politics Trump

Trump Brands GOP Opposition ‘Human Scum’, Gaetz Plus Wingnuts Storm Briefing Room, ‘Woman In Blue’ Dazzles

"Meanwhile that woman in blue is about to get swept up in the Rapture".

It says a lot about the state of civil discourse and about how perilously close America is to losing its democracy when you see “human scum” trending on social media and you know, without even checking, that it’s a quote from the president.

“The Never Trumper Republicans, though on respirators with not many left, are in certain ways worse and more dangerous for our Country than the Do Nothing Democrats”, Donald Trump tweeted on Wednesday afternoon, shortly after some two-dozen of his allies on Capitol Hill tried to storm the secure House Intelligence committee suite where a Defense department official was being deposed.

“Watch out for them, they are human scum!”, Trump said, of Republicans who oppose him.

The bizarre visual above shows notorious problem child Matt Gaetz explaining how he and the GOPers haphazardly arranged behind him intended to stage a veritable stand-in to try and stall the impeachment inquiry.

As far as the girl in the blue dress illuminated in golden light on the stairs behind the lawmakers, she became an instant social media sensation.

Meanwhile that woman in blue is about to get swept up in the Rapture and no one even notices”, one member of the Twitterati quipped. 

“My mood is this woman in blue on the stairs”, another said. “Lord, give me the strength to deal with all the foolishness”.

Most of those assembled behind Gaetz (who staged a similar publicity stunt on his own earlier this month) aren’t on the committees conducting the impeachment probe, which means they aren’t entitled to attend the hearings. The proceedings are open to members of both parties who sit on the committees.

Ultimately, the lawmakers stood around and chanted “Let us in! Let us in!” while waving cell phones, which aren’t allowed in the room. Esquire summed it up nicely:

Lord save us. Apparently, a mob of angry white people committed a dangerous breach of national security Wednesday morning on Capitol Hill. No shots were fired in the incident

The show of desperation came a day after US Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor delivered a damning account of the quid pro quo pressure campaign that Trump sought to foist on the fledging Volodymyr Zelensky government in Ukraine. Taylor’s opening statement caused extreme consternation among the president’s defenders, who seem to sense that the end may be nigh.

(In a testament to how concerned some folks are, two readers e-mailed us to say we shouldn’t have published Ambassador Taylor’s remarks. Apparently, those readers believe it’s not in the public’s interest to read the account of America’s top diplomat in Ukraine.)

Lawmakers would have heard from Laura Cooper, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, on Wednesday, but Gaetz’s farcical soap opera interrupted the deposition.

Adam Schiff called the sergeant-at-arms to shoo the uninvited Republicans away. Capitol police were also involved.

Sources say Trump was informed on Tuesday of Gaetz’s plan to stage a circus.

Later, the president pinned the “human scum” tweet to the top of his Twitter feed.


7 comments on “Trump Brands GOP Opposition ‘Human Scum’, Gaetz Plus Wingnuts Storm Briefing Room, ‘Woman In Blue’ Dazzles

  1. Mr. Oxygen says:

    The angel and the mob.

  2. This is an attempted violent coup. These people belong in jail and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

  3. vicissitude says:

    From Politico

    An official working on the impeachment inquiry said some GOP lawmakers “refused to completely remove” their devices even after being reprimanded by security personnel and the House sergeant-at-arms, adding the House parliamentarian concluded the GOP lawmakers who stormed the facility violated House deposition rules.

    Republicans said House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) was threatening them with ethics violations. Schiff was also consulting with the House sergeant-at-arms.

    Later Wednesday, House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) wrote a letter to the House sergeant-at-arms demanding that he “take action” against the GOP lawmakers who breached security inside the SCIF.

    Later Wednesday, the Democratic chairs of the three committees sent a letter to the State Department demanding that it turn over documents “that are directly and highly relevant” to the impeachment probe.

  4. Funny how the word “deplorable” got the Republicans panties in a bunch and yet their President is throwing out names on daily basis. I am not proud to be an American. I am embarrassed and afraid of how much further we will fall.

  5. vicissitude says:

    Here’s my scope/FYI:

    Re: GOP wingnut invasion/disruption/breach of closed hearing:

    (4) The chairman may punish breaches of order and decorum, and of
    professional ethics on the part of counsel, by censure and exclusion
    from the hearings; and the committee may cite the offender to the House
    for contempt.

