When she turned 75, three years ago, The Washington Post called Nancy Pelos an “effective leader.“

Three years later, and with a different president in the White House, liberal faithful like actress and activist Alyssa Milano would seem to agree.

Milano has tweeted about how ‘terrifying’ the former speaker of the House and current minority leader is — allegedly — to Republicans:

Can you do me a favor? Can you retweet this if you’re sick of Republicans attacking Nancy Pelosi? They only attack her, because they’re absolutely terrified of her. They should be. Listen to a new #DworkinReport below. https://t.co/985kAijwxA

— Alyssa Milano (@Alyssa_Milano) August 15, 2018

And while conservatives loathe the policies Pelosi helped pass during her two years as House speaker during the Obama administrations, some, like conservative actor James Woods, think Pelosi might be one of the Republicans’ most effective weapons to bring out their voters in November — and stop Pelosi from getting the House gavel again.

TRENDING: Sex Story Backfiring. Dems Get Bad News from RINO Vital To Stopping Kavanaugh

I agree. I’m sick of Republicans attacking Pelosi. They should be throwing rose petals at her feet. Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth! https://t.co/mfIZEGnQbl

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) August 21, 2018

For many on the right, Pelosi is not terrifying at all. In fact, she is the meme that keeps on giving.

Who could forget her referring to the Trump tax breaks “crumbs,” on more than one occasion calling President Trump “President Bush” (a Gateway Pundit count put the number at five in 2017 alone), and saying that mowing the grass would work to control illegal immigration instead of building a border wall?

But it isn’t just Republicans who see some flaws with Pelosi. One Democrat shared that Pelosi’s continued high visibility is actually harming the Democrat Party:

No. 🚫

I’m a Democrat and transgender. I’ve heard Nancy Pelosi call people Nazis that aren’t actually Nazis. So she has done wonderful things in the past but she’s NOW doing things that harm the #democrats @TheDemocrats

I agree the Republican Party is in the wrong though.

— Shawn Sunshine Strickland (@Strickalator) August 15, 2018

But that Democrat is not alone. The Atlantic — that liberal redoubt — has now reported that multiple Democrats have signed a petition that could have a direct impact on Pelosi’s future.

It first noted that it has been “described as a direct shot at Nancy Pelosi.” Then the article explained that, “At least 10 Democrats in the lower chamber have signed on to a letter to Caucus Chair Joe Crowley seeking a change to caucus rules that would raise the number of votes required to nominate a candidate for speaker.

“Current rules mandate that a nominee receive support from only a simple majority of caucus members before advancing to the floor for a vote. The letter requests that threshold be changed to 218, a majority of the House.”

In other words, if Democrats do retake the House in the November midterms, Pelosi would likely need the votes of all but a few of the Democrat representatives. (Democrats need to win at least 24 more seats in the House than they now hold even get the 218 votes they would need to elect a speaker.)

Ten signatures on the petition may not sound like a lot, and it isn’t. However, the article also reported that more weren’t needed for the petition to be taken seriously. It has enough support for the Democrat caucus to vote on it.

RELATED: Conway Shames Obama, Uses His Own Words Against Him To Praise Trump’s Economy

“Only five are needed for a vote on a petition like this one,” the article reported. “The proposed rule change will be voted on next week.”

No matter how the proposal fares, it’s a sign of rebellion among Democrats restless under Pelosi’s rule.

And this is from The Atlantic, the magazine so liberal it lets liberal social media mobs decide who it will hire and fire.

In the meantime, those on the right will continue to have fun at the expense of the “terrifying” Pelosi. Memes and political cartoons are sure to continue to be produced.

Reposting @thedeusvault:#democrats #chuckschumer #nancypelosi #qanon #maga #LockThemAllUp #trump #censorship #FreeSpeech #2ndAmendment #guncontrol #SecondAmendment #GunReformNow #deepstate #corruption #lockherup #Alfie #FreeHealthCare #Obamacare #USA #trump #trumpmemes pic.twitter.com/L2ksZRGLSX

— Tim Gradous (@tgradous) September 20, 2018

You’re kidding me right Nancy? I love my crumbs.. pic.twitter.com/4YY39L8RjI

— Covfefe Jerry (@JerryLanci) September 14, 2018

And Pelosi’s supporters will continue to hit back. Pelosi herself has made it clear that she has no plans on going anywhere:

Nancy Pelosi Mocks Conservatives, Says She’s Going Nowhere: “As Long as Trump’s Here, I’m Here” https://t.co/4Is0kw5fjm #proife #maga pic.twitter.com/iOivbVVxum

— LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) September 10, 2018

According to LifeNews, she credits President Donald Trump with her determination to stay put, despite acknowledging that not only will her caucus determine leadership within, but in fact, “it’s time for new blood.”

LifeNews added that in a CNN interview, she also claimed, “If Hillary Clinton had won, and the Affordable Care Act was protected — I feel very proprietary about that — I was happy to go my way. If the election were held today, we would win overwhelmingly and women would lead the way.”

“We have so many excellent women candidates from women across the country. Women marched and then they ran, and now they’re running and now they’re going to be members of Congress.”

It bears noting that Republicans have women in the Trump administration, in Congress, and running for office.

And it’s a good bet they’re more “effective” at what they do then Nancy Pelosi can dream of.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

ZIP |
September 20, 2018 5:20 pm

A CNN interview on Wednesday with former FBI assistant director Chris Swecker didn’t work out quite the way the network was probably hoping after Swecker said the recent accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh would not hold up in court.

