Image 01 Image 03

McConnell Blocks Quick Vote on $2,000 COVID Checks

McConnell Blocks Quick Vote on $2,000 COVID Checks

Trump: “Unless Republicans have a death wish, and it is also the right thing to do, they must approve the $2000 payments ASAP.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell put a stop to a quick vote that would have increased the COVID stimulus checks to $2,000 from $600.

The House voted to increase the amount on Monday, 273-134.

McConnell did not explain why he objected to the vote.

Instead, McConnell mentioned that he would like to package the checks with other concerns from President Donald Trump:

Mr. McConnell, without giving details, also said the Senate would address Mr. Trump’s concerns about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which regulates online speech, and his repeated complaints about purported election fraud. Mr. Trump has blamed fraud for his election loss, but no significant fraud has emerged.

“This week the Senate will begin a process to bring these three priorities into focus,” the Kentucky Republican said on the Senate floor. He didn’t comment on whether the items could potentially be linked together in one bill for a vote, or if they could receive separate votes. A spokesman also declined to comment on the plans.

Mr. McConnell also scheduled a vote for Wednesday to override President Trump’s veto of the bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act, after the House held its own vote and overrode the veto by a large bipartisan majority on Monday.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) then objected to McConnell “scheduling a quick vote on overriding Trump’s veto on NDAA.”

Trump pushed the Republicans to pass the stimulus checks now.

Experts believed the COVID checks faced a challenge in the Senate. But after the House passed its bill, five Republican senators agreed to increase the checks to $2,000. This includes the two Georgia senators, who face a run-off on January 5:

But after the House passed the bill, five Republicans have signaled that they back increasing the size of the stimulus checks. Sens. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), Josh Hawley (R., Mo.) and Deb Fischer (R., Neb.) have all voiced support to increase the checks. Notably, Georgia Republican incumbent Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, who are engaged in runoff races that will determine control of the Senate, both said Tuesday that they support the president’s call to increase the stimulus checks.

“I’m delighted to support the president in this $2,000,” Mr. Perdue said on Fox News. “It’s really a $1,400 increment over what we’ve done… It’s the right thing to do for people in Georgia.”

The senators did not say they agree with the House bill or if they want to amend the bill and send it back to the House.

Fischer is worried about combining the checks with the other priorities into one legislation bill. She noted that “you end up with bad policy.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | December 29, 2020 at 4:05 pm

GOPe does have a Death Wish along with the DEMS.


Epic Anti-Mask Flash Mob Takes Over CVS Shouting ‘FREEDOM’

Gatrway Pundit

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital. | December 29, 2020 at 10:19 pm

    “……. So he is admitting the toxic political issue of the $2,000 denial will exist to benefit the democrats in the race. Accept this.

    Second, McConnell knows a second bill with all three elements will not pass the House. McConnell knows it is a pure political posturing exercise that will produce nothing, yet provide more justification for his blockage.

    Once you stop being a battered conservative; meaning once you accept that McConnell knows he is creating a dynamic that supports the GA democrats; then you move to the question: ‘why would McConnell take an action that would put him in the minority?’

    On its face the question seems absurd; however, it only seems absurd because people don’t understand the schemes in the upper chamber, the Senate, under Leader McConnell and Leader Harry Reid before him. The institution of the Senate requires a voter to understand the shell game. The pea is never where you think it is.

    Defenders of the Decepticon schemes rely on our inability to understand a hidden agenda; a secret agenda… However, with more eyes now open this outline will start to make sense.

    First, McConnell doesn’t care about holding a majority position in the Senate. Whether he is a majority leader or a minority leader doesn’t matter to McConnell. In fact McConnell’s political skill-set does better in the minority than the majority.

    The preferred political position for Mitch McConnell is where he has between 45 and 49 republican Senators, and the Democrats hold the Majority with around 55. Of course with Senator Harry Reid’s retirement, this would now imply Majority leader Chuck Schumer holding office.

    Why does McConnell prefer the minority position?

    The answer is where you have had to actually follow Mitch McConnell closely to see how he works. When the Majority has around 52 to 55 seats, they need McConnell to give them 8 to 9 votes to overcome the three-fifths (60 vote) threshold for their legislative needs. It is in the process of trade and payment for those 8 to 9 votes where McConnell makes more money, and holds more power, than as a sitting Majority Leader.

    The 60 vote threshold, and McConnell’s incredible skillset in the minority, is where he shines. Each of the needed votes to achieve sixty is worth buckets of indulgence to the minority leader and those on K-Street who need the Senate to support their legislative constructs. The votes to get to sixty are worth a lot of money…..”

