Pointless lie: Pelosi on Gruber: 'I don't know who he is'

[cali]

The ObamaCare consultant churning headlines this week for questioning voters' intelligence is a stranger to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader from California said Thursday.

“I don't know who he is,” Pelosi said of Jonathan Gruber. “He didn't help write our bill.”

Gruber, a health economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who advised the administration during the months-long ObamaCare debate, stirred a hornet's nest this week with comments he made last year suggesting only a “lack of transparency” and “the stupidity of the American voter” allowed the bill to pass.

<snip>

Still, if Pelosi is unfamiliar with Gruber now, that wasn't the case amid the fierce debate as ObamaCare was being crafted.

As unearthed Thursday by The Washington Post, Pelosi's website contains entries from December 2009 featuring an extensive analysis of the law's impact on insurance premiums. The author? Jonathan Gruber.

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/224031-pelosi-on-gruber-i-dont-know-who-he-is

[MineralMan]

1. In all honesty, she may have never even been on her website.

It's entirely possible that she didn't know who he is. Very few congressional members actually participate in creating their websites. They have people who work for them who do that.

[Mass]

4. She should know who Gruber is. It is not a question of creating websites. He was deeply involved in

advising the Obama administration for ACA. This is a ridiculous lie.

[MineralMan]

5. Did he testify in Congress at some time Pelosi was

present? If not, then it's not necessarily a lie. I think you overestimate the degree to which people in Congress are involved in the details of legislation.

It wouldn't surprise me at all.

[Mass]

9. Apparently, she knew who Gruber is at that point (See video)

http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4514604/nancy-pelosi-mentions-jonathan-gruber-analysis

[MineralMan]

12. OK. That's good evidence. Apparently, she did know who he is.

Thanks.

[cali]

11. oh, please. I know who he was and the considerable role he played.

One hardly needs to be involved in the minutia of legislating to know basic information.

[MineralMan]

14. And now, I've seen the video where she mentions his name.

I stand corrected, but I did not say that she didn't know. I said that she may well have not known. Apparently, she did know.

[cali]

16. I just think there are simple, better ways to handle this

all she had to say was that she strongly disagreed with him.

[MineralMan]

18. As you say.

Generally, there are better ways to handle most things.

[B2G]

13. He testified, was quoted by Reid and Pelosi on the Senate floor,

wrote countless opinion pieces as a paid consultant...the list goes on and on.

It's all there in my link down thread.

[hfojvt]

10. also there's the simple fact

that just because you read and posted an article by somebody, that does NOT mean you know who they are, or will remember their name even a week later.

[MineralMan]

17. That's true, but it does appear that she knew him, since

she mentioned his name. So, never mind. It appears she did or does know who he is. As you say, she might have forgotten that in five years. I don't know.

[former9thward]

63. Its more than a website.

She cited him by name in an 2009 interview.

PELOSI: Let me just say this. Anything you need to know about the difference between the Democratic bill and the Republican bill is that the Republicans do not end the health insurance companies' discrimination against people with preexisting conditions. They let that stand. That's scandalous, the fact that it exists. I don't understand why they have not heard the American people, who have said preexisting conditions should not be a source of discrimination.

And secondly, the Republican plan ensures about 3 million more people than now, and ours does 36 million people. So that's a very big difference in that.

We're not finished getting all of our reports back from CBO, but we'll have a side by side to compare. But our bill brings down rates. I don't know if you have seen Jonathan Gruber of MIT's analysis of what the comparison is to the status quo versus what will happen in our bill for those who seek insurance within the exchange. And our bill takes down those costs, even some now, and much less preventing the upward spiral.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/11/13/nancy-pelosi-says-she-doesnt-know-who-jonathan-gruber-is-she-touted-his-work-in-2009/

[Tatiana]

2. Pathetic. I don't know what to believe.

a) She's flat out lying.

b) She's so disengaged with the legislative process that her staffers do all the work and she doesn't have a clue regarding what's going on.

Either way, I don't think she should be in any leadership position, at this point.