    Also see:

    of the

    (4) The chair may punish breaches of
    order and decorum, and of professional
    ethics on the part of counsel, by cen-
    sure and exclusion from the hearings;
    and the committee may cite the of-
    fender to the House for contempt.


    Also see: The Impeachment Process in the House of
    Updated October 10, 2019

    The primary mechanism by which an investigating committee can and has chosen to limit access to inquiry information is through the use of executive—or closed—session.
    Under House Rule XI, clause 2(g)(1), a committee can operate in executive session by majority vote, a quorum being present, to restrict attendance at a business session to only committee members or others authorized by the committee.38 Similarly, a committee can receive evidence or testimony as if in executive session, which, under Rule XI, clause 2(k)(7), may only be released through authorization by the committee.39

    ==> Rule XI

    In general
    procedures of committees and unfinished business

    Sec. 803. Hearing procedure

    The requirements of clause 2(g)(1) and (2), and of 2(m)(2)(A), of this
    rule that a majority of the committee or subcommittee shall constitute a
    quorum for the purposes of closing meetings or hearings or issuing
    subpoenas have been construed to require, under clause 2(k)(7) of this
    rule, that a majority shall likewise constitute a quorum to release or
    make public any evidence or testimony received in any closed meeting or
    hearing and any other executive session record of the committee or
    subcommittee. See also clauses 11(c) and 11(g) of rule X, which provide
    that executive session material transmitted by the Permanent Select
    Committee on Intelligence to another committee of the House becomes the
    executive session material of the recipient committee by virtue of the
    nature of the material and the injunction of clause 11(g) of rule X
    which prohibit disclosure of information provided to committees or
    Members of the House except in a secret session. A resolution directing
    a standing committee to release executive-session material referred to
    it as such by special rule of the House was held to propose a change in
    the rules and, therefore, not to constitute a question of the privileges
    of the House under rule IX (Sept. 23, 1998, p. —-).


  6. vicissitude says:

    And another thing … Why isn’t Pelosi jumping on the Sergeant-at-Arms about enforcing rules????? Maybe that creates some weird imbalance in a new political way, but no matter what side your on, rules were broken and they need to censure all these creepy nazis — not just because they were acting like nazis, but because they are nazis and if this isn’t nipped in the bud today, these nazis will continue to disrupt other House Rules and ignore ethics and disrupt and upset the rule of law — making this into what it is, which is a nazi coup.

    Decorum in House Debate

    October 26, 1999

    A person may not smoke or use any personal, electronic office equipment, including cellular phones and computers, on the floor of the House. The Sergeant-at-Arms is charged with the strict enforcement of this clause.

    Under clause 2 of Rule I and clause 3 of Rule II, the Speaker may direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to restore order in the chamber by, for example, removing a violating Member from the floor or presenting the mace (the House’s traditional symbol of order).45

    ====> Indecorous words or conduct can give rise to a question of the privileges of the House if a Member believes that the alleged breach of decorum has undermined the integrity of House proceedings. For example, on September 18, 1997, Representative Menendez offered and was recognized to debate H. Res. 233, a resolution stating a question of the privileges of the House. Representative Menendez proceeded to explain that, while making a parliamentary inquiry on the previous day, a former Representative who was in the chamber that day had“used profane language, accused me of religious bigotry, called my integrity into question, and, by the tone of his voice and the context of his remarks, clearly attempted to lure me off the floor into a physical altercation.” H. Res. 233 called for the House to affirm “its unequivocal commitment to the principle that every person who exercises the privilege of admission to the Hall of the House or rooms leading thereto assumes a concomitant responsibility to comport himself in a manner that properly dignifies the proceedings of the House.” The resolution also instructed the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove the former Representative from the chamber and adjoining rooms, and to prevent the gentleman’s return until his contested election was resolved.57 A motion to table Representative Menendez’s resolution was defeated 86-291, and the resolution was adopted, 289-65, after debate.


