New Speaker McCarthy to remove Jew Hating Ilhan Omar from committee assignment

[reason10]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kevin-mccarthy-says-will-remove-ilhan-omar-committee-assignment-antisemitism-speaker

Kevin McCarthy says he will remove Ilhan Omar from committee assignment over 'antisemitism' when speaker

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said on Saturday that when he is speaker of the House next year he plans to remove Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., from the House Foreign Affairs Committee over her "antisemitic" comments. 

"We watch antisemitism grow, not just on our campuses, but we watched it grow In the halls of Congress," he said at the Republican Jewish Coalition’s 2022 leadership meeting in Las Vegas. 

"I promised you last year that as speaker she will no longer be on Foreign Affairs, and I’m keeping that promise," he said to cheers from the audience. 

Ever wonder why they called her Nazi Pelosi?

One of the many reasons probably is for allowing this GOOSE STEPPER

anywhere near a committee assignment.

At least the adults will be in charge in the House.

 

[ironstone]

This is long overdue and someone as awful as Ilhan Omar should never have been holding any kind of public office in the first place. She literally does come from arguably the worst sh*thole country on the planet and yet she never seemed grateful to have been taken in by the US.

[Infidel Dog]

Did you ever see that Project Veritas one where they showed a guy claiming to be one of Omar's cousins driving around collecting stacks of ballots for ballot box stuffing?

If you ever wondered how she can keep getting elected, I mean.

[Infidel Dog]

I saw the video of a guy claiming to be Ilhan Omar's cousin driving around with stacks of ballots explaining how he got them and what he was going to do with them.

At the time it was a civic election but the suggestion was it was a general practice.

Don't condescend to me with a back-handed compliment and an unsupported posture of superior understanding.

I saw it. You apparently did not.

I imagine the video is still on the Project Veritas website somewhere. Feel free to educate yourself.

[Rebound]

3 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

I saw the video of a guy claiming to be Ilhan Omar's cousin driving around with stacks of ballots explaining how he got them and what he was going to do with them.

At the time it was a civic election but the suggestion was it was a general practice.

Don't condescend to me with a back-handed compliment and an unsupported posture of superior understanding.

I saw it. You apparently did not.

I imagine the video is still on the Project Veritas website somewhere. Feel free to educate yourself.

You saw a video of a guy claiming to be her cousin. 
Even if he is her cousin, and he probably isn’t, that isn’t HER. 

[dialamah]

4 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

I saw the video of a guy claiming to be Ilhan Omar's cousin driving around with stacks of ballots explaining how he got them and what he was going to do with them.

At the time it was a civic election but the suggestion was it was a general practice.

Don't condescend to me with a back-handed compliment and an unsupported posture of superior understanding.

I saw it. You apparently did not.

I imagine the video is still on the Project Veritas website somewhere. Feel free to educate yourself.

Link the video.

 

[Infidel Dog]

I told where I'd look for it. That's good enough.

But what's more interesting is what I've been hearing at multiple sites of the right lately. Basically, you can't win against ballot harvesting so it becomes an "if you can't beat them join them" situation. There's a push from some Republicans to start getting good at it themselves - setting up ballot boxes in Republican areas and ballot harvesting by Republicans and such like that.

I suspect some will even go  to the dirtier side of the ballot harvesting. The Minneapolis or 2000 Mules version. When that happens though what we'll be hearing from you guys is it was Republicans doing it all along, of course. Which will be a lie, of course.

Oh what the Hell, Di...we both know you're not going to look it up. I'm not even sure you know how, so here ya go...

https://www.projectveritas.com/news/ilhan-omar-connected-cash-for-ballots-voter-fraud-scheme-corrupts-elections/

The correct response is Thank You.

Edited November 21, 2022 by Infidel Dog

[dialamah]

39 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

I told where I'd look for it. That's good enough.

But what's more interesting is what I've been hearing at multiple sites of the right lately. Basically, you can't win against ballot harvesting so it becomes an "if you can't beat them join them" situation. There's a push from some Republicans to start getting good at it themselves - setting up ballot boxes in Republican areas and ballot harvesting by Republicans and such like that.

