We are starting to see piles of bad news flow in for U.S. Congressman and future assistant manager at Applebee’s Devin Nunes.
This should not be a big surprise to anyone who believes in the literal truth to the title of Rick Wilson’s new book, “Everything Trump Touches Dies,” because Trump has definitely touched Nunes, and not in a good place.
Norman Ornstein, a scholar currently working for a conservative think tank, stopped by The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell to discuss his recent op-ed suggesting that Nunes should be expelled from Congress. Not voted out — expelled, as in the mechanism that has only been used five times in our history to get rid of the bad eggs. Ornstein’s theory is based in the idea that when Nunes knowingly lied about FISA warrants, he was de facto aiding the Russian efforts against us, which constitutes aid and comfort, which is an impeachable offense.
It’s doubtful this Congress would take the suggestion seriously, but let’s hope this news boosts Andrew Janz, who is making this district competitive. The last polling we have is party internal (never the best source), but it has Nunes leading by only eight points. The district remains something of a long shot, but this is the Golden State, and sometimes you strike pay dirt.
The bad news is that Nunes’s Trumpiness has filled his coffers with out-of-district deplorable dollars. For a candidate who typically raises $2.5 million in an entire season, Nunes has raised $7 million for his 2018 re-election. Still, let’s remember Jeb Bush going down in flames after spending $100 million plus. Money isn’t everything, and with Nunes at war with the local paper, under scrutiny by the FEC, explaining his record, avoiding his voters, and being called on to be expelled by respected conservatives, well we might just strike gold in CA-22 yet.
And I should of course mention that Andrew Janz is an excellent candidate and would be a great public servant. Let’s not forget that...this isn’t just about firing a horrible Congressman, it’s also about electing a good person to serve.
Correction: I now realize that my source newspaper was referring to Ornstein as a “conservative scholar” because of who he works for, not as much his personal ideology. I think they did that to create a flashy headline. If I had realized that, I would not have referred to Ornstein the same way. I have edited the diary slightly to remove that language, and concur with commenters that it’s not an accurate characterization and apologize for having inadvertently used that talking point.