The bloodletting has begun

The GOP reps are discussing expelling Matt Gaetz.

McCarthy wanted Pelosi out of her offices because he wants them. He was behind that order.

Rep Nancy Mace is telling CNN all funding by the GOP has dried up. She was against Gaetz raising money off the McCarthy vote for speaker earlier this year but she is now in need of money. She voted against McCarthy.

The bloodletting will be never-ending for “The 8”.

After Matt Gaetz is expelled McCarthy will probably run again for speaker. Does anyone not believe that?

To top it off McCarthy is saying Pelosi had guaranteed to back him up if there was this sort of vote.

Pelosi will expose him tomorrow but the GOP rank and file won’t believe the truth.

Adding…as McCarthy explains it he asked Pelosi if he should give them the one vacancy vote rule. According to McCarthy Pelosi promised to back him up if such a vote happened.

Do any of you see that conversation ever having taken place?

Jim Jordan’s campaign for the office will be short. He is to the right of Gaetz.


Georgia Rep. Austin Scott added, “Those eight people are anarchists, and they’re chaos caucus members.” - Yahoo article

So is Mr. Trump but it takes nuts to say that if you are Austin Scott. So do not expect him to have any.


@Leap1 politics is banned on METAR. This is a purely political post with no macroeconomic impact. I have flagged it and will flag all posts like this.



I agree it is political. I am good with the post being flagged.

As far as tax cuts they are definitely macroeconomic events. But when they never show up that is another macroeconomic event.


There were two parts to that post. Were you objecting to the very bottom statement? Or the other stuff that took up the body of the post?

This is okay? On economic policies, there are none at all on offer except a fraudulent offer of a tax cut you won’t get. All of it begets laying off your grandkids and/or paying them less.

Unfortunately major events in Washington, DC can have a major impact on the economy and our investments.

It can be a very fine line. Some discussion of the implications is appropriate. Maybe without naming names and political parties.

A bit of latitude is required.