CNN anchor Brooke Baldwin asked Swecker a series of questions regarding the FBI’s involvement with the accusations of sexual assault made by California university professor Christine Blasey Ford against Kavanaugh.

Discussion of the FBI’s involvement with the case began Tuesday after Ford demanded an FBI investigation into her allegations before she testifies before Congress.

The Senate Judiciary Committee said in an official statement that the FBI wouldn’t handle the decades-old case.

“The FBI has indicated to the committee and in public statements that it considers the matter closed. The FBI does not make credibility determinations. The FBI provides information on a confidential basis in order for decision makers to determine an individual’s suitability,” the statement read.

TRENDING: Sex Story Backfiring. Dems Get Bad News from RINO Vital To Stopping Kavanaugh

Swecker confirmed during the CNN interview that the FBI won’t handle the case.

“The FBI has no independent jurisdiction to open up a stand-alone investigation of rape allegations or assault allegations that may have taken place 36 years ago,” Swecker said. “That’s a local crime. Unless it involves a federal official or on federal land, or has some federal nexus, there’s just no jurisdiction to do it.”

Former FBI assistant director Chris Swecker on Kavanaugh accuser: ” … she doesn’t remember where it happened. She doesn’t remember when it happened. How do you investigate with so few details available? … There is not much there … None of this would hold up in court.” pic.twitter.com/Ys6gT5Q97M

— The Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) September 19, 2018

The interview got even more disappointing for the left when Baldwin asked Swecker what evidence the agency would look at to investigate Ford’s claims.

“There just can’t be any forensic evidence. I would be shocked if they brought a garment forward that might have DNA or something like that,” Swecker said.

Swecker went on to say that the evidence would be “strictly interviews” of the alleged victim, the alleged perpetrator, anyone else who might have been at the party, her therapist or anyone else she may have confided in about the incident.

Already, three of the four other people Ford claimed were at the party have denied her allegations with the most recent being Kavanaugh’s former classmate, Patrick Smyth.

“I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh,” Smyth said in a statement obtained by CNN.

After explaining the types of evidence available, Swecker noted that Ford’s accusation wouldn’t hold up in court.

RELATED: George W. Bush Doubles Down on Kavanaugh in Wake of Allegations – ‘We Stand by Our Comments’

“But it’s all fairly thin. None of this would hold up in court,” Swecker said.

Swecker added that Kavanaugh already passed six rigorous background checks from the FBI.

“These are the most thorough background checks that you can possibly do,” Swecker said.

In other words, there’s virtually no way to definitively prove Ford’s allegations are true. Which creates a sad irony that Democrats are so willing to ignore the basic tenets of due process when it comes to trying to prevent the nomination of Kavanaugh to the highest court in the land.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

When the President made the decision to order the declassification and release of various documents from the Russia, Russia, Russia investigation, there was an immediate uproar. The documents to be declassified included one section of the initial 2017 FISA application against Carter Page, as well as some of the FBI’s notes taken during interviews with Page and Bruce Ohr, having mostly to do with the Steele dossier. The strange aspect of the protests was the fact that they all seemed to be coming from one side of the aisle. Now, the most senior Democrats in Congress are trying to slam the brakes on the process by asking the Justice Department and the FBI to provide an “immediate briefing” to the Gang of Eight. (Daily Caller)

Leading congressional Democrats are looking to stall the process to release documents related to the Russia investigation, which President Donald Trump ordered declassified on Monday.

Reps. Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff and Sens. Chuck Schumer and Mark Warner, sent a letter Tuesday asking Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, FBI Director Christopher Wray and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats to provide an “immediate briefing” to the Gang of Eight before declassifying and releasing the documents…

The Democrats argue that Trump’s action is a “brazen abuse of power” aimed at undermining the special counsel’s investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.

They further claimed that “absent an indictment,” the subjects of federal investigations “should not be able to access law enforcement or related national security information for any reason.”

The curious part of all this is that some of the people who have been screaming the most loudly about transparency (when they want information damaging to the President to be released) are now suddenly the people who are concerned about protecting sources and methods or compromising the investigation. We should also be reminded that it’s the President and his top intelligence officials who make the final call on what information should be classified. It’s also their responsibility to live with the results of any declassification.

Here’s at least one point to consider. I completely agree that the government should be able to protect sources and methods, but how much would that really apply here? As far as sources go, we already know the identities of the people who were being questioned. That information leaked out ages ago and has been plastered all over the media on a daily basis. (And when the stories looked bad for the White House, none of these security-minded Democrats seemed to be objecting.) If there were any other people involved in connecting the dots to come up with Page and Ohr’s names, their identities can be redacted easily enough.

The same goes for methods. This sounds like a pretty straightforward investigation, but if it involved any particularly clever tricks, they could be blacked out as well. It’s also very difficult to see how declassifying anything that they’ve already discovered is going to somehow imperil the investigation. It’s not as if this is suddenly going to tip off Ohr and Page at this point. I think they’ve figured out that they were being surveilled.

It’s not just the Democrats on the hill, either. I’ve been seeing analysts on CNN commenting on how this request could somehow undercut the Special Counsel or the investigation itself. Really? The media has been joyously accepting leaks from Mueller’s team right and left and running blaring headlines about anything that makes it look as if the noose is closing in on the President. But now, all of a sudden they’re concerned about protecting classified information? Pardon me for guffawing a bit.

The senior Democrats involved in this have been poo-pooing the idea that there was something improper going on in relation to the origins of the investigations into Ohr and Page, as well as the Steele dossier. If that’s the case, why are you worried about the public seeing this information? If they want to keep a lid on it this badly, that makes me suspect it really is material we need to see.