Churlish Democrats Might Not Shake Trump's Hand at Joint Session

It's not a formal State of the Union address -- that will come next year -- but on Tuesday President Trump will address a joint session of Congress in what amounts to the same thing. In years past, this has meant that camera-hogs on both sides of the aisle jockey for choice aisle seats so they can be seen shaking hands with the leader of the Free World as he makes his way toward the podium. But maybe not this year:

For nearly three decades, Engel has been on the aisle for every presidential address to Congress. For a fleeting moment, it’s just him and the president — two Republicans and two Democrats since he began the tradition in 1989 — shaking hands in a show of support for the leader of the free world.

Engel could be someplace else Tuesday night, when President Trump strides down the House’s center aisle to deliver his first address to a joint session of Congress. It’s not technically called a State of the Union this early in a presidential term, but Trump’s speech will have the same bells and whistles.

Engel has not decided yet what to do; he did not decide to attend Trump’s inauguration until the day before. Other Democrats who have previously angled for prime seats have decided to distance themselves from Trump, whose first month in office has prompted outrage from most congressional Democrats.

“I have no desire to sit on the aisle and shake the president’s hand,” said Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.), who has traditionally positioned himself just off the aisle and leaned over his colleagues to get a moment with the president. Not this time. He’ll be in the chamber, but far away from the aisle.

Well, bully for him. Remember when Joe Wilson shouted at Barack Obama for blatantly lying during a SOTU:

Democrats reacted in horror. But now, snubbing the new president -- and telling the world about it -- just because your nose is still out of joint is apparently A-OK. Because, after all, Trump has nobody to blame but himself:

This is just the latest example of how Trump has scrambled the most basic of traditions in Washington. On Jan. 20, for Trump’s inauguration, a third of House Democrats publicly declared they were boycotting the swearing-in ceremony, led by civil rights icon John Lewis (D-Ga.), who declared Trump an illegitimate president because of alleged Russian meddling with the 2016 election contest.ii

read more:

https://pjmedia.com/election/2017/02/24/churlish-democrats-might-no...

Views: 471

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

who the hell needs their f...ing hand shake???

AGREED 10,000,000%!!!

..............COOTIES.......UGH........

Drain the Swamp Mr PRESIDENT Donald J. Trump and don't worry about the liberal/socialist idiots in the US Congress not wanting to shake your hand . If you keep your promise and Drain The Swamp those liberal/socialist idiot in the US Congress will be gone in a few months anyway .

I wouldn't trust any of them shaking the PRESIDENT'S hand.....they may have the same kind of poison on them that killed the north Korean guy...........

no way....I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw an elephant........

DRAIN THE SWAMP MR. PRESIDENT......

if you have to shake their hands....WEAR RUBBER GLOVES.....just sayin...!!!!!!

Dennis,

Good point, they will not stop at anything it is feasible.

What has happened to civility, and courtesy, yes, even good sportsmanship when you lose and diplomacy. No wonder they say the Dems are a party of 8 year olds. Children of the CORN?

Democrats are the problem. They are little immature babies that can't handle defeat and because of this are not willing to work across the aisle to make America better again. They are deliberately trying their best to make sure Trump does not succeed further dividing our country even more. The nice thing about it is they are making sure a Democrat never gets into office again.   

the democratic party is a misnomer, it is anything but democratic. the new unimproved far left democratic party of today should be rebranded as the seditionist socialist party and is an unholy brew of far leftist/elitist socialists/liberals/anarchists/seditionists who are hell bent on doing little more than destroying this country with their radical socialist ORWELLIAN agenda. I for one have no inclination to shake the hand of anyone who wishes to completely step away from the American constitution towards a socialist oligarch dystopian society-in retrospect I would be more likely to shackle their hands as opposed to shake their hands 

It never ceases to amaze me these days how democrats/liberals, no matter what their age, can be SOOOOO childish, immature, disrespectful, and frankly, just TOTAL ASSES.  What happened to the days of "good sportsmanship"?  All team members shook the opponents hands even though you didn't agree?  These people have ZERO social etiquette skills.  No grace. No honor. No civility. NO CLASS.  You'd think they were ALL brought up in the millennial/snowflake generation...

do not mistake the democrats seditionist behavior for a lack of etiquette!! the words LOYAL OPPISITION is purposely LEFTED OUT of their agenda deliberately so. their ideological direction and or political mindset is that of sedition, for they are by definition seditionist-they do not want co-operation nor do they want compromise no, what they want is total control of you everyone and everything. the Obama agenda is still being maintained by those in attendance of the shadow gov't and this shadow movement is indefectible and incessant towards it's ultimate goal which is nothing less than total control of America! .......Soros, Obama, Clinton are all apart of this shadow gov't and they are not going to go quietly into that good night-the fight is far from over, to think otherwise is naiveté

Marilyn,

They created the millennial/snowflake so now that their works are exposed what do you think they would do, but also expose who they really are and have been all their adult lives.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

ALERT ALERT

Clinton Donor And Tax Cheat Tied To Russia

“Do as we say, not as we do.”

