Pelosi Wants Credit for Not Violating the Constitution to Unseat a Duly Elected Republican in the House! What?

Democrat Rita Hart decided to appeal a six-vote loss that she experienced in an Iowa-2 race back in December. She took this gripe directly to the House of Representatives. Instead of allowing the state court to settle the issue, Hart wanted Nancy Pelosi to be the one who decides.

While Pelosi agreed to seat the Republican winner, Marinette Miller-Meeks, that does not mean that the issue is going to go away. Pelosi herself is not even closing the door on the dispute. According to her, there are still scenarios where Hart could be declared the winner.

Republicans and moderate Democrats are going to push back against this. Pelosi’s got quite the interesting take on all of this, too. She says that she did not have to seat Miller-Meeks. “It would have been, under the rules, allowable for me to say we’re not seating the member from Iowa. We did not do that. So I want credit for that,” she says.

This is hilarious. Okay, great, lady. You did the right thing for once. That’s what politicians are supposed to do! We cannot believe that this woman wants a cookie just because she decided not to circumvent democracy for a little while.

Let’s face the music here. No one is running to Nancy Pelosi when they want a fair and balanced process. This is something that you do when you want to go around the courts. She’s your go-to guy when you want to make sure that the process has been biased in your direction as far as possible.

“The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is paying for top Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias, who fought Donald Trump in election cases before and after Nov. 3, to represent Hart…

The Elias brief for Hart offers a tinny excuse for avoiding a contest court in Iowa. It states that Hart did now know about all of the 22 ballots she considers improperly discarded until Dec. 1 and that meant there simply wasn’t enough time to go through the court (it would have been made up of the chief justice of the Iowa Supreme Court and four district court judges)…” Politico shares.

We had to know that the excuse was going to be flimsy before we even heard anything else about what took place. That’s how Pelosi rolls. She’s not the type to care about having a good story to tell, she just wants to win. If she has to put her thumb on a few scales to do it, she will. That’s what the Democrats are always banking on.

“The decision to skip the contest court and go directly to the House of Representatives is transparently an effort to bypass a body that aspires to neutrality in favor of one that does not, and to avoid a decision based on Iowa law to seek one based on the partisan interests of fellow Democrats…

Sure enough, Elias has basically put the point in black and white. Quoting from the last case when a Democratic-controlled House overturned an election (in 1985 to award an Indiana seat to a Democrat), his brief says the committee is “certainly not bound” to follow Iowa law and indeed, “there are instances where it is in fact bound by justice and equity to deviate from it,” Politico continues.

If you’re asking us to make a prediction, we would be willing to bet that Pelosi does not make any major waves. She knows that pulling the Republican winner in favor of a Democrat will invite a political firefight that she does not need at the moment. On the other hand….

The left sure does love their nakedly ambitious power grabs. Pelosi could completely reverse course on this and no one would be surprised in the slightest. They could swipe the seat and end the filibuster in one fell swoop. The Democrats do not care about proper procedure, they only care about gaining as much power as possible.