[YarnAddict]

27. How about

c) She's starting to lose it. She did NOT look good today.

[Orsino]

3. Not much of a lie, if they never met and Gruber didn't actually write any of the bill. n/t

[HereSince1628]

39. and she may never had read what was posted on her website...

not kidding about considering that possibility.

Aren't websites mostly maintained by one or more staff members?

[Mass]

6. Ridiculous. Gruber was an important actor during the writing of ACA.

Even if he was not an advisor for the House (not sure whether this is the case or not), he was everywhere in the media and in hearings. It is ridiculous that she would answer like that.

[cali]

8. Embarrassing. As are the justifications in this thread

Hell, I know who he is and that he was a key adviser on the ACA.

[Orsino]

43. But what part of the actual bill did he write?

Did he ever meet Pelosi? Speak with her?

An awful lot of people touched healthcare, but even a key consultant may not have authored any of the bill (s).

[Yo_Mama]

49. He was paid almost 400K to advise on the bill

See 2010 HuffPo article, which B2G linked:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/how-the-white-house-used_b_421549.html

Up until this point, most of the attention regarding the failure to disclose the connection between Jonathan Gruber and the White House has fallen on Gruber himself. Far more troubling, however, is the lack of disclosure on the part of the White House, the Senate, the DNC and other Democratic leaders who distributed Gruber's work and cited it as independent validation of their proposals, orchestrating the appearance of broad consensus when in fact it was all part of the same effort.

You really have to read the whole article. His work was widely used to support the bill's proposals, and he was hired to consult on health care reform. He was instrumental to the effort and his work was even used by CBO to score it.

[Orsino]

51. And yet nothing there seems to give the lie to Pelosi. n/t

[B2G]

7. She's fucking lying and she needs to be gone.

She has become a huge liability.

From HuffPo in 2010. Read the whole damn thing:

"On November 30th, Krugman wrote about the CBO report, relying on Gruber's analysis. He, too, concluded it was "good news for reform advocates." That same day, Harry Reid took to the floor of the Senate that same day, saying "just a few days ago an MIT economist -- one of the nation's foremost economists -- a man by the name of Jonathan Gruber, analyzed our bill and concluded it will help Americans pay less and get more."

Reid read from the piece on the floor of the Senate, saying that it provided substantiation from Gruber "who is one of the most respected economists in the world" that the Senate bill would reduce the deficit. Nancy Pelosi touted "the Gruber analysis" on the Speaker's website."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/how-the-white-house-used_b_421549.html

[louis-t]

15. Funny, Hannity and the rest of the Goebbels wannabes

are claiming he "wrote" the bill.

[nationalize the fed]

19. k/r this is the person who, upon being asked where the US Government

gets the authority to mandate the purchase of a product from for profit companies, answered "Are you serious"

That was before the argument switched to taxing authority.

Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a "serious question."

“You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2012/03/26/flashback-pelosi-responds-are-you-serious-question-about-obamacare

If the Republicans all of a sudden came up with the idea that the Government could mandate the purchase of *anything* the Democrats would have gone ballistic.

[alp227]

32. Please don't link to Newsbusters or other right wing sites.

this story is only posted on right wing sites and is likely out of context.

[B2G]

34. I linked to Huff Po and...crickets. nt

[n2doc]

55. Squirrel!

Come on, folks, ignore the distraction. What does it matter if she lied, forgot or whatever? For that matter, what does it matter what Gruber said a long time ago? ACA is the law, we need to focus on making it better, or at least not letting the repubs destroy it.

[Nye Bevan]

20. Maybe she forgot? She is 74, after all, and the ACA was crafted a few years ago.

I'm not sure that it's fair to expect someone in their mid seventies to remember everyone who was involved in something that was several years ago.

OTOH, I think it would be a good idea to bring some younger new blood into the Democratic congressional leadership. (I'm thinking of Harry Reid too).

[cali]

21. If she can't remember who he is, she shouldn't be in Congress, let alone the leader of the Dems

in the House.

And I know lots of people her age who are sharp as tacks and sure as shit wouldn't have forgotten this.

