LOL, Trumpworld catching on only now that Mark Meadows wasn't really one of them when it was obvious in 2017

 Months ago, Meadows and his lawyer severed communications with most of Trumpland ...

Meadows’ lawyer George Terwilliger this month offered only vagueness ...

That cryptic statement did not sit well with much of Trumpworld. In recent weeks, several lawyers and confidants had already discussed their unconfirmed suspicions with Trump that Meadows was being very useful to the feds in order to reduce Meadows’ own possible legal exposure, two other people familiar with the matter say. Both sources independently tell Rolling Stone that when the topic has come up within the past several months, Trump has at times said that he doesn’t know what Meadows is doing, adding that it would be a “shame” if the MAGAland rumors were true.     

More.

Meadows played key roles in mucking up both Obamacare repeal and immigration reform.

Trumpworld is a bunch of dimwits, and Meadows knows it better than anyone else.

Mark Meadows has always been a weenie

 Meadows complies with DOJ subpoena in January 6 probe...

The idea that Trump is going to get personnel right in a second term, and on a massive scale, is just preposterous

 Axios reports, in laborious detail, here.

The grifters are lining up from sea to shining sea, including Demented Jim, and Trump retreads Stephen Miller, Mark Meadows, and Michael Rigas who didn't get it right the first time.

Who the hell wants to go to work for just four years for a lame duck?

These people think we are fools.

LOL Bob Woodward and Robert Costa for WaPo full of it again, can't produce one text showing Ginni Thomas "urged Meadows to overturn the 2020 election"

 Texts don't show.

 Urged White House chief to pursue unrelenting efforts to overturn election...

When you imagine Republicans did what Joe Biden did

Career civil servant Mark Sandy testified on Nov. 16, 2019 that he was told that military assistance to Ukraine was put on hold by Trump because Trump was concerned other countries were not contributing more to Ukraine:

Mr. Sandy: I recall in early September an email that attributed the hold to the President's concern about other countries not contributing more to Ukraine. ... Mr. Meadows: And, all of a sudden, we get some additional information that's provided in terms of what other countries contribute to Ukraine aid, and then the aid was released. Is that a fair characterization? Mr. Sandy: In terms of the sequencing, yes.

Rush Limbaugh 12/20/2018: "Trump had better not sign that", 10 minutes later gets instant message

Lol, Rush is pretending again today that it's just a coincidence he got the instant message right after warning Trump on 12/20:

The President Tells Me It’s Money or Nothing

... If it’s that, then Trump had better not sign that. There has to be some serious appropriation. So, I mean, it’s time for applause. (clapping) Yes. This is a great, great first step. But it’s not a full-fledged veto. Not that we want a veto; don’t misunderstand. This is simply the president telling the Republicans, “I’m not signing this. There’s no border security in it.” So now the Republicans are gonna go back and put some border security in their version of the continuing resolution. We’ll know what that is soon enough.

Then when they finish doing that and they vote on it — and it will pass — they’ll send it over to The Turtle, Mitch McConnell in the Senate, and then they will deal with it. The Senate was very happy to have not a penny in this CR for border security. So it looks like the onus now is… It looks like it’s on the House, but it’s actually gonna be on the Senate, because we have to assume the House is gonna put something in this. Meadows was dead serious about this. Ryan? I don’t know. But it’s still his House. He’s still speaker for a while. So that’s where we are. But it’s great news that the president refused to sign this.

Now we have to keep our eyes on what they come up with as border security.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay, folks, this is good. This is interesting. I just got a phone call. Well, I got an instant message. It’s the equivalent of you getting a phone call. That’s how people communicate with me, particularly during the program. It’s impossible to use the phone during the program. Anyway, I just said less than 10 minutes ago in my translation of what’s happened here, “The president told Republicans he’s not going to sign this. It’s not a veto yet, but he’s not gonna sign it until there’s border security in it.” ...

