​INSANE NANCY PELOSI WANTS CREDIT FOR SEATING THE WINNING IOWA REPUBLICAN CONGRESSWOMAN

In December Democrat Rita Hart decided to appeal her 6-vote loss in the Iowa-2 race directly to the House of Representatives. Hart claimed there wasn’t time to try to settle the issue in state court.  Instead, she wanted to hand the decision over to Nancy Pelosi.  

Pelosi agreed to seat the certified winner of the race, which was Republican Marinette Miller-Meeks, at the beginning of this Congress.  That doesn’t mean the issue is settled.  As Jazz pointed out earlier this month, Pelosi said there was still a scenario in which Rita Hart could be judged the winner and seated in place of Miller-Meeks.

There was a considerable amount of pushback to that idea from Republicans and some from a few moderate Democrats, who came out against it.  But on Friday Pelosi told reporters that she would have been within her rights as Speaker to not seat Miller-Meeks and that she deserves credit for doing so. 

“It would have been, under the rules, allowable for me to say we’re not seating the member from Iowa. We did not do that. So, I want credit for that.”

Pelosi did do the right thing three months ago and so she should get credit for that.  But what’s happening now is another matter, where on Thursday Ric Lowry pointed out that the Democratic effort to challenge Miller-Meeks is self-evidently partisan.

He said, you don’t bypass the state courts in favor of Nancy Pelosi if you want an unbiased process.But here is what is happening:  The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committe is paying for top Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias, who fought Donald Trump in election cases before and after November 3, to represent Hart.

Elias’ brief for Hart offers a tiny meager excuse for avoiding a contest court in Iowa.  It states that Hart did not know about all of the 22 ballots she considers improperly discarded until December 1, and that meant there was not enough time to go through the court made up of the chief justice of The Iowa Supreme Court and four district court judges.​

The decision to bypass the Iowa law and base it on partisan interests of fellow Democrats in the House of Representatives, instead of a state body that aspires to neutrality, like the Iowa Supreme court is ridiculous, even if lawfulBasically, Elias has based his decision by quoting from the last case when a Democratic-controlled House overturned an election (in 1985 to award an Indiana seat to a Democrat). 

His brief says the committee is certainly not bound to follow Iowa law and indeed, “there are instances where it is in face bound by justice and equity to deviate from it.”​Pelosi probably isn’t going to decide on ejecting Miller-Meeks in favor of Rita Hart because it would create a lot of negative publicity she doesn’t need at this time.   

But partisan power grabs are the expertise of the left.  A good example of that right now by taking this seat and ending the Senate filibuster would be a perfect combination to show everyone that Democrats never cared about anything but power.

3.5 2 votes
Article Rating

You Might Like

Leave a Reply

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments