Will John Boehner Betray his nation on Second Amendment and Immigration?

It looks like House Speaker John Boehner may be paving the way for two of his biggest caves - on gun control and on immigration. If he does, it will mean that he will essentially be throwing in with the Democrats at the expense of a majority of his own caucus. It will be a colossal betrayal. We're talking Benedict Arnold type betrayal.

It would also make him a bald-faced busted... liar.

The 'Hastert Rule', named after Boehner's Republican predecessor Dennis Hastert, says that no bill will get a vote unless it has the support of a majority of the caucus. The Toomey-Manchin gun control legislation would not garner a majority of the caucus, which should make it DOA because Boehner has supported the Hastert Rule, though only when it seems to suit him, which doesn't seem to apply with the Toomey-Manchin bill.

Via the Washington Post (h/t Hot Air):

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) signaled Thursday that he may continue to bypass a House Republican rule that has required any legislation being voted upon to have the support of a majority of the GOP conference.

Boehner has flouted the so-called “Hastert Rule” — named for former GOP House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) — on a few pieces of key legislation so far this year, which hasn’t sat well with some conservatives.

He said at a news conference Thursday that he will continue to try and follow it in spirit, but also suggested he might well violate it for upcoming votes on guns, immigration and the budget.

“Listen: It was never a rule to begin with,” Boehner said. “And certainly my prerogative – my intention is to always pass bills with strong Republican support.”

Boehner in early March sought to reassure his conference that the rule would continue to be regular practice, but he broke it again earlier this week.

A common theme - demonstrated by Toomey - is that Republicans are incapable of presenting a united front on important matters. There always seems to be just the right number of votes from their caucus to give the Democrats what they want. In this case, if Boehner breaks the Hastert Rule on gun control, it will mean he knows the legislation will pass with a Democratic minority, coupled with a few Republican peel-aways. It will make Boehner a traitor to his party but more important, a traitor to the Constitution in general and its second amendment in particular.

On another huge issue to conservatives, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) more than just slightly rankled the right wing of his party when he became one of the 'gang of eight' and joined with the likes of Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Bob Menendez (D-NJ), John McCain (R-AZ), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on immigration reform (amnesty). The left will display photos of Rubio standing with them at a podium for years to come.

What Rubio didn't seem to understand or care about was that nothing - absolutely nothing - good could come out of his joining with those Senators.

Now, Boehner is hinting that he will betray conservatives on another promise. That promise is that he would honor regular order, which in the case of the monstrosity that is the immigration bill, is all that more important. Like the 2009 stimulus bill and the 2010 Obamacare bill, page numbers end with four digits.

Via Breitbart:

According to a recent Politico report, Boehner is seriously considering abandoning regular order to rush through immigration reform. Regular orders is the process by which a bill is supposed to come up through the respective committees of jurisdiction and allow members of those committees to offer amendments, an open and transparent process that then is supposed to continue on the House floor.

“The GOP is also mulling skipping the committee process and instead having lengthy discussions among Republicans to work out the legislation’s kinks,” Politico’s Jake Sherman wrote in the report. “This would allow leading conservatives who are crafting the deal with Democrats to explain the policy. That seems to be the preferred path, according to conversations with several GOP aides.”

Ain't that something. With that as a potential reality, it would mean that Boehner only feigned outrage when he slammed down the 1100 page Stimulus bill in 2009 because, for one thing, it was being rammed through without consideration for... wait for it... regular order:



Ah, the tale of two Boehners. First, the tough-talking Boehner can adequately express outrage when he has no power. Since becoming Speaker, he's rarely expressed even a modicum of that kind of indignation. Now that Boehner is in the majority and holding the gavel, he's just might be willing to do with a 1500 page immigration bill what he was so adamantly against being done with an 1100 page stimulus bill.

This would make him a liar in addition to being a weak leader. Apparently, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) agrees.

Democratic politicians should be recognized for one thing; they hardly ever break ranks. United fronts abound. Perhaps one of the best examples is the Senate vote on Bill Clinton's impeachment. Not one Democrat voted to remove him from office. It worked for them then and it's a strategy they've replicated many times over since.

Republicans, on the other hand, are behaving as if they want to lose the 2014 mid-terms because - as a group - they're incapable of standing on principle and are walking all over themselves to hand the Democrats victory after victory.