The logic:. 

1.  We lost, therefore they cheated.

2.  They are cheating, therefore we should cheat too.

If the left was cheating why didn't they win the house?  

[dialamah]

52 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Oh what the Hell, Di...we both know you're not going to look it up. I'm not even sure you know how, so here ya go...

https://www.projectveritas.com/news/ilhan-omar-connected-cash-for-ballots-voter-fraud-scheme-corrupts-elections/

The correct response is Thank You.

I read it, thank you.

As I'm reading, I'm surprised by someone in their car boasting about the ballots they've harvested.  I'm also wondering why this examination into ballot harvesting is so focused on one incidence - couldn't the investigative journalist have found other instances to really demonstrate how ballot harvesting is so "pervasive", as one source claimed?  

Anyway, Project Veritas has a nice ring to it so I looked it up - seems it's a far-right activist group.  So that kinda answers the questions I had.

[dialamah]

This is an interesting site.  It's the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

The link takes you to a voter fraud data base, containing almost 1400 proven cases.  Most of them don't specify if the offender was Republican or Democratic, which was the first sign - for me - that it was an objective source.  The only instance I could find where the offender's politics were revealed was for a Republican.  Another sign that the information and data it provided can be trusted.

The point being that individuals engaging in voter fraud could be either Democrat or Republican.

[Infidel Dog]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

The logic:. 

1.  We lost, therefore they cheated.

2.  They are cheating, therefore we should cheat too.

If the left was cheating why didn't they win the house?  

No. They're not saying "cheat." They're saying your guys changed the rules now they have to adapt by getting better at ballot harvesting than the Prog-Comms.

Cheating is possible too. Imagine some on the right will try to beat the Progs at that as well.

[Infidel Dog]

55 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I read it, thank you.

As I'm reading, I'm surprised by someone in their car boasting about the ballots they've harvested.  I'm also wondering why this examination into ballot harvesting is so focused on one incidence - couldn't the investigative journalist have found other instances to really demonstrate how ballot harvesting is so "pervasive", as one source claimed?  

Anyway, Project Veritas has a nice ring to it so I looked it up - seems it's a far-right activist group.  So that kinda answers the questions I had.

Actually you should already know about James O Keefe and his Project Veritas. That you don't tells me you're out of touch.

But yeah, you're progressive socialists guys don't like them so they call them names. I say all you can do with that is return the favour.

But here's the problem with being out of touch. You say naive things. Only one incident? What? Are you joking. Shall we start with 2000 Mules for examples of others?

One incident at a time maybe, but only one incident? Catch up.

[dialamah]

Just now, Infidel Dog said:

Actually you should already know about James O Keefe and his Project Veritas. That you don't tells me you're out of touch.

But yeah, you're progressive socialists guys don't like them so they call them names. I say all you can do with that is return the favour.

But here's the problem with being out of touch. You say naive things. Only one incident? What? Are you joking. Shall we start with 2000 Mules for examples of others?

One incident at a time maybe, but only one incident? Catch up.

Why should I know about Project Veritas?  

2000 mules has been debunked, as have the vast majority of the claims of massive voter fraud that some repubs claim.  

 

 

[Infidel Dog]

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

 

2000 mules has been debunked, as have the vast majority of the claims of massive voter fraud that some repubs claim.  

 

 

No, it hasn't. The debunkers have been debunked. Too bad you're so out of touch. That's another on you should already know.

[DogOnPorch]

Poor voter ID standards...if any at all...combined with the ability to harvest ballots both by mail and canvasing is simply going to equal fraud. One can literally buy votes like back in the good ol' days...staple a $20 on the ballot for a signature. Not to mention the incumbent RUNNING the election in certain areas.

Nutty.