So I get this direct message: “You tell Rush that if there’s no money in this, it’s getting vetoed. If there’s no money — if there’s no money for a wall — I’m vetoing this, plain and simple.” This was the message that I just got, and I trust it and I believe it to be the case. By the way, it’s a legitimate question. I mean, the way the media reports this — and it was not just the media. It was Paul Ryan saying, “The president cares deeply about border security. So we’re gonna go back and we’re gonna get some border security in this thing.

Rush Limbaugh thanks Mark Meadows today when it was Meadows who helped stop the immigration showdown in October

Neither Meadows nor Limbaugh (Ted Cruz supporter) really want the wall.

And Trump obviously doesn't either, otherwise he wouldn't have treated the issue like he has, in sharp contrast to his campaign for president.

Here's the grifter today taking money from you suckers:

Nancy doesn’t even run the House yet, and she’s out there saying Trump couldn’t get the votes — and he did, and it was because of Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan and the Freedom Caucus. They did their special order earlier this week and they let the president that know they would have his back. It’d be easy for the president to think that he’s isolated, but it was I think a very important thing that they did to make it a point to go to the floor of the House and special orders to make sure that everybody knew — not just the president — that they, significant number of Republicans in the House, would have his back.

Mark Meadows is a libertarian open borders fanatic posing as a Trump supporter when he's really supporting his GOPe

From the story here:

Chairman Mark Meadows of North Carolina has argued that entering into a spending battle that could shutter the government in October would be unwise without a cohesive plan, appearing to side with GOP leaders who fear a shutdown before midterms would upend their House majority. ... “I don’t see a deliberate plan on how we secure our border happening by the end of September, and so having that debate over the next three months is probably more prudent than trying to have it in the next week and a half,” Meadows said.

Manufactured crisis of child separations: Both Bush and Obama separated families by the hundreds of thousands

And there are lots of photos, here.

The "crisis" is being used to move poor legislation, and the president is its easy mark:

Representative Mark Meadows said Trump told Republican members of the House at a meeting on Capitol Hill that they needed to get something done on immigration "right away."

This is why conservative temperament matters: It isn't manipulated easily or hastily. Unfortunately Trump has no such temperament.

The shock that is no shock: Open borders fanatics in the libertarian Freedom Caucus like Mark Meadows are OK with delaying The Wall some more

Justin "Might as well be a Democrat" Amash also voted against "No Sanctuary for Criminals Act"

Amash and six other Republicans (Curbelo of FL, Diaz-Balart, Donovan, King of NY, Reichert, Ros Lehtinen) went down to defeat with 188 Democrats.

HR 3003.

Here.

Republicans Chaffetz, Gosar, Long, Mark Meadows, Nunes, Scalise, Smith (NJ) and Stivers did not vote.

Mark Meadows: Ousted Boehner, voted against the original HR 3762 in October 2015, leads House Freedom Caucus against Obamacare repeal in 2017

Clearly Mark Meadows is Trump's number one problem in the US House of Representatives.

In view of the fact that Meadows was in the extreme minority in October 2015 voting with only six other Republicans against Obamacare repeal in the form of HR 3762, it was hypocritical of him to accuse John Boehner of bypassing the majority in the House in the summer of 2015 and filing the motion for him to vacate the chair. Meadows bypassed the majority in October.

Meadows only flipped his position on HR 3762 when it was revamped and hardened by the Senate to make a political point to the voters back home.

In other words, Meadows only supported the bill when it allowed him to hide behind the skirts of the Senate version which both they and he knew was designed merely to be vetoed:

[T]he Senate's version would have implemented a two year phase-out of Medicaid expansion and exchange subsidies.

The House agreed to the Senate's changes, so the final version of the bill included the Senate's modifications.

There were concerns in Congress – particularly among lawmakers from states that have expanded Medicaid – that repealing the law would result in millions of people losing their health insurance coverage. But Politico reported that "senators were reminded that the president would veto the repeal bill anyway, meaning Republicans could vote on the measure without having to deal with the political risks of actually making major changes to existing law."