Pat Toomey and Bart Stupak now share something in common

In 2010, the Obamacare debacle was crammed down the throats of the American people but not before an alleged 'pro-life' Democratic congressman named Bart Stupack (D-MI) sold out. If you remember, the House version of the bill had a provisions in it that prohibited funding for abortion. That provision did not pass in the Senate's version.

The final vote was extremely contentious and arm-twisting was in no short supply. Even then, the Stupak dozen was the only thing that stood in the way of passage. Then, Stupak caved and settled for a meaningless Executive Order from Barack Obama that guaranteed no funding for abortion in the bill. In short, Stupak sold out to Obama.

Pro-life Democrats had been "Stupaked" and Obamacare became law.

In 2010, Stupak resigned; he did not seek reelection; The Tea Party helped get a Republican to replace him. Something else happened in 2010. The Tea Party got behind Pat Toomey to replace RINO Senator Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania. By all accounts, Toomey was a true conservative and had an "A" rating from the NRA. The Tea Party wave swept Toomey into office after Specter was so far behind in the polls that he switched over to the Democratic Party, where he thought he had a better chance of winning.

In 2012, Stupak expressed regret for what honest people would say was a betrayal.

Toomey apparently didn't learn the right lesson from Stupak because he has betrayed the gun rights crowd. Period.

Here in 2013, less than six months after the Sandy Hook shootings, several conservative Republican Senators had threatened to filibuster any bill that came to the floor. It would be Rand Paul times ten. Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), and others pledged to join in. For once, it appeared that Republicans were going to stand united and go to the mat with the Democrats on something important.

All they had to do was stick to their principles and stand united. In fact, during such a filibuster, one of the Senators would likely stumble upon the contrast between how the Obama administration handled operation Fast and Furious and how it is exploiting Sandy Hook. It would be a tremendous opportunity to expose the administration. Perhaps that is why a filibuster would be so undesired by the Obama.

This is where Toomey appears to have channeled Bart Stupak. He came to a deal with Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), a supposed pro-second amendment Democrat, on expanding background checks. A consequence of this deal is that the filibuster may be prevented. That Manchin caved to pressure is not surprising. That Toomey did very much is. He's not only a Republican. He was supposed to be a conservative Tea Party Republican who took a lot of money from the NRA in 2010 to get elected, in much the same way that Stupak accepted the support of pro-life Democrats

How do we know Toomey caved? Very simple.

Obama congratulated him and so did Michael Bloomberg.

The NRA is also not satisfied with the Toomey / Manchin bill.

Larry Pratt, the Executive Director at Gun Owners of America (GOA) says Toomey has "betrayed" (Stupaked) his constituents. Pratt is now calling for Toomey to be primaried:



By the way, for those who don't see expanded background checks as a big step toward confiscation, check out this firsthand account about what happened in Canada:

Did Senator Pat Toomey just have his 'Rick Santorum endorses Arlen Specter' moment?

In 2004, then Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) endorsed incumbent Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey. It was a contributing factor to Santorum's loss to Bob Casey in 2006. In 2010, the showdown between Toomey and Specter began anew. With Tea Party support, Toomey won.

Last month, during Rand Paul's now famous filibuster, Toomey was one of several Republican Senators who dined with Barack Obama as Paul ate candy bars.

Now, in what appears to be an effort to prevent a filibuster on gun control, Toomey and Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) have come together on a compromise bill. As news begins to trickle out, what initially seemed like an inexplicably bone-headed decision by Toomey to reach across the aisle is now no less boneheaded but a little less inexplicable.

Via the Daily Caller:

New York mayor Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun group announced Wednesday that it will stop running a negative television ad targeting Sen. Pat Toomey now that the Pennsylvania Republican has signed on to a proposal to expand background checks to gun show and online firearms purchases.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns had been hammering Toomey, a junior senator with an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association, with negative ads in Keystone State. But his latest proposal, which he is co-sponsoring with West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, has Bloomberg and company singing a different tune.

The coalition’s initial negative ad featured an urgent-voiced narrator who said, “Tell Senator Toomey, don’t protect criminals…Demand action now,” and displayed Toomey’s office phone number. Now the coalition is running a positive ad praising Toomey.

At first blush, it would seem that Toomey could be selling out the second amendment in the interest of getting re-elected.

VIDEO: TOOMEY TALKS JOBSGATE ON MORNING JOE

Democrats control both Houses of congress and there is no way Eric Holder is going to launch an investigation. Joe Sestak's opponent, Pat Toomey has the ability to be a lightning rod in this scandal. No one person in the media can control it. The scandal will either have a life of its own or it won't. Toomey, on the other hand, has the power to make hay over it.

