Pelosi’s baby bottle: While moms can’t find baby formula, Congress can now get booze delivered to their offices


The following contains editorial content which is the opinion of the author, a current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today. 

WASHINGTON, DC- For anyone who has watched Nancy Pelosi’s trainwreck news conferences or statements, it is clear that she appears to be suffering from one of two maladies—moderate dementia or ETOH intoxication. Or perhaps a combination of both.

Usually these events involve Pelosi struggling to keep her dentures in her mouth, babbling incoherently and slurring her words, while basically making little if any sense.

Now, for those who suspect old Nancy likes herself an occasional (ok, more than occasional) nip on something, Pelosi has made it easier for members of the House to have beer, wine and spirits delivered directly to their offices, the Daily Wire reports. This should make those press events even more comical than they already are.

According to Fox News Channel’s Chad Pergram, the new perk comes courtesy of Sodexo, the Capitol’s new caterer.

“Wine and beer was often available at catered receptions on Capitol Hill,” Pergram tweeted. “But now booze can go directly to a Member’s office.”

This latest development comes as parents across the country are finding store shelves which used to stock full supplies of baby formula empty. Despite Biden’s claim last week that indicated the administration was taken by surprise over the shortage, it was initially reported as being an issue back in November. But hey, at least we know the Democrat-controlled Congress has their priorities straight.

According to a page called “Drinks on Demand” on Sodexo’s House of Representatives site, it shows members of the House can place “bulk orders” for drinks “by the case.” Choices include brands such as Tito’s vodka, Jack Daniels whiskey, Johnnie Walker scotch and much more, with prices ranging from $16 to $35 per bottle.

Beer may be purchased by the case only, with prices ranging from $25 for a 24-pack of Busch to $50 for a case of Red Bear 51st State Hazy IPA. Why do we think that somehow the taxpayers will end up being on the hook for Pelosi and friends’ alcoholic beverages?

Clear winos like Pelosi can also order all manner of wines, with various brands among the categories of Cabernet, Chardonnay, Merlot, Rose, Sauvignon Blanc, Pinot Noir, Pinot Grigio and Riesling. We think Pelosi likes to imbibe on a bit (ok, a lot) of Chardonnay.

Now mind you, none of this is high-end stock, with the most expensive coming in at $25 a bottle. For those who might have a conscience, a Crane Lake Pinot Grigio is available for the cost of only $10 a bottle.

The development was called out by Rep. Austin Smith (R-GA), who tweeted:

“Pelosi is opening a liquor store in the House where Members can buy alcohol with their taxpayer-funded MRAs.

“All while Americans are struggling to pay for food? Outrageous.”

Some in the Twitterverse also slammed the development.

Under House rules, members and their staff “may be reimbursed for food and non-alcoholic beverage expenses incurred while participating in virtual legislative planning sessions,” they are prohibited from billing the government (aka you and me) for alcohol.

“Members and employees may not be reimbursed for the cost of alcoholic beverages,” it states.

This  is of course nothing new. As reported by Judicial Watch:

One CODEL traveling from Washington, D.C. through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq from May 15-20, 2008 “to discuss matters of mutual concern with government leaders” included members of Congress and their spouses and cost $17,931 per hour in aircraft alone. Purchases for the CODEL included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Creme, Makers Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer, and several bottles of wine. 

Now, if anyone believes that members of Congress—especially Democrats—won’t find a way to have the taxpayers fund their alcoholic tendencies, at least via campaign funds, you’ve been imbibing what Pelosi has been drinking.

One Twitter user opined that it was likely old crazy Nancy herself who arranged the new program, since she owns a vineyard in California and is known in Washington, DC circles to tip a glass of the fermented grape now and again.

“This HAD to be Nancy’s doing,” the user tweeted.

We agree, 100%!

For more on the incompetent Pelosi:


NEW YORK CITY, NY – In a recent interview with Sean Hannity, former President Trump pointed the finger of blame at Nancy Pelosi for the chaotic events of January 6, 2021, saying she turned down a National Guard presence.

In an exclusive phone interview with Sean Hannity on January 20, 2022, Hannity questioned the former president about his and Pelosi’s involvement with security considerations for the January 6 protests.

Hannity asked:

“Did you authorize, as required by law, the calling up of up to twenty thousand National Guard troops on January the 4th, and maybe even other occasions, in the lead-up to what everybody knew would be a big rally, and in every big rally I guess you always have bad actors.