    Additionally: A former Member must observe proper decorum under this clause, and
    the Chair may direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to assist the Chair in maintain-
    ing such decorum (Sept. 17, 1997, p. 19027). In the 105th Congress the
    House adopted a resolution offered as a question of the privileges of the
    House alleging indecorous behavior of a former Member and instructing
    the Sergeant-at-Arms to ban the former Member from the floor, and rooms
    leading thereto, until the resolution of a contested election to which he
    was party (H. Res. 233, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19340).

    Pursuant to the modification of this clause in the 112th Congress, the
    Speaker announced that mobile electronic devices that impair decorum
    include wireless telephones and personal computers, but that electronic
    tablet devices may be used unobtrusively in the Chamber, although no
    device may be used for still photography or for audio or video recording
    (Speaker Boehner, Jan. 5, 2011, p. l). The Chair has also announced that
    Members should disable wireless telephones on entering the Chamber (e.g.,
    June 12, 2000, p. 10369).

  7. vicissitude says:

    We have a problem here and I strongly believe that Americans need to complain about the GOP crime related to this mob rule pr action, where large groups of people can break the law. This sets a precedent for mob rule, e.g., the media, as a group should now be able to break down any door in the capital and disrupt any activity. This could be any group, including protestors or terrorists, i.e, if you have the numbers, the police will look the other way. Ok, well, the 24 gangsters that broke into the executive hearing need to be charged. This is not a matter of House Rules and Procedures, that group broke the law and they need to go to jail and be fined. They had no right to assume they were above the law. Need facts, here yah go: If it was me, I’d also include criminal treaspass

    Code of the District of Columbia

    § 10–503.16. Unlawful conduct.

    (a) It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons:

    (b) It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons willfully and knowingly:

    (1) To enter or to remain upon the floor of either House of the Congress, to enter or to remain in any cloakroom or lobby adjacent to such floor, or to enter or to remain in the Rayburn Room of the House or the Marble Room of the Senate, unless such person is authorized, pursuant to rules adopted by that House or pursuant to authorization given by that House, to enter or to remain upon such floor or in such cloakroom, lobby, or room;

    (2) To enter or to remain in the gallery of either House of the Congress in violation of rules governing admission to such gallery adopted by that House or pursuant to authorization given by that House;

    (3) To enter or to remain in any room within any of the Capitol Buildings set aside or designated for the use of either House of the Congress or any member, committee, subcommittee, officer, or employee of the Congress or either House thereof with intent to disrupt the orderly conduct of official business;

    (4) To utter loud, threatening, or abusive language, or to engage in any disorderly or disruptive conduct, at any place upon the United States Capitol Grounds or within any of the Capitol Buildings with intent to impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly conduct of any session of the Congress or either House thereof, or the orderly conduct within any such building of any hearing before, or any deliberations of, any committee or subcommittee of the Congress or either House thereof;

    (5) To obstruct, or to impede passage through or within, the United States Capitol Grounds or any of the Capitol Buildings;

    (c) Nothing contained in this section shall forbid any act of any member of the Congress, or any employee of a member of the Congress, any officer or employee of the Congress or any committee or subcommittee thereof, or any officer or employee of either House of the Congress or any committee or subcommittee thereof, which is performed in the lawful discharge of his official duties.


    ==> § 10–503.18. Prosecution and punishment of offenses.

    (a) Any violation of § 10-503.16(a), and any attempt to commit any such violation, shall be a felony punishable by a fine not exceeding $5,000, or imprisonment not exceeding 5 years, or both.

    (b) Any violation of § 10-503.12, § 10-503.13, § 10-503.14, § 10-503.15, § 10-503.16(b), or § 10-503.17, and any attempt to commit any such violation, shall be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding $500, or imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, or both.

    (c) Violations of this part, including attempts or conspiracies to commit such violations, shall be prosecuted by the United States Attorney or his assistants in the name of the United States.


    Also see: § 22–3302. Unlawful entry on property

    (b) Any person who, without lawful authority, shall enter, or attempt to enter, any public building, or other property, or part of such building, or other property, against the will of the lawful occupant or of the person lawfully in charge thereof or his or her agent, or being therein or thereon, without lawful authority to remain therein or thereon shall refuse to quit the same on the demand of the lawful occupant, or of the person lawfully in charge thereof or his or her agent, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than the amount set forth in § 22-3571.01, imprisonment for not more than 6 months, or both.

Speak your mind

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to toolbar