in order to win national elections.

RECENT VIDEOS