Connect with us

Congress

GLOVES OFF: Trump Calls Pelosi a ‘Third-Grade Politician’ in Contentious Face-to-Face Meeting

The President is sick of these Democrat witch hunters.

Published

1 year ago

on

Reports from today’s meeting between President Donald Trump and Democratic Party leaders, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD), show that the President is ready for war and no longer pulling any punches against his adversaries.

Following the meeting, Trump and Pelosi bashed each other publicly and called each other unhinged. It was clear that Trump’s aggressive and biting rhetoric had really flustered Pelosi.

Trump is demonstrating he will not play ball with political opposition that is desperate to evict him from office undemocratically under any circumstances. The White House is putting the blame on the Democrats for storming out of the meeting abruptly after they were triggered by Trump’s remarks.

“The President was measured, factual and decisive, while Speaker Pelosi’s decision to walk out was baffling, but not surprising. She had no intention of listening or contributing to an important meeting on national security issues. While Democratic leadership chose to storm out and get in front of the cameras to whine, everyone else in the meeting chose to stay in the room and work on behalf of this country,” White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham said.

Trump kept trolling Pelosi on Twitter, posting a photograph from the meeting when Pelosi was throwing a child’s tantrum:

Trump has already gotten Pelosi to blink, as she and other House Democratic leaders like Rep. Adam “Shifty” Schiff (D-CA) are too scared to put the impeachment inquiry against Trump to a formal vote:

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has said that he “may not” put the impeachment inquiry up to a vote in the House, as Democratic Party leaders prepare to push the measure unilaterally.

The House Intelligence Committee Chairman could be worried about putting House Democrats who serve in more conservative districts on the record heading into next year’s contentious general elections.

“We may have a vote on an impeachment proceeding, or we may not have a vote. Ultimately that will be the decision that we make together with our leadership. But no one should be under the apprehension or misapprehension that were we to vote and authorize, by the full vote of the House, an impeachment inquiry that that will in any way stop the White House complaints, attacks, etc,” Schiff said at an event in New York City on Monday.

“They will just move on to the next hurdle they want to put in the way. So, we should be clear about what is happening here. This is merely an effort to delay, distract, deter. And we will not be delayed, and we won’t be distracted, and we will not be deterred,” he added…

Schiff is acting like he does not care about the implications that a vote on the impeachment inquiry may have during next year’s election.

“Let the chips fall where they may,” he said during the Monday event.

But the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans are calling Schiff’s bluff. They continue to demand a full vote on the impeachment inquiry, and certainly would point out the Democrats in conservative-leaning districts who joined in on their party’s extreme partisan witch hunt against the President.

Democrats are already getting a taste of what they will have to face off against if they actually go through with impeaching Trump, and they are not liking it one bit.

Congress

Democrat Black Farmers Bill Would Give Away $8 Billion of Land Yearly in Reparations Program

South Africa-style land redistribution?

Published

16 hours ago

on

Nov 24, 2020

By

Democrat Senators are touting new legislation that would purchase national farmland and give it away to Black Americans for free.

Democrats Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Elizabeth Warren are sponsoring the the Justice for Black Farmers Act, which seems likely to be the most wide-ranging affirmative action program ever enacted if it’s signed into law. It’s not inaccurate to call the bill a reparations program.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The law establishes preferences for Black Americans within Department of Agriculture policy. Blacks would be granted free land purchased by the federal government, in total increments that appear to add up to $8 billion a year.

An undersecretary of a USDA “Equitable Land Access Service” would be entrusted with purchasing(using taxpayer funds) and redistributing land. The reparation bill appropriates for a massive 20,000 grants annually over ten years, adding up to a total redistribution package of $80 billion.

The under-secretary would be commissioned to “(1) purchase from willing sellers, at a price not greater than fair market value, available agricultural land in the United States; and (2) subject to section 205, convey grants of that land to eligible Black individuals at no cost to the eligible Black individuals.”

If the bill redistributes 160 acres per grant, it would ultimately end up transferring 1.6% of the total land in the continental United States for free.

Democrats cite a decline in the numbers of black farmers since the 1920’s as an impetus for the bill, pointing out that there were 1 million black farmers in 1920 and 50,000 today. Such logic ignores that the number of American farmers broadly has declined sharply as the United States transitioned to an industrial economy, and that millions of Black Americans who worked under poor conditions as sharecroppers in the American South have long since moved to northern cities.

The bill is somewhat similar to South African racial land redistribution policies, which differ primarily in that they forcibly nationalized land owned by Afrikaner farmers and redistributed them to South African Blacks. South Africa’s land reforms in the name of “equity” have proven to generally be a failure, with novel farmers unable to utilize the land they’ve been gifted in a manner beneficial to society. South Africa has transitioned from a bountiful agricultural society known as the “bread basket of Africa” to a net food importer, with experts pointing to arbitrary land redistribution as a factor in doing so.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending

 
Thanks for sharing!
We invite you to become a Big League Politics insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.