“But on the heels of the rioting, 574 riots in the summer of 2020 that killed dozens, injured thousands of cops, and caused billions in property damage, did you authorize calling up the Guard, and then… the chain of command went to Nancy Pelosi and to the mayor of D.C., Muriel Bowser.

“Did you, as required by law, authorize that?”

Trump responded by claiming that Pelosi and Bowser both turned down the National Guard troops, saying:

“One hundred percent.  And, attested to by many people, and they turned it down.

“Nancy Pelosi turned it down.  I guess they both did, but Nancy Pelosi turned it down, and she’s in charge of the Capitol.

“So they run the Capitol, the security of the Capitol.”

Trump continued by speculating on what would have happened had National Guard troops been present, saying:

“If you had 10,000 or 20,000, … if you had 5,000 soldiers wrapped around the Capitol, you would have had no January 6 as we know it.

“There would have been no problem whatsoever.

“But they turned it down.”

According to a Breitbart transcript, Trump also reiterated his claim, going on to say:

“But I wanted to have soldiers or — and I wanted soldiers and/or National Guard, and Nancy Pelosi turned it down.

“And if she didn’t turn it down, you would not have had any problem.

“It would have just been absolutely a lovely day.”


Also in his phone interview with Hannity, Trump offered up some criticisms of foreign relations under Biden.

He asserted that the U.S. is “disrespected,” largely due to the disastrous pullout from Afghanistan.  He told Hannity:

“We’re disrespected all over the world.  And don’t forget, President Xi of China, Putin, Kim Jong-Un, Iran, all of these people, these leaders are watching.

And when they watch our border, and maybe worse,… what happened in Afghanistan, the way we got out, it looked like a surrender.”

Trump continued:

“They look at that, and all of a sudden, they have great bravery.

“So now you have a problem in the Ukraine, which you would have never had in my administration.”

In relation to the developing situation with Russia and the Ukraine, Hannity and Trump also discussed President Biden’s most recent press conference, in which the president stated:

“Russia will be held accountable if it invades.

“And it depends on what it does.

“It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having to fight about what to do and not do, et cetera.”

Re-Fund the Police

Trump responded:

“Really, what he said when he said they may go in, they will go in, and he talks about a “minor incursion,’ I sort of said, ‘I don’t believe he said that.’

“Because that’s like giving him, they use the term ‘green light.’  He [Putin] was green lighted.”

Trump continued:

“Whether you’re for strong stoppage or not, you’re really telling him [Putin] he might as well go in.”

Trump added that discussion on the matter of the Ukraine should not be only in terms of sanctions, “because sanctions don’t mean too much to Russia.”

WASHINGTON, DC- Apparently, Hunter Biden isn’t the only relative of a high-ranking Democrat to leverage his family name to enrich himself with Chinese money.

According to the blockbuster new book, “Red-Handed: How American Elites Get Rich Helping China Win,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) amazingly reduced her previous criticism of the Chinese Communist Party while her husband and son filled their pockets with Chinese money, as reported in Breitbart.

The revelations in Schweizer’s book come just after it was revealed that Pelosi’s husband Paul has made some “timely” stock trades for the couple which have a tendency to outperform the stock market…significantly.

Now it has been revealed by Schweizer that the Pelosi’s have also been the beneficiaries of business relationships in China, relationships which appear to have swayed Pelosi’s views on the communist nation.

According to Schweizer, Pelosi and her family had millions of dollars at stake where it concerns China, and Pelosi has apparently “evolved” in her stance on China’s communist regime from a policy perspective as the family’s investments in the communist nation grew and took shape.

While Pelosi began her career as a tough critic on China, she has softened those stances, although on occasion, perhaps to give her cover, she has been critical of the Chinese Communist Party for human rights abuses.

“The longtime member of Congress and Speaker of the House was, early in her career, a particularly harsh critic of China’s human rights practices,” Schweizer wrote.

“She continues to be vocal about some issues, but her positions have softened as her family has sought and received lucrative commercial opportunities in mainland China.”

Back in the 1990s, Pelosi was a rather fierce critic of China and in fact had at one time protested in Tiananmen Square, a move which angered Chinese officials:

In 1991, as a junior member of Congress, Pelosi found herself in Tiananmen Square. She was part of a congressional delegation visiting Beijing barely two years after the horrific events had unfolded.

Pelosi had been in meetings with Chinese officials, but with a couple of colleagues, she covertly carried a banner into the middle of the square and unfurled it in front of a small crowd and the media. “To those who died for Democracy in China,” it read. The Chinese police were furious. They pushed through the crowd to seize the banner.

