MRCTV readers likely are aware that we, along with a disturbingly small number of other groups, covered and wrote follow-ups on the intense battle over the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and its wildly unconstitutional and immoral claim to tell landlords that they could not evict renters who didn’t pay.
As I wrote in March of 2021, the Trump CDC sparked the controversy in September of 2020. Specifically, I noted that it began…
September 4, 2020, when the CDC issued a ‘temporary moratorium’ on landlords evicting tenants who had broken their contracts and not paid. Shortly thereafter, numerous groups and individuals (landlords) brought suit against the CDC and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in numerous federal district courts.
That, you likely remember, led to the insane June, 2021 Supreme Court “give and take,” which saw the majority finding “in spirit” against the constitutionality of the CDC policy, but ALSO saw Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh backing away from the rest of the conservatives, and allowing the policy to continue, because - to paraphrase his rationale - the initial CDC program was scheduled to end within a month.
Subsequently, the Rochelle Walensky army at the Centers for Disease and Rent Control decided to EXTEND the moratorium against evictions (which, as the Federalist noted last year, was costing landlords approximately $13 Billion-per-month). And so, Kavanaugh soon joined the rest of the conservative majority to call for it to end.
Because, evidently, the unconstitutional nature of it wasn’t really on his radar. For him, the key was whether the CDC “program” was going to continue.
Related: Squad Members Hold Abortion ‘Town Hall,’ and It Goes About As You’d Expect
As I noted at the time, some jurists claimed that if ONLY the Congress had passed a federal statute robbing landlords of their right to evict non-payers, then, they argued, it would be okay – which, of course, is absurd and runs contrary to the fact that Congress has no such power in the Constitution. And, even if it did, that would be an utterly immoral and unethical move by any politician who voted for it.
Little more than a month later, I reported the news that a cadre of Congressional leftists had proposed a bill to do a variation of that, with the virtue-signaling politicians focusing on “suspending the obligation of rent payment” for renters.
In other words, they wanted to federally legalize squatting during the so-called "pandemic." That, of course, was categorized as such by the rent-controlling CDC and federal government, itself, which inspired unconstitutional “emergency” lockdowns and policing on local and state levels across much of the nation.
The astounding part of that development was the fact that some of the sponsors of the bill to “protect” renters? They were landlords, themselves, and hadn't voluntarily stopped collecting rent from their tenants.
As I wrote in August, last year:
Anyone looking for hints of thuggish hypocrisy will easily find it in virtually any government office, and they’ll never experience a surfeit of it if they study Congress. Case in point, hardcore collectivists Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), who, among others, have co-sponsored a bill to prohibit landlords from collecting rent.
Strong-arming which, as I noted, would be bad enough, on a constitutional and moral level. But the enflaming insult came in the fact that, as I wrote, "Tlaib and Pressley both made oodles of cash last year - as landlords - while they bemoaned the plight of renters.”
And a major footnote to that 2021 bill is the fact that, sure, she wanted to cancel rent, and, sure, she never lifted a finger to stop taking it from her own tenants, which is quite revealing. But get this: in her proposed legislation to “ban collection of rent,” the federal government would have reimbursed landlords – like her! In other words, under her paradigm, it was okay to collect during the “eviction moratorium." Then, if her 2021 bill were to pass, she would be reimbursed by taxpayers when she was prevented from collecting.
She literally wanted to pass a bill to give herself taxpayer money as a landlord, making YOU pay for her property.
And now, the 2022 follow-up that only emerges from a few news sources…
Fox News’ Joe Schoffstall reports:
Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., has pocketed up to $100,000 in rental income during the pandemic despite pushing to cancel rent, according to disclosure forms reviewed by Fox News Digital.
Tlaib filed her latest annual financial disclosure report Thursday, which reveals she collected between $15,001 and $50,000 in rental income from a Detroit property in 2021. The Michigan Democrat reported the same rental income for 2020 last August, meaning she now made between $30,000 and $100,000 from rent payments during the pandemic.
And, need anyone be reminded:
Tlaib, however, collected the rent checks despite co-sponsoring a bill alongside other ‘Squad’ members that sought to cancel rent during the pandemic.
As I noted in my August 2021 report, Tlaib was not alone in her tower of hypocrisy.
Her heroic “rent-stoppage” co-sponsor, Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) also wears the virtue mask while she tallies the rent check income.
Last year, Fox News reported that Pressley and her husband disclosed between $5,000 to $15,000 in rental income throughout 2020 from a Boston property.
And her latest disclosure, due Saturday, August 13, likely will become public at some point this week.
In 2005, Peter Schweizer released a book on political hypocrisy entitled “Do As I Say (Not As I Do),” covering the double-standards of people such as Barbra Streisand, Michael Moore, and Nancy Pelosi.
One wonders if his agent has asked him for a new, much larger, updated version.
Follow Us On Twitter
Andrea Mitchell: "We're not in a recession yet, but we'll wait and see what does happen."@SenatorRounds: "Two quarters tell you differently than that." pic.twitter.com/etyNF2iNiY— MRCTV (@mrctv) August 15, 2022