[Nye Bevan]

22. Well, either she is forgetful or she is a liar.

I prefer the more charitable explanation, but either way I agree, it is time for younger blood.

[840high]

26. She needs to retire in any case.

[NCTraveler]

23. Her job here was to get the bill through the house.

That's it. She did not have the expertise or understanding to have huge amounts of input on the bill itself. Her job was to fight and fight is what she did. At times fought for a bill that was completely non-existent. It is really her job in the house on just about everything. Overall, she is extremely good at what she does. She knows who he(Gruber) is. She also knows very few will care in any way. She will claim in public it is a smear from the right. That is how she operates. It is how Harry operates also. They are good at what they do. What they do isn't necessarily honest or what you want. Her lie in the end will be insignificant to her personally. It isn't the first on she has told and won't be the last. That is true for all politicians.

[cali]

24. All she had to say was that she strongly disagrees with him

instead, she turned this into a story that reflects badly on dems. I don't call that effective.

[NCTraveler]

36. You don't call that effective in passing the bill.

That is what I addressed with respect to effectiveness. You took it to a place I didn't. The bill passed, yet you don't think she was effective in getting it passed because of something years later. That is a disconnect. That is the point of effectiveness I addressed. Passing the bill.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

25. Considering the controversy centers on pols deliberately lying to the electorate

everything you said only further underscores and rekindles the accusations. You're actually proving the point of those who now want Gruber hauled before Congress and placed under oath to testify about the lies he claims were perpetrated in the name of passing the ACA.

[NCTraveler]

35. Is what it is. I was speaking directly about Pelosi.

Some here are acting shocked. Every single person here knows she fought her ass off for a bill she knew very little about, if anything at all. She is good at her job. The controversy of "pols deliberately lying to the electorate" is something almost one hundred percent of the electorate is aware of. You really don't think the electorate believes that pols are honest do you? Sunshine is the best disinfectant though.

[TeeYiYi]

28. If she doesn't know who he is...

...how does she know he didn't help write the bill?

re: “I don't know who he is,” Pelosi said of Jonathan Gruber. “He didn't help write our bill.”

TYY

[Orsino]

41. Because she thinks she knows who helped write the actual bill?

I do not understand why she would be expected to know an author of a study that perhaps only her staffers ever touched. I don't think this is a gotcha.

[TeeYiYi]

61. She's making a statement that he didn't help write the bill.

The only way she can say that with certainty is if she knows who he is. To know something about a person means you have an understanding of the person you are referring to.

So, she does know who he is. Either that, or she's never heard of him; in which case she can't say with certainty that he didn't help with the bill.

I'm a Pelosi fan. It was an unfortunate statement.

re: “I don't know who he is,” Pelosi said of Jonathan Gruber. “He didn't help write our bill.”

TYY

[Orsino]

62. Could be unfortunate.

While I'm not a great fan of Pelosi, there are vetifiable lies we can tag her with. In the absence of information, this doesn't seem to be one of them.

[TeeYiYi]

64. She should've said...

...'I've heard about this asshole and I assure you he had nothing to do with writing our bill.'

TYY

[Orsino]

65. Hmm. Refreshing. n/t

[FBaggins]

29. Let us not forget that she said this today

She isn't doing her job very well (perhaps still in denial over the election returns?) if she doesn't know who he is now.

[alp227]

30. UGH. She makes liberals look bad with this remark.

she should be grateful she represents San Francisco not San Bernardino or San Antonio. Otherwise she'd have to resign. I'm tired of Democrats not standing up for their values and records while Republicans have an unending supply of braggin' rights.

[stevenleser]

31. She probably interacts with scores of people a day. ACA was passed what, 4+ years ago?

I don't remember all the people I worked on projects with four years ago who I havent seen since.

[cali]

37. seriously? this is just embarrassing to see. This was the signature

legislation that came out under her aegis- not just Obama's signature legislation. She worked on it for years. This wasn't something that just happened over the course of a day.

[JonLP24]

33. Stop the BS

Especially when it comes to this.