    The Last Refuge

Why hasn’t EVERYONE made a mad rush to re-register to unaffiliated independent yet? Why would anyone want to be a Republican after everything they have done for the Democrats? Do it now!

    Well, they got their party back. That said, American conservatives are not, in principle, diversitists, and do not exercise liberal license to indulge color judgments. Neither are libertarians.

    Some states require a party affiliation to vote in that party’s primary, don’t switch from unaffiliated to a party in time & you can’t vote in the primary at all

      Antifundamentalist in reply to rocky71. | December 29, 2020 at 5:06 pm

      I’m in Florida. I haven’t ever been able to vote in a primary because I have no party affiliation. This year, a majority voted to end that but it was not enough of a majority to change the rule, so I still have no voice in who becomes president.

        You have the same say everyone else has in who becomes president. More, because you’re in a swing state. You have no say in whom a party you don’t support should nominate as its candidate, and nor should you.

        In fact, in my opinion merely checking off a box on a voter registration form should not be enough to vote in a primary. You should have to pay membership fees to the party, or at least make a sworn declaration that you support the party’s goals and ideals, and pledge to vote for its candidates. Otherwise what gives you (and thousands like you) the right to dictate to that party whom it must run?

          51% unaffiliated, 22% Democrat, 22% Republican, 5% other. You figure it out.

          sestamibi in reply to Milhouse. | December 29, 2020 at 7:26 pm

          Well, I don’t know if I’d go that far as to embrace the British model, in which party membership and nominal dues (of what 5-10 pounds) required. The concept of a party primary is a uniquely American one, with political parties in Europe nominating candidates by “lists” or my local party associations, although I understand the Conservative party did experiment with an open primary to choose its London mayoral candidate last time around (and someone correct me if I’m wrong on that).

          As for Amendment 3 (I’m in Florida too), it got 57%, less than the 60% required for approval. We dodged a bullet on that, because it would have adopted the California style “top two” format, which has really turbocharged radical politics in the Golden State. The GOP came out strong against it, but didn’t publicize the issue much. I don’t know where the Dems stood, but they had a lot to lose since this ain’t California and in many locations the top two would most likely be Republicans and the Dems shut out.

          Bottom line is that the purpose of the party primary is to choose the party’s candidates for the general election and the closed primary, with public party affiliation declared in advance works best to secure the integrity of this process. Even in states with open primaries where no party registration is required, the voter must choose the party ballot on the spot and cannot cross over to vote for different candidates of different parties for different offices. Sometimes the voter must request the party ballot, which choice is recorded (“open primary, public choice” where which primary you chose is public, but your ballot is still secret), and in other states the both choice of party and candidates is concealed (“open primary, private choice”).

          Complicating the issue further is that party officials (precinct committee members, state committee members, delegates to various conventions) are often chosen at primaries as well, and it would be unfair to let non-party members make those choices. Even California closes its primary for the purpose of electing county central committee members.

          So keep the primaries closed. If you want to participate, declare your affiliation. It costs nothing.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | December 29, 2020 at 11:57 pm

          51% unaffiliated, 22% Democrat, 22% Republican, 5% other. You figure it out.

          Figure what out? You persist in the delusion that political parties somehow benefit from having people registered in their name. They don’t. All they care about is how you vote.

          TheOldZombie in reply to Milhouse. | December 30, 2020 at 12:22 am

          I agree with you here. I’m in Florida and a Republican. I should have no say in who the Democrats want to run for office. Democrats should have no say in who Republicans want to run for office. This of course applies to all other parties as well. Member of the Green Party? You’ve no business telling other parties who they should run for office.

          And those who are in neither party should have no say on either party. If you don’t want to be in a party that’s fine but you shouldn’t expect to be able to tell the parties who they should have for candidates.

          And that’s the way it should be for the entire nation.

          @milhouse: My point has nothing to do with being a member of a “club”. Think of it from the point of view of the party leadership and of the pollsters. If your party is suffering losses in membership (this is where you pause to think and absorb a vital point) to the point that there is a stampede out the door, that doesn’t matter? Really? How ignorant can you be?

          The pollsters make major assumptions about how registered voters based on which party they belong to. They are clueless about the unaffiliated voters. So the fastest growing party to the point of being larger than “both” Uniparty wings combined keeps growing and that doesn’t matter? What a moron.

          Antifundamentalist in reply to Milhouse. | December 30, 2020 at 11:50 am

          The fact that two totally Private Organizations have the power to determine who becomes President is just flat out wrong on so many levels. From my perspective, all primaries should be open and the top two candidates should be sent on to run, regardless of party. Then maybe we could have a chance at someone who isn’t bought and paid for. Every American should have a voice from the start.

          lgbmiel in reply to Milhouse. | December 30, 2020 at 12:16 pm

          Political parties should not be deciding anything!

