NY21 - Stefanik - My Despicable Congresswoman

[Estiveo]

[RTH10260]

I quite like this.

Stefanik Better Off.jpg

Let's have a Congress hearing and look at her bank accounts and find those Chinese business contacts

[pipistrelle]

I want to know how that happened.

[p0rtia]

Ghost writer for Kristi Noem?

[p0rtia]

She gets fifty cents from Matt Gaetz every time MTG makes an idiot of herself?

[MN-Skeptic]

Ron Filipkowski
@RonFilipkowski

At the invitation of the Speaker of the Israeli Knesset, Elise Stefanik makes a partisan political speech today attacking the President of the U.S. and praising Donald Trump. Apparently, the current government of Israel thinks this is the smart way forward.

[pipistrelle]

Didn't watch. Was not aware she is new Secretary of State. How'd I miss that?

[pipistrelle]

From her congressional site (didn't give it a click; it was in the search results):

The rate of assaults on law enforcement officers hit a 10 year HIGH. This is unacceptable.

She found the attack on the Capitol and Metro Police unacceptable, right?

[MN-Skeptic]

Aaron Rupar
@atrupar

Yikes! Elise Stefanik gets big mad at Fox News Sunday's Shannon Bream when Bream asks her about calling Trump a "whack job" and "insulting to women" during the 2016 cycle: "Well Shannon, it's a disgrace that you would quote the New York Times with nameless, faceless--"

"They're quoting your friends," Bream replies. "To be fair, there are a number of names of people who are quoted in the article."

Fun to see the push back from Fox News as Stefanik is desperate to show that she is a long time loyal Trump supporter in spite of her words in 2016.

[Mrich]

From the tweet thread responses, here is a gift link to the NYT article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/31/us/p ... =url-share

[pipistrelle]

“She knows exactly what she’s signed up for,” said Kate Yearwood Young, a former friend from Harvard. “There was no radicalization.”

That's how I see it.

[Kendra]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 0323&ei=32

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) are demanding answers about a delay into an investigation of a judge's comments about former President Donald Trump.

The two sent a letter to the Office of the Circuit Executive of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Monday, seeking information about the status of the complaint filed by Stefanik regarding Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
k alleged in her original complaint in December 2023 that Howell made a "highly inappropriate political speech" during the Women’s White Collar Defense Association's gala the previous month. She specifically pointed to Howell allegedly pushing partisan statements and commenting on proceedings involving Trump that were pending before the court.

Trump was indicted in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for charges related to his alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election in a case prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith.

In the joint letter sent to the circuit executive, the pair of Republicans said that "the status of Representative Stefanik’s complaint and its contents remain unaddressed — notwithstanding Representative Stefanik’s having filed her complaint three times and via different methods." They also claimed the executive at one point said her complaint had been incorrectly filed.

[raison de arizona]

Why Stefanik’s new ethics complaint against Judge Merchan matters
House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik is apparently trying to corner the market in filing ethics complaints. Judge Juan Merchan is her new target.

As assorted partisans compete for Donald Trump’s attention, his would-be running mates each try to excel in a specific area. For her part, House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik is apparently trying to corner the market in baseless ethics complaints. Axios reported:

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) filed an ethics complaint Tuesday accusing the judge presiding over former President Trump’s New York hush money trial of a conflict of interest, Axios has learned. ... The letter is unlikely to have an immediate effect on the trial, but it’s the latest chapter in Trump allies attempting to defend the former president by lodging complaints against the judge and prosecutors involved in the case.

The Axios report has not been independently verified by MSNBC or NBC News, though the New York congresswoman confirmed to the outlet that she believes Judge Juan Merchan has run afoul of state ethics laws.

The allegations are difficult to take seriously, but the point of this political gesture is not to present a compelling case to the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct. Indeed, the commission’s members aren’t even the intended audience. Rather, this is about Stefanik trying to score cheap points with Mar-a-Lago.

Or, more to the point, Stefanik is trying to score cheap points with Mar-a-Lago again.

It was after all just a few weeks ago when the House GOP conference chair filed an ethics complaint against special counsel Jack Smith.

Which came on the heels of the GOP lawmaker filing a formal complaint against New York Attorney General Letitia James over her fraud case against the former president.

Which came on the heels of Stefanik filing an ethics complaint against the judge overseeing Trump’s civil fraud trial in New York and pressing the Justice Department to prosecute Michael Cohen, Trump’s former fixer, ahead of his testimony in the former president’s trial.

For those keeping score, the New York congresswoman has now filed formal ethics complaints against four key officials in the last six months. It’s hard not to wonder if her office has some kind of form letter in which names can simply be swapped out every time Stefanik wants to make Trump happy with a baseless gesture.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-sho ... rcna153444

[RTH10260]

Question: how are such complaints or better inquiries by members of the House proper considering the separations of powers?

[bob]

Question: how are such complaints or better inquiries by members of the House proper considering the separations of powers?

The short answer is: they're not.

TL;DR: This is just political theater.

An explainer:

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) are demanding answers about a delay into an investigation of a judge's comments about former President Donald Trump.

This is a I-need-to-speak-to-your-manager move. It is cute that Members of Congress believes the federal judiciary is going to give their complaint any special attention. Bottom of the pile, and it'll rise up in due course. (And receive a perfunctory "complaint closed" FOAD.)

If Private Citizens Jordan and Stefanik want to file a complaint against a federal judge, feel free (you petition your grievances, girl!). It'll be roundfiled like every other crank who does so with any substantial basis for a complaint.

But if Members of Congress start throwing around institutional weight, the federal courts institutionally will respond with , because there are obvious separation-of-powers concerns.

With respect to a federal Congress member want to investigate a state judge, the answer will be, "Federalism, donchta love it!" and give the state complaint the same due respect, i.e., the minimum required.

If Stefanik can convince Jordan (or some other committee chair) to conduct a House hearing over these complaints, that's "great." Because we've all seen how effective this Congress' hearings are.