web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu

Gillibrand continues flip-flopping her way toward the nomination

Westlake Legal Group Gillibrand Gillibrand continues flip-flopping her way toward the nomination The Blog nomination Kirsten Gillibrand Illegal Immigrants illegal aliens flip flop driver's license 2020 Democratic primaries

Kirsten Gillibrand kicked off her presidential bid recently (for some reason) in the city of Troy, New York. Since that time, she hasn’t exactly been taken to task by the media. But if any reporters are looking for subjects to question her about, they might consider her stunning series of flip-flops on topics running across the entire political spectrum. She’s starting off this campaign in a similar fashion, once again reversing a position she held not that long ago when representing an upstate New York district in Congress.

When the subject of driver’s licenses for illegal aliens was brought up, the New York senator took the default Democratic position of saying that such individuals need a license to be able to get around and take care of their family. (Daily Caller)

Democratic New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand reversed her position on allowing illegal immigrants to obtain drivers’ licenses only a day after she announced that she will seek the Democratic nomination for the presidency in 2020.

Gillibrand told reporters just outside of Troy, New York, during her presidential campaign kickoff Wednesday that she is now supportive of granting illegal immigrants the ability to procure a driver’s license, reported the New York Daily News.

“I think we have to make it possible for people to provide for their families,” the New York senator said. “We need comprehensive immigration reform. Without doing that, you’re not going to get the problem solved for the rest of the country.”

That’s an interesting position for her to take when you consider that she told reporters during her 2008 congressional campaign that proof of citizenship should definitely be a requirement for obtaining a driver’s license. During more normal times, such a flip-flop would have attracted the scrutiny of the press. Of course, reporters may have already reached the saturation point when it comes to Gillibrand doing an about-face on her campaign talking points and they no longer pay much attention.

We’re not just talking about driver’s licenses here. Kirsten Gillibrand has reversed her positions on everything from gun rights to abortion, and she did it in a remarkably short period of time. It’s not that human beings can’t evolve and change their views over time. Some people experience a critical, defining moment and might “see the light” on a given subject. Others may skew more liberal in their youth and then slowly find themselves siding with more conservative positions as they mature.

That’s not what happened with Kirsten Gillibrand. It wasn’t even ten years ago when she was representing NY-20 in Congress. And by then she was already in her forties. At that time she was so much of a blue dog that the NRA gave her an A rating. When the Governor plucked her from that office and appointed her to Hillary Clinton’s old Senate seat, the Huffington Post described Gillibrand as “a bizarro version of Sarah Palin.”

As soon as Gillibrand was seated in the Senate she obviously realized that she would need to win a statewide race and carry the Democrats in New York City. (The same applies for a national bid to win over the Democrats’ liberal base.) Seemingly overnight, Gillibrand was a progressive feminist who supported abortion in all cases, loved illegal aliens and thought gun bans might be just the ticket for America.

The only times I’ve heard the Senator challenged on these amazing flip-flops, she’s trotted out what appears to be her default talking point. She claims that she went through a process of “learning more and expanding my views.” Yes… what she learned was that her old positions didn’t sell with the liberal base so she dumped them. So there you have it. The 2008 and 2019 Kirsten Gillibrand models are as different as day and night. But if Democrats nominate her and possibly even send her to the White House, which one will they get? Or is there possibly a Gillibrand 3.0 model waiting out there for the next shift in the political winds?

The post Gillibrand continues flip-flopping her way toward the nomination appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Gillibrand-300x159 Gillibrand continues flip-flopping her way toward the nomination The Blog nomination Kirsten Gillibrand Illegal Immigrants illegal aliens flip flop driver's license 2020 Democratic primaries   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

White House looking to see if McConnell can invite Trump to deliver SOTU

Westlake Legal Group d-2 White House looking to see if McConnell can invite Trump to deliver SOTU Trump The Blog State of the Union Speech SOTU security schumer pelosi mcconnell address

Does Cocaine Mitch have a, er, trump card to play with respect to Pelosi’s disinvitation?

Top White House officials are discussing whether the GOP-controlled Senate could invite President Trump to deliver the State of the Union address. This, in the wake of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s suggestion Wednesday that the address be postponed or relegated to being done in writing due to the partial government shutdown, now in its 27th day…

Senior officials are advising him that Pelosi’s suggestion is a sign of weakness — that Democrats fear he will use the stage to his advantage. It’s not known whether that is actually the case, but it is what senior officials are telling him.

Lots of questions here. Like this one: Does the Senate chamber have the capacity to accommodate both houses of Congress for the SOTU? Or could McConnell commandeer the House chamber to host Trump against Pelosi’s wishes?

More substantively, does the Senate majority leader have unilateral power to invite the president to speak or is that power subject to authorization by a resolution of the Senate? Roll Call reporter Niels Lesniewski says it’s the latter, which would mean Schumer could filibuster any attempt to invite Trump.

Another question. Assume McConnell figures out a way to extend the invite. Would Democrats show for Trump’s speech? That answer is easy: No, not most of them. But what about those freshmen Dems from purple districts? They might want to make a gesture of respect to POTUS just to keep their Republican supporters back home pacified. It’s a cinch that Pelosi would boycott, not wanting to be trapped on camera sitting in silence as Trump harangues her for an hour about the shutdown, but that in itself would strongly signal disrespect — and would corroborate Trump’s claim that Democrats, not him, are the truly intransigent party. Would purple-district Dems pay for it?

Plus, how could she boycott after claiming yesterday, completely disingenuously, that she was discouraging Trump from giving the speech due to concerns about security? If McConnell thinks it’s safe for him to attend and the Secret Service thinks it’s safe and Pelosi still doesn’t bother to show up, it’ll be transparent proof that she tried to block him from delivering the SOTU for petty political reasons.

But maybe she doesn’t care. She’s gone out of her way to show contempt for Trump at every stage of this. Maybe she’d see this as icing on the cake.

One more question, this one out of the box. What if Trump tweets today that he intends to deliver the SOTU in the House chamber and will be there on the 29th, whatever Pelosi may have to say about it? What does she do? No other president would publicly dare the Speaker of the House to bar him from the room to prevent him from speaking. (No other president would be disinvited in the first place.) But Trump does things the Trump way, for maximum drama. And nothing would be as dramatic as putting Pelosi on the spot in deciding whether to try to have the president physically blocked from giving an address.

I assume the Secret Service would lean heavily on Trump not to follow through on that threat, just because they don’t like situations where the president’s movements are uncertain. And I also assume that Pelosi would try to avoid that game of chicken by deciding that Trump is free to come if he likes — she hasn’t formally rescinded her invite, remember — but that she and most of her caucus will skip the event. Then we’ll be treated to the spectacle of Trump addressing the nation with an empty chair over his right shoulder, with Democrats no doubt engaged in some sort of counterprogramming elsewhere for the hour. They might have to let Ocasio-Cortez deliver the Intersectional State of the Union or something. That’s the only thing that could compete with Trump.

The post White House looking to see if McConnell can invite Trump to deliver SOTU appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group d-2-300x153 White House looking to see if McConnell can invite Trump to deliver SOTU Trump The Blog State of the Union Speech SOTU security schumer pelosi mcconnell address   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com