          They are private organizations which only work to amass more power and money for the people of its own organization!!!!

          We need to do everything we can to strip political parties of their power!!!

          Individual constituents are to control our elected officials not political parties!!!

      malclave in reply to rocky71. | December 30, 2020 at 1:18 am

      California here. GOP has a closed primary, so only registered Republicans can vote in it, but that only applies to the Presidential race. And by the time the primary comes around, the race is pretty much over.

      Switched to “No Party Preference” a few years ago. If I really want to, I can vote in the Democrat primary that way.

    The way I see it, Republicans on the right, Socialist’s on the left…
    Everyone else lost somewhere in between.

    Why would the Republicans care how you’re registered? In what way do you imagine this would hurt them?

McConnel knows if he let’s the stimulous stand alone, it will fly right through.
But that is the leverage he needs in the larger bill, which wouldn’t stand a chance without it.

A refundable credit and public smoothing functions (“welfare”) to fill in the missing links.

$2,000 Now will only make that loaf of bread in a couple years more expensive, and any money saved worth less. Shame somehow those who really need it or else can’t just be the ones getting it.

    snopercod in reply to Skip. | December 29, 2020 at 9:28 pm

    Exactly! I don’t want or need any government handouts…Well, I’m on Social Security so that statement sounds a little hypocritical, doesn’t it?

No, the right thing to do is to:
1- Cut the pork.
2- Stop the lock-downs and let Americans work freely.

Trump knows about poison pills and land mines. He’s laying lots of them around as he heads for the door.

Watch- it’s only going to get better between now and inauguration— and this is just the stuff we will know about.

Independent is the ONLY party any reasonable person should belong to. All others are extremist.

As long as someone is trying for a larger bill, might as well add a law that every precinct in every State must, with one month of a federal election, forensically audit every portion of that election, from the poll books, to the paper ballot, the machine with its software, to the computer image, to the tally. Every step along the way has observers in a position to see and evaluate procedures and decisions, and video recording at every step. Mandatory reports to all sitting chairs and co-chairs in the house and senate with copies to DOJ.

GOP commits Mitchmcide for New Yer.

“Mr. Trump has blamed fraud for his election loss, but no significant fraud has emerged.”

The Wall Street Journal – an allegedly conservative publication – is playing a high risk / low reward game. The evidence of voting fraud this past November was massive and beyond dispute, but the NeverTrumpers who run the WSJ are trying to use the stolen election for their own greedy, power-hungry ends. Rather than take on Trump and beat him “fair and square” for control of the Republican Party, they want to use the brownshirts of the Communist Party and their massive voting fraud apparatus to do their dirty work for them.

Once Trump is vanquished, the NeverTrumpers believe they can restore the politics of the GOP to its pre-Trump corporatist socialism days, complete with its support for open borders, gun control, government-run healthcare, and a crackdown on the free speech of the Deplorables. If you listen to what they say, the NeverTrumpers are convinced the Communists will overreach and the GOO will come roaring back in 2022 and beyond – although why the Communists will suddenly start allowing honest elections again is never explained.

The reality is that the NeverTrumpers in the GOP are playing the role of Franz von Pappen, who irrationally believed he could outwit Hitler after helping to make him Chancellor of Germany. The inevitable crumbling of the NeverTrumpers’ boneheaded strategy is already taking place, as the Communists are well on the road to stealing two more House elections (in New York and Iowa). In the two US Senate runoffs in Georgia next week the Trafalgar Poll (IMO the most accurate poll over the last three election cycles) show slight leads for the two Communist candidates. If this turns out to be so, then even a modest level of voting fraud will be more than sufficient to drag Ossoff and Warnock over the finish line.

We will see if the WSJ and the rest of the Franz von Pappen NeverTrumpers are still enamored with their anti-Trump win-by-losing strategy in the dark months and years to come.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | December 30, 2020 at 1:08 pm


“They’re Scared of Me and They Should Be” – Dominion Whistleblower Says CEO Lied During Michigan Testimony — Personally Witnessed Internet Connections Between Machines

Is anyone ever going to investigate this POS with all his dirty dealings? In fact, the entire Republican party is due for a good fumigation.

We dodged a bullet here in Florida with that vote for the open primary/top 2 are the candidates.
California has this and it has resulted in the cities voting two Democrats on the ballot.
There is no Republican to even vote for in a protest vote.