But there are still 206 Republican members in the US House in 2017 who voted for the original, honest HR 3762 in October 2015, and who should do so again in 2017, if only someone (not Mark Meadows, and not Paul Ryan) would lead them there:

The House version of H.R. 3762 included repealing the individual mandate, the employer mandate, the medical device excise tax, and the "Cadillac tax" on expensive employee health insurance premiums.

It also included a measure to eliminate federal Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood for one year. But it called for increasing funding for community health centers by $235 million/year for two years (a 6.5 percent increase over the currently scheduled funding).

Republicans used the budget reconciliation process to ensure that their bill could advance through the senate as long as it received a simple majority of at least 51 votes, instead of needing 60 votes. By using reconciliation, the measure was filibuster-proof, and advanced to a vote in the Senate.

Mark Levin is a jerk . . .

He complains about the left criticizing conservatives while bashing the 2015 bill conservatives and all Republicans except for 7 (Mark Meadows!) passed through the House and Senate and to Obama's desk!

P.O.S. is Mark Levin.

House Freedom Caucus' Meadows was one of just 7 Republicans to vote against the 2015 Obamacare repeal

Meadow's leadership against the current repeal bill, which is in fact a crummier bill, obscures his isolation previously. 

The roll call vote is here. Buck, Dold, Hanna, Jones, Meadows, Salmon, and Walker voted No. The majority of the Freedom Caucus voted for the bill, including leaders like Justin Amash and Jim Jordan.

Unlike Meadows, Americans for Tax Reform here also supported the bill at the time, as did the broader Republican Caucus in the House (it passed 240-189). ATR acknowledged the difficulty of repealing Obamacare's policy provisions without 60 votes in the Senate, which remains the problem now in 2017.

Jim Jordan is right. Repass H.R. 3762 and send it to Trump.

From ATR:

H.R. 3762 repeals most of the heart of Obamacare. The individual and employer mandates and their attendant tax penalties are gone. The medical device tax is repealed. The “Cadillac plan” excise tax is prevented from coming into effect (more on that later).

On the spending side, H.R. 3762 repeals some unaccountable Obamacare slush funds, shutters IPAB (the Medicare rationing board that Sarah Palin called a “death panel”), and ends Obamacare auto-enrollment. Importantly, it also defunds Planned Parenthood for the fiscal year.

At a markup for the bill, liberal Congressmen went apoplectic at the effect H.R. 3762 would have on Obamacare. Top House Ways and Means Democrat Sandy Levin (D-Mich.) said that the bill ”effectively guts [Obamacare].” Congressman John Lewis (D-Ga.) said, “this bill really is pulling the legs from under [Obamacare]. It is a deliberate, systematic attempt, not just to repeal, but to destroy [Obamacare].” ...

When the Republicans took the Senate in the 2014 elections, there was a lot of talk about moving bills from Capitol Hill to the President’s desk to force showdowns with the White House. That hasn’t happened, largely because Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has bottled up the Senate in 60 vote purgatory.

The one area he cannot do that is on a privileged budget reconciliation bill like H.R. 3762.

Hey Reince Priebus, the House Freedom Caucus won't endorse Paul Ryan either, so lay off the Donald

From the story here:

Not a single member of House Freedom Caucus leadership opted to endorse House Speaker Paul Ryan in his contentious August 9 primary race against Wisconsin businessman Paul Nehlen.

Breitbart News reached out to House Freedom Caucus leadership board members and caucus spokesmen including Reps. Jim Jordan, Mick Mulvaney, Mark Meadows, Steve Pearce, Jeff Duncan, John Fleming, Matt Salmon, Scott Garrett, and Raul Labrador.

Breitbart News asked the members multiple times whether they planned to make an endorsement in the race. Not a single member chose to endorse Ryan.