The only way this scandal continues becoming a big deal is if public opinion drives it. Right now, the media is driving public opinion by continuing to cover it so Toomey's input can remain minimal. If the story dies down in the media, Toomey will have to drive it again.

So far, he is chiming in on the scandal and is calmly stating that something stinks here. That's exactly what he should be doing and he does so again on MSNBC'S Morning Joe.

An excellent point made by Toomey in this exchange is his Senate run in 2004 and the Republican establishment wanting him to drop out of that race because it had thrown its support behind Arlen Specter. Toomey says that he was never offered a job to drop out.

h/t to Hot Air

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

VIDEO: PAT TOOMEY ON JOBSGATE

Pennsylvania Senate candidate Pat Toomey (R) appeared on Sean Hannity's television show and discussed the 'Jobsgate' scandal involving his opponent Joe Sestak and the White House. I thought Toomey did well in publicly talking about the issue and hinting that he believes there is a legitimate problem. That said, Hannity pressed him a bit on the statement released by Toomey's office, saying that he thought it should have been tougher.

As this scandal heats up, Toomey should lead the charge to blow it open. To Hannity's credit, after reading the statement from Toomey's office (below the video), he was right to push Toomey on it. At this point, I think Toomey did fine in his appearance. As long as the media continues to run with the story, he can probably sit back a little but if it shows any sign of dying down, he needs to whip out the bellows and get it going again. As I wrote HERE, this scandal is much bigger than Toomey's personal aspirations.

Via Fox


HERE is Toomey's statement referred to by Hannity in the above interview.

For Immediate Release—May 24, 2010

Contact: Nachama Soloveichik • Communications Director • 484.809.7994 • 646.528.1029
Contact: Kristin Anderson • Deputy Communications Director • 484.809.7994 • 612.280.5196
Contact: Tim Kelly • Press Secretary • 484.809.7994

Allentown, PA – U.S. Senate candidate Pat Toomey issued the following statement today about allegations that the White House offered Rep. Joe Sestak a job in exchange for exiting the U.S. Senate race:

“From day one, our campaign has been focused on the critical issues facing Pennsylvania, like jobs, the economy, and a federal government that’s on an out-of-control spending spree. That’s where our focus will remain. To that end, Congressman Joe Sestak’s support for the policies that are bankrupting our country and killing jobs is of much greater concern to me than whatever deal-making was done between him and the White House.

“Having said that, by virtue of the nonstop inquiries coming into our campaign from members of the media, we are compelled to respond to what is now being commonly referred to as ‘job-gate.’ My response is simply this: Congressman Sestak should tell the public everything he knows about the job he was offered, and who offered it. To do otherwise will only continue to raise questions and continue to be a needless distraction in this campaign. Joe and I disagree on many important issues, from health care, to bailouts, to the unprecedented debt being racked up in Washington. That’s what our campaign should be about, rather than these other matters. Joe can clear that all away by simply disclosing all the facts that he knows, and I urge him to do that.”

Hannity addressed that statement perfectly with Toomey. He lightly pressed him and then got him to publicly admit this is a big deal. Toomey did a very decent job of answering the questions but he needs to be prepared to help drive this scandal, not because it will help him defeat Sestak but because it's the right thing for him to do for his country.

Via Fox News

IT'S TIME TO START TALKIN' TOOMEY

My latest column is posted over at the American Thinker and is about the percolating scandal involving Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) and his admission in February that the White House offered him a job in return for his dropping out of the primary with Arlen Specter. Sestak's defeat of Specter presents a significant problem for both himself and the White House because if his claim - which he refuses to explain in detail - is true, it would implicate the White House in the commission of a felony.

After writing the column, I noticed that I referred to Sestak being interviewed on KDKA 1020 in Pittsburgh by Mike Pintek but didn't give any details of it. For the record, on May 19th, Pintek confronted Sestak on this issue for two minutes - after having interviewed Pat Toomey - and Sestak bungled it; big time. I will be playing those two minutes on my May 23rd show so be sure to check the radio show archives and download the podcast.

Via American Thinker:

May 23, 2010
Will Toomey Play Hardball with Sestak?
Ben Barrack

When Joe Sestak defeated Arlen Specter to secure the Democratic nomination for Senator of Pennsylvania, you could almost feel the White House cringe. Although it's too early to say that Sestak's loose lips in a February media interview with Larry Kane could sink the Obama administration's ship, his primary win almost certainly has the White House scrambling for sandbags to reinforce the stonewall.

