"Republican Past" is coming home to roost! In Public, Newt Gingrich said he supported the Bailout Plan (oops , I mean "Recovery Plan"). In private, he called Republican members of Congress to defeat the bill. Why? Insiders are saying Gingrich wants McCain to lose this year´s election so he can run for Prez in 2012! Some of these Congressmen who said NO are saying they are fashioning themselves as the next generation of Newt Gingrich’s 1994 revolution. All of this Republican politicizing and backstabbing, at the expense of the American people!
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was working aggressively behind the scenes to defeat the Wall Street rescue plan minutes before he himself released a public statement in support of the package, NBC's Andrea Mitchell reported on Tuesday. Gingrich was whipping up votes for the opposition, Mitchell said, apparently without the knowledge of the current GOP leader, John Boehner, who was responsible for recruiting enough support from his caucus to help ensure the bill's passage. Ultimately, the GOP was only able to rally roughly a third of its members. "Newt Gingrich," she said on MSNBC, "I am told reliably by leading Republicans who are close to him, he was whipping against this up until the last minute, when he issued that face-saving statement. Newt Gingrich was telling people in the strongest possible language that this was a terrible deal, not only that it was a terrible deal, it was a disaster, it was the end of democracy as we know, it was socialism -- and then at the last minute [he] comes out with a statement when the vote is already in place." Indeed, as Mitchell noted, shortly before the bill's failure, Gingrich "reluctantly" came out in favor of its passage: "Therefore, while I am discouraged at the final collapse of the Bush Administration, and frustrated by the Democrats' passion for the taxpayer's money, I would reluctantly and sadly vote for the bailout were I still in office." The rest of the set of Morning Joe had some interesting takes on the news nugget. Joe Scarborough called Gingrich's backstabbing of John Boehner "undercutting his own." Mike Barnicle offered his own bit of reportorial insight: "Andrea, I could hug you for saying that, because I was told last night by two or they members of Congress that this was the opening salvo of Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign four years hence."
NEWT is now poo-pooing the facts and now claiming bias my MSNBC.
(The Politico) Former Speaker Newt Gingrich strongly disputed Andrea Mitchell's report on MSNBC this morning that he had privately moved to dissuade House Republicans from voting on yesterday’s bailout bill while publicly endorsing it.Speaking before the National Press Club today, Gingrich called MSNBC a “stunningly dishonest network.” While critical of many parts of the proposed legislation, Gingrich said he had nevertheless supported its passage and made that clear to Minority Leader John Boehner and others in the House.Still, Gingrich said that there was good that could come from the bill failing and encouraged what he regarded to be the long-run view of the matter stating, “Do you really want to get over a headache by giving yourself cancer?”
Democrat Leaders Played to Lose
ReplyDeletePublished 9/30/2008 12:50:21 AM
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ordered her Majority Whip, Jim Clyburn, to essentially not do his job in the runup to the vote on Monday for the negotiated Wall Street bailout plan, according to House Democrat leadership aides.
"Clyburn was not whipping the votes you would have expected him to, in part because he was uncomfortable doing it, in part because we didn't want the push for votes to be successful," says one leadership aide. "All we needed was enough to potentially get us over the finish line, but we wanted the Republicans to be the ones to do it. This was not going to be a Democrat-passed bill if the Speaker had anything to say about it."
During the floor vote, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and House Democrat Conference chair Rahm Emanuel could be seen monitoring the vote on the floor, and gauging whether or not more Democrat votes were needed. Clyburn had expressed concerns, says the leadership aide, of being asked to press members of the Black and Hispanic caucuses on a bill he was certain those constituencies would not want passed.
"It worked out, because we didn't have a dog in this fight. We negotiated. We gave the White House a bill. It was up to the Republicans to get the 100 plus votes they needed and they couldn't do it," said another Democrat leadership aide.
Emanuel, who served as a board member for Freddie Mac, one of the agencies that precipitated the economic crisis the nation now finds itself in, had no misgivings about taking a leadership role in tanking the bill. "He was cheerleading us along, mothering the votes," says the aide. "We wanted enough to put the pressure on the Republicans and Congressman Emanuel was charged with making it close enough. He did a great job."
Pelosi and her aides have made it clear they were not going to "whip" or twist the arms of members who did not want to vote, but they also made no effort to rally any support for a bill they attempted to hijack over the weekend.