That seems to be the slogan for Hillary Clinton and her political allies, and it’s especially apt in light of new information about one of Clinton’s largest campaign donors.

While the left is still trying to attack President Trump and his family over unproven business dealings and largely debunked connections to Russia, a new report indicates that it was Hillary Clinton’s team who were doing those exact things.

“Fox News has learned that one of the top donors to the ‘Hillary Victory Fund’ (HVF) in 2016 was a Los Angeles-based attorney who is alleged to have misused company funds to create his own $22 million real estate portfolio,” that outlet reported on Thursday.

“He has also been considered by California to be one of the state’s biggest tax cheats, and allegedly has ties to the (Russian) Kremlin,” Fox continued.

The man’s name is Edgar Sargsyan. His deep pockets greatly benefited Clinton’s campaign, with contributions of at least $250,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund in 2016.

He was also in charge of an elite fundraising dinner to benefit Clinton, where donors paid $100,000 per couple just to attend the ritzy event. But in true Clinton fashion, the money apparently went missing.

Sargsyan is now “being sued by his former company for allegedly diverting those funds to start his own real estate company,” according to Fox.

Now, people are asking hard questions about Clinton’s buddy Sargsyan, including whether his contributions were part of a pay-to-play scheme and if he had shady connections to foreign governments.

“Nobody gave to the Hillary Victory Fund out of the goodness of their heart or some generalized desire to help 33 random state parties,” pointed out attorney Dan Backer from the Committee to Defend the President.

“They did so to buy access and curry influence — something the Clintons have been selling for nearly three decades in and out of government,” he continued.

Trying to buy political influence is sadly common, especially when it comes to the Clintons. What is raising more red flags than normal, however, is the evidence that Sargsyan is no run-of-the-mill campaign donor.

“The really scary question is, what did this particular donor with this strange web of connections hope to buy for his quarter-million dollars?” Backer asked Fox News.

That web of connections is strange indeed.

The Committee to Defend the President is now alleging that SBK, a major Sargsyan-linked company “is an investment firm that is affiliated with United Arab Emirates president, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, and its international affiliate has business interests in Russia,” according to Fox.

“Among its dealings was a bid to finance $850 million for a major bridge project to connect Crimea with Russia,” the group claims.

“He worked for SBK, and SBK appears to have bid on some Crimean/Russian bridge project,” Backer said. “That’s usually an indicator of political favor and connections.”

It raises several chilling questions: Was Sargsyan paying a quarter million dollars to Clinton for political favors, and — more disturbingly — was that money actually from sources in Russia in order to smooth the way for its construction plans?

Nobody knows for sure. What is clear, however, is that there is a pattern of dirty money surrounding the Clintons, with the “Uranium One” and “Clinton Foundation” scandals just two of the most well-known examples.

“It reinforces how fast and loose the Clinton machine was when it came to ‘Hoovering up’ these megadonor checks, not just from questionable Hollywood and Wall Street elites but potentially from foreign influence peddlers using who knows what money,” Backer told Fox News.

“It reinforces the need to take a long hard look at not just the unlawful money laundering process, but the way in which they were solicited as well,” he continued. “The Clintons have never shown a great deal of concern for whomever it was cutting the checks — whether it’s foreign influence peddlers or Hollywood smut peddlers like Harvey Weinstein.”

If those claims are even partially true, then America dodged a bullet in November of 2016 — and it’s worth keeping the pile of foreign-connected Clinton scandals in mind the next time the left tries desperately to tie Donald Trump to Russia. Perhaps they should look in the mirror.

SLAVEHOLDER??

Washington Post Compares
Jeff Sessions To Slaveholder’

The Washington Post compared Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “slaveholders” after he quoted the Bible on Thursday while discussing his department’s policy of prosecuting all illegal immigrants who cross the border.

Sessions made the statement during a speech to law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

WaPo ran a story entitled “Sessions cites Bible passage used to defend slavery in defense of separating immigrant families” by general assignment editor Keith McMillan and religion reporter Julie Zauzmer on Friday.

Rather than detailing the statistics Sessions cited in the speech that explain the immigration policy, the story quoted John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania.

“This is the same argument that Southern slaveholders and the advocates of a Southern way of life made,” Fea said.

Sessions spent much of the speech discussing the numbers behind current immigration policy, including separating families at the Southwest border.

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes,” Sessions said.

“Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves. Consistent and fair application of the law is in itself a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak and protects the lawful.”

“The previous administration wouldn’t prosecute aliens if they came with children,” Sessions said.

“It was de-facto open borders if you came with children. The results were unsurprising. More and more illegal aliens started showing up at the border with children.”

Sessions laid out the numbers in the speech.

“In 2013, fewer than 15,000 family units were apprehended crossing our border illegally between ports of entry in dangerous areas of the country,” he said.

“Five years later, it was more than 75,000, a five-fold increase in five years. It didn’t even have to be their child that was brought, it could be anyone. You can imagine that this created a lot of danger.”

The U.S. has the “opportunity” to fix its broken immigration system now, Sessions said.

“I believe that’s it’s moral, right, just and decent that we have a lawful system of immigration,” he said. “The American people have been asking for it.”

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service