[baldguy]

38. So we need political purity tests to be instituted

for anyone ever involved in producing any speeches, reports, ads, flyers, presentations, etc etc etc, ... even down to the citations & references used?

And the candidate or office holder should have to memorize the dossiers for each of those people? Get real.

Gruber was a guy who was paid to do a job. Period. Why should anyone care what he has to say half a decade later, and for comments which he has since apologized for?

This sounds like just another phoney GOP-produced "scandal" that should be ignored.

[cali]

47. say what? this was a needless, stupid lie that is quite damaging.

And if you think it's going to be ignored, grab a freakin' clue: It is not being ignored by either the press or the repukes in Congress. All she had to say is that she strongly disagrees with him and she would have shut this down. duh.

[maced666]

40. Point is that guy needs to shut up.

his opinions and intentions which were deceiving to the American public are not what the Democratic Party's intentions were

[sendero]

42. Pelosi is apparently lying..

... no huge surprise there. But I want to add my fondest wish - that this Gruber idiot be drummed out of his job and work at a car wash or 7-11. His big stupid mouth, even if taken somewhat out of context, has damaged the ACA at a time it can ill afford any more damage.

It beyond unprofessional, it is malpractice.

[Yo_Mama]

44. Gruber is supposedly now involved in advising Vermont on their single-payer system

http://watchdog.org/182774/gruber-single-payer/

Is this a good thing?

[cali]

48. no. we're in a shambles in Vermont. We have a non-functional health exchange

and the only way to purchase health insurance is thru the non-existent health exchange.

[Yo_Mama]

50. What are people doing?

I have been trying to follow the VT healthcare evolution, but it's hard to get info and I wind up abysmally confused.

[cali]

53. well, supposedly it's fixed as of today.

[Amishman]

45. Just another lie by a politician

Whenever the facts get inconvenient they all start lying.

Our folks do it, repugs do it more.

Just another reason we fundamentally need to clean house, all parties all levels.

How do you know the politician was lying? Their lips were moving.

[BklnDem75]

46. We quote people we don't know all the time...

Gruber was one of the architects for the ACA. It's no surprise Pelosi would mention or quote Gruber in trying to sell the plan to the rest of the House. She doesn't have to know him to do that. It was Pelosi's House that passed a bill with a Public Option. The Hill knows damn well that staffers deal with websites. Why are we helping the media attack Democrats?

[cali]

52. aargh. this was just stupid. and nothing posted here will make any difference

avoidable lie.

[onenote]

54. She didn't say she didn't know him personally. She said she didn't know who he is.

While I may quote people I don't know personally, I try to make a point of knowing who they are before I quote them.

[BklnDem75]

57. Apparently, she meant personally...

"Well, you gave an interesting set of observations, but one that you skipped is Mr. Gruber's comments were a year old, and he has backtracked from most of them. He's not even advocating the position that he was at some conference. So I don't know who he is. He didn't help write our bill. With all due respect to your question, you have a person who wasn't writing our bill, commenting on what was going on when we were writing our bill, who has withdrawn some of the statements that he made. So let’s put him aside."

Pelosi said, "I don't know who (Jonathan Gruber) is." Video showing Pelosi citing Gruber’s work offers the clearest evidence that she did indeed know who he was, and even her office now acknowledges that she meant to say that she didn't know Gruber personally. Even if the latter is true, that’s not what she said at the press conference, so we rate her claim False.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/nov/13/nancy-pelosi/nancy-pelosi-says-she-doesnt-know-who-jonathan-gru/

[Mass]

58. "I don't know who (Jonathan Gruber) is." This does not mean personally.

[BklnDem75]

59. Did you read the whole statement that I posted?

If she didn't know who Gruber was, how would she know he retracted his statement? She meant personally because she was referring to his character. Her office already said she meant personally.

[hrmjustin]

56. Welll it looks like she knew who he was in 2009 according to a video I saw.

This was not a good moment for her.

[Autumn]

60. Oh say it ain't so. Nancy lied??? Nah, she just forgets

that there is video of her talking about him. She forgets quoting him. Nancy needs to retire her leadership position.