“I started running,” Pelosi recalled. “And my colleagues, some of them, got a little roughed up. The press got treated worse because they had cameras, and they were detained. The Foreign Ministry denounced the event as a “premeditated farce.”

Breitbart noted, citing Schweizer that the incident was not an isolated one; Pelosi was actually tough on China for a number of years.

He told how Pelosi had opposed giving China most-favored-nation trade status, and opposed their entry into the World Trade Organization, which is widely credited with pushing the communist nation to the head of the pack where it concerns manufacturing.

In 2005, Schweizer noted, Pelosi rose on the House floor to support an amendment to block the Chinese National Overseas Oil Company (CNOOC), a Chinese government-backed entity, from purchasing Uniocal, a California-based energy company.

However, at some point in time, Pelosi’s “views began to moderate,” Schweizer wrote. In fact, a 2009 Politico story noted Pelosi’s change in attitude toward China. The story quoted people close to Pelosi who noticed a “subtle shift” in her approach to the communist nation.

The reporter, Glenn Thrush wrote that while Pelosi “won’t back down on her core commitment to democratization in the country,” according to people close to her “she’s also not looking to pick new fights with China’s leaders—or with the Obama Administration as it seeks to strengthen US.-China relations.”

Only two months after the Politico story, the Wall Street Journal reported that Pelosi told  the U.S.-China Clean Energy Forum in Beijing that the reason for her “shift” on Chin was, as Schweizer writes, “ result, in part, of issues like climate change that the two countries needed to tackle together.”

“I think this climate crisis is game-changing for the U.S.-China relationship,” Pelosi said at the event. “It’s an opportunity we cannot miss.”

While the public reason for Pelosi’s decision to soften her stance on China was claimed to be the “climate crisis,” Schweizer believes there is much more to it, claiming perhaps “other factors” were at work, pointing out that Pelosi’s husband Paul and her son, Paul Jr., had started working business deals in China.

Two men arrested and charged with the attempted murder of a Chicago cop after shooting him during a traffic stop

Paul Pelosi, Schweizer explains, “became a partner investor in Matthews International Capital Management, a pioneer in the Chinese investment market.” That company was run by Pelosi’s “friend and political supporter” William Hambrecht, a mega donor who donated millions of dollars to Democrats and Democrat-aligned causes.

Hambrecht first launched a Chinese growth fund as far back as 1995, Schweizer writes, and he notes that Hambrecht felt that technology—especially the internet—would explode growth there.

Schweizer notes that The China Fund is Matthews’ “best-known investment fund.” The Matthews fact sheet reads:

“Under normal market conditions, the Matthews China Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing at least 80% of its net assets, which include borrowings for investment purposes, in the common and preferred stocks of companies located in China.”

Schweizer writes that Pelosi and her family have had “millions” invested in just this particular fund.

“In addition to Paul serving on the board, the Pelosis had a big chunk of money invested in Matthews,” Schweizer writes. “In 2010, the Pelosis held between $5 million and $25 million in a Matthews fund ‘specializing in Asian investment.’ Paul Pelosi received partnership income between $100,000 and $1 million.”

That fund, however, isn’t the only business relationship the Pelosis have tied to China. Paul Pelosi was involved with a number of limousine services, including one that catered to the 2008 summer Olympics in Beijing.

“The Pelosis had previously become involved in other China ventures as well. Paul Pelosi’s classmate from Georgetown, Vincent Wolfington, set up a limousine service called Global Ambassador Concierge, which catered to ultra-high net-worth individuals traveling around the world,” Schweizer writes. “One big market for Global: the Beijing 2008 Summer Olympics.”

Amazingly, Nancy Pelosi had originally been opposed to Beijing hosting the Olympic games in 2008, citing the fact that “[China’s] human rights record should prevent it from such an honor.” However when her husband was put in the position of being to clean up financially, Pelosi suddenly appeared to have changed her position.

“The year after her husband bought shares in Global Ambassador Concierge, she reversed course and opposed a boycott of Beijing’s hosting of the games,” Schweizer writes.

Global wasn’t the only limousine service that Pelosi’s husband (and by extension Pelosi) profited from.

“The Pelosis also bought a stake in another limousine service, City Car Services (CCS), which Wolfington’s son apparently ran,” Schweizer writes. “SEC documents show Paul Pelosi as a member of the board of directors of CCS.”

Schweizer notes that it wasn’t only Paul Pelosi Sr. who had business interests in China. Paul Pelosi