Sestak clammed up in that interview after admitting that someone in the administration offered him a job in July to drop out of the primary -- presumably, that job was Secretary of the Navy. The problem is that the claim implicates the administration in the commission of at least one felony and Sestak could be implicating himself in the misprision of a felony as long as he remains silent about what job was offered and who offered it.

Republican candidate Pat Toomey is now running against Sestak and told KDKA radio's Mike Pintek on May 19th that he will run his campaign like he's twenty points down in what is, on paper a close race. If he means that, perhaps he should shine the spotlight on this scandal now that he is on a national stage.

On its face, a strategy that involves calling national media attention...

Click HERE to read entire column.

HERE is the U.S. Statue involved.

DARRELL ISSA KEEPING PRESSURE ON SESTAK SCANDAL

It is awesome to see that Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) will not be letting up when it comes to getting to the bottom of the alleged job offer given to Rep. Joe Sestak by the White House in exchange for Sestak's dropping out of his race with Arlen Specter, who has since lost the nomination for the Senate seat he has held for decades in Pennsylvania. If the White House was cringing when Sestak admitted in February to Larry Kane that he was offered a quid-pro-quo deal, it is doubling over now.

POLITICO reports on Issa's latest ratcheting:

A leading House Republican is threatening to file an ethics complaint against Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) if he doesn’t reveal who in the White House offered him a job to drop out of the Pennsylvania Senate primary.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the top Republican on the Oversight and Government Reform committee, said Sestak needs to explain what job he was offered and who at the White House was involved. Sestak, who beat Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) in the Democratic Senate primary on Tuesday, said on a Philadelphia radio station in February that the White House offered him a job to drop out of the race.

Let's not forget Issa's recent grilling of Attorney General Eric Holder on this issue. Holder was defenseless and clueless - shocker.



h/t to Free Republic

CORNYN STILL DOESN'T GET IT

There are some thick-headed Republican senators out there who just never seem to wise up. Texas senator John Cornyn voted for TARP despite his constituents overwhelmingly telling him not to. Those constituents were proven right. Back in May, as Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Cornyn threw his support behind Florida Governor Charlie Crist for the 2010 SENATE RACE there despite conservative objections that it was too early and that Crist was too moderate.

Lo and behold, Marco Rubio is now neck and neck with Crist. Instead of Cornyn deferring to the conservative base of the Republican party after they proved him wrong again, he continues to double down, saying that conservatives need to be more realistic in their expectations in the 2010 elections.

Imagine how this race would look like now had the The National Republican Senatorial Committee, chaired by Cornyn, withheld support for Crist and let things play out. Erick Erickson at RED STATE also points out that the NRSC also scoffed at Pat Toomey's chances in Pennsylvania against Arlen Specter. Specter is now a reeling Democrat who looks very vulnerable.

So Cornyn and the NRSC jump into bed with Charlie Crist because of the poll numbers in Florida and now Crist is tied to or behind Marco Rubio. The NRSC also said Pat Toomey was not a viable alternative to Arlen Specter and even after Specter jumped to the Democrats, the NRSC worked valiantly to try to convince every other Republican in Pennsylvania to get in so they wouldn’t have to deal with Toomey.

Erickson goes on to explain the issue Cornyn and Republicans seeking to put up moderate candidates are facing:

Here is the problem for the NRSC and the Republican Establishment.

They are panicked.

The tea party movement outpolls the GOP.

The conservative challengers are performing as well as or better than the establishment picks.

The NRSC lost in Pennsylvania.
The NRSC is going to lose in Florida and California.
The NRSC is losing in Kentucky.
The NRSC may very well lose in Colorado and New Hampshire.

On a different but related note, everyone needs to remember what happened in 2004. Rick Santorum, along with Bush, threw his support behind Specter in the primaries, thereby dissing Toomey at the time. Specter won and Pennsylvania had two Republican senators. In 2006, Santorum lost his seat to Democrat Bob Casey in part, due to a lack of conservative turnout. In 2009, Specter became a Democrat.

End result? In late 2006, Pennsylvania had two Republican senators. In 2009, it had 2 Democrat senators by following the moderate Republican model.

No thanks. Cornyn needs to pipe down and get in line.

Read the WHOLE THING