[Infidel Dog]

35 minutes ago, dialamah said:

This is an interesting site.  It's the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

The link takes you to a voter fraud data base, containing almost 1400 proven cases.  Most of them don't specify if the offender was Republican or Democratic, which was the first sign - for me - that it was an objective source.  The only instance I could find where the offender's politics were revealed was for a Republican.  Another sign that the information and data it provided can be trusted.

The point being that individuals engaging in voter fraud could be either Democrat or Republican.

That is an interesting site. Would you like me to show you how to do a search on it?

There are twice as many incidents of Democrats cheating as there are Republicans.

[DogOnPorch]

3 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

No, it hasn't. The debunkers have been debunked. Too bad you're so out of touch. That's another on you should already know.

 

2000 Mules was ignored by the left. Unwelcome news.

[dialamah]

14 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

2000 Mules was ignored by the left. Unwelcome news.

Debunked, not ignored.  The left can't help it if so many on the right are gullible.

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, dialamah said:

Debunked, not ignored.  The left can't help it if so many on the right are gullible.

 

Debunked is in the eye of the beholder. A made-up word in today's context. Debunked by whom? Those also accused of stealing the election, of course.

2000 Mules: One simply does not wish to see. So one will not. Simple as that...

 

[dialamah]

7 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Debunked is in the eye of the beholder. A made-up word in today's context. Debunked by whom? Those also accused of stealing the election, of course.

2000 Mules: One simply does not wish to see. So one will not. Simple as that...

 

Shrugs.  Those who want to see election fraud, will see that.

And that's the whole problem, isn't it?  No way of knowing who's telling the truth, and who's lying.  So one picks a team, decides they always tell the truth and the other side always lies.

It's sad.

 

[DogOnPorch]

17 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Shrugs.  Those who want to see election fraud, will see that.

 

You might have heard of the FTX scandal happening now. Then again...perhaps not, eh?

[dialamah]

Just now, DogOnPorch said:

 

You might have heard of the FTX scandal happening now. Then again...perhaps not, eh?

yes, it is big enough to hit my little world here.  It's probably the conspiracy theory that I missed - Democrats are using the billions supposedly lost to create fake people to vote for them?  Am I close?

[Hodad]

3 hours ago, dialamah said:

This is an interesting site.  It's the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

The link takes you to a voter fraud data base, containing almost 1400 proven cases.  Most of them don't specify if the offender was Republican or Democratic, which was the first sign - for me - that it was an objective source.  The only instance I could find where the offender's politics were revealed was for a Republican.  Another sign that the information and data it provided can be trusted.

The point being that individuals engaging in voter fraud could be either Democrat or Republican.

James O'Keefe is a young Roger Stone  A total scumbag who will lie, cheat and break the law to get access to people to record them and then deceptively edit the video to create calculated hit jobs. He hurts individuals and organizations- typically innocent -to score targeted, politically-timed strikes against ideological opponents. People lose their jobs, organizations have their reputations damaged, and some time after the the lies have done their harm, the truth comes out. A summary: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas

As for "Project Veritas," the name, I assume, is meant to be ironic.

Edited November 21, 2022 by Hodad

[Infidel Dog]

39 minutes ago, Hodad said:

James O'Keefe is a young Roger Stone  A total scumbag who will lie, cheat and break the law to get access to people to record them and then deceptively edit the video to create calculated hit jobs.

Or so the Prog-Comm spin machine like Wikpedia would have you believe. Anybody can smear and slur though and you're doing more of it than O'Keefe ever did.

Love the way you posture and puff to bluster us into believing you've proven some sort of point though. Message from Prog, "You've learned well, little Padawan."

 Or did you learn that from Wikipedia? Would you like some quotes on what some folks think about Wikipedia?

Anyone can smear and slur and pull selected spun facts out their butts. Too bad they don't tell you that on Wikipedia. Some us understand why they don't. Farts in a crowded elevator syndrome.

Edited November 21, 2022 by Infidel Dog

[Infidel Dog]

Also, not that it matters but you do know you grabbed the wrong quote, don't you?

I had to work on that one to figure out where you were coming from.