Further, according to House Oversight Committee staff, Emanuel has received assurances from Pelosi that she will not allow what he termed a "witch hunt" to take place during the next Congressional session over the role Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac played in the economic crisis.
Emanuel apparently is concerned the roles former Clinton Administration members may have played in the mortgage industry collapse could be politically -- or worse, if the Department of Justice had its way, legally -- treacherous for many.
Treasury Officials Admit Bill's CEO Compensation Measure and Restrictions on Paulson Were a Farce
ReplyDeleteEven the Daily Kos was against this bill and more than enough commentors blame Pelosi for playing politics.
You shouldn't have a problem with this link, right Dee, since it is one of your blog links on your home page.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteDoes it bother you that Gingrich played these dirty tricks to backstab McCain, Boehner and the American Public? He LIED. He went on the news channels and said he supported it. Then he goes behind their backs and convinces the 15 who initially committed to vote NO. Why would Gingrich do this Liquid? Why?
Easy answer. He is beginning his own Prez campaign now!
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteThis post is about Gingrich. Why dont you want to discuss this topic? Why?
Interesting you post Blogs with unknown aides.
ReplyDeleteThe quote I provided was by Andrea Mitchell, a reknowned and well respected reporter. Not even Gingrich says she is lying. Instead he spouts gibberish about MSNBC. He is one pile of lying deceit!
I'm not a Republican, Could care less about Gingrich.
ReplyDeleteGingrich for Pres in 2012?? Biggest laugh in History. No chance in Hell for him.
ReplyDeleteYou chastise me for linking to a blog with unknown aides as witnesses, yet you quote the Huffington Post Blog as your topic and then claim Gingrich said nothing about Mitchell's accusations. Boy are you misinformed and lacking in your research.
ReplyDeleteGingrich Denies Whipping Against Bailout
Mitchell's report was followed by MSNBC's Mike Barnicle saying, "Andrea, I could hug you for saying that because I was told last night by two or three members of Congress that this was the opening salvo of
Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign four years hence."
When Barnicle raised the prospect of Gingrich seeking the White House by undermining the House Republican Leader, Mika Brzezinski interjected by borrowing the words Boehner had used to describe the Wall Street bailout.
"Talk about a crap sandwich," said Brzezinski.
Watch the MSNBC video on ThinkProgress.
Gingrich led the charge against Paulson's original proposal last week, telling ABC News on Tues., Sept. 23 that John McCain could not vote in favor of it and still claim "with a straight face" to be "the reform candidate."
The next day - on Wed., Sept. 24 - Gingrich issued a statement to the press praising McCain for suspending his campaign and "putting everything on the line" to try to get a bipartisan "economic package" to replace what he called the "failed Paulson bailout package."
Appearing Sunday on ABC News' "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," Gingrich said that he suspected that he would "probably" end up voting "reluctantly yes" on the revised bailout if he were still in office. He coupled this with a call for Henry Paulson's resignation, claiming that the U.S. Treasury
Secretary had behaved in an "un-American way" by initially asking for $700 billion without legislative oversight or judicial review.
On Monday, with the vote underway on the House floor, Gingrich made his position on the bailout definitive, issuing a statement saying that if he were still in office he would "reluctantly and sadly" support it. Gingrich explained his change in position by saying that the House Republicans, "reinforced by John McCain," have improved the bill "significantly" so it is "less bad" than the original proposal offered by Paulson.
MSNBC did not have an immediate reaction to Gingrich's criticism.
Clyburn: Not whipping yet
ReplyDeleteAsked about Monday’s vote on the bailout bill, House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn tells reporters: “We haven’t started whipping.”
Asked if he’s going to start whipping, Clyburn says: “The speaker hasn’t told me yet. I do what I’m told.”
Clyburn: Not whipping yet
Dems Talk Among Themselves
ReplyDelete(The Politico) While the Republicans are ready to herd their cats at a caucus meeting later today, Democrats are gathering their members in smaller groups right now, according to John Bresnahan and Patrick O’Connor.
Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) and Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) are addressing the conservative Democratic Blue Dogs in Majority Leader Stenty Hoyer's office – after already meeting with the pro-growth New Democratic Coalition.
The Tri-Caucus (comprised of the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and the Asian-Pacific American caucus) will meet with them later, followed by the Progressive Caucus.
Leaders are not officially whipping this bill, but they are pushing hard , focusing on the fact that they were able to insert a provision mandating a future tax on financial services companies if taxpayers lose money -- a provision that was championed by Blue Dog Rep. John Tanner (D-Tenn.).
A group of anti-bailout Dems are meeting at 3:30.
UPDATE: House Democrats will also caucus in the Capitol basement at 5 p.m. to review the details of the bailout plan.
Here's the best part: "Leaders are not officially whipping this bill", kind of lends to what I posted atop of this comment section doesn't it.
There are good and substantial reasons for opposing this bill, espeically now that it looks more like a $1 Trillion Christmas tree.
ReplyDeleteDid you know the bill allows foreign banks to be bailed out at our expense. In fact,banks abroad can transfer all their bad debts to their U.S. branches and qualify for the bailout.
If you would prefer that your tax dollars not go to buy the
ReplyDeletetoxic assets of foreign banks you should call your congressman and tell him to vote no.
Ulty,
ReplyDeleteI agree.
My opinion flip flops on how this disaster should be handled. I know de-regulation got us into this mess. I know the Republicans are primarily responsible for this deregulation. I know they did have some Dem support. However, now that we are in this mess, I do not know the resolution. I know I don´t want our country to go into a deep depression.
I know there are those that say this is Bush´s last raspberry to all of us in his bid to aid his multi national banking cronies.
We are left with no positive choices:
Pass the Bill: Stave off the Depression while we give a Trillion Dollar Christmas Tree for Bush´s friends and decades of debt for our children and grandchildren.
NOT Passing the Bill: Go into a Depression Now and face immediate devastation.
NO GOOD CHOICES!! All we can hope for is our next President is another Clinton economically.
ultima said...
There are good and substantial reasons for opposing this bill, espeically now that it looks more like a $1 Trillion Christmas tree.
Dee says:
ReplyDelete"I know the Republicans are primarily responsible for this deregulation. I know they did have some Dem support."
your political finger pointing is more than ignorant. Research the debacle. I will make it simple for you to understand with the following.
"The Real Deal
So who is to blame? There's plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn't fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn't do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility ... with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here's a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:
* The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.
* Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.
* Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.
* Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.
* The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.
* Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.
* Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.
* Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.
* The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.
* An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.
* Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.
The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation. Claiming that a single piece of legislation was responsible for (or could have averted) the crisis is just political grandstanding. We have no advice to offer on how best to solve the financial crisis. But these sorts of partisan caricatures can only make the task more difficult."
Who Caused the Economic Crisis?
October 1, 2008
MoveOn.org blames McCain advisers. He blames Obama and Democrats in Congress. Both are wrong.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteYou are hilarious.
So you take the word of "Frank Fact Checker" over my friend Robert Reich.
No wonder your OPINIONS are as they are!
Go back to my 1st post on this subject and my RR quotes. Please become enlightened and quit listening to your little bloggers!
My how you have a convoluted head. You obviously have no clue about what has happened or who all were at fault. You can't think past 1 or maybe 2. Should I show how it was Clinton who let this happen, he was warned back in '99 about this, yet he did nothing.
ReplyDeleteFannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
I linked to Greenspan from '94 in the other topic.
Your political prowess is just dumbfounded. Stay on that line though, your ignorance becomes clearer.
And what exactly is it that Reich has said or who has he blamed?? Since you know so much, please show us.
ReplyDeleteNow, all Reich has said and done is tell his readers what was coming and has shown that: Fannie and Freddie -- and the executives who ran them and still run them -- have been out to maximize profits. Period. Just the same as every other mortgage and investment bank. High-risk sub-prime loans offered a higher rate of return, so Fannie and Freddie went into them big time. And because of the implicit government guarantee, Fannie and Freddie could take on even more risks and make even more money. Until now.
Again your IGNORANCE is out in the open. There's nothing here to argue about, there is a lot of blame to go around, from Government to the home purchaser, yet now everybody has to pay for their stupidity.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteTalk about convoluted thinking. You blame the crisis on an increase in home ownership by minorities and low income. How ludicrous. It is not these low income homes that caused the multi billions of loss. If that were the case you would go to low income neighborhoods and see the foreclosure signs. BUT THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. It is the California, NY and GA high end neighborhoods where you see all the signs.
It was the predatory loans pushed by the unscrupulous and greedy brokers and banks that caused this crisis, just as Reich said!
Liquid,
Published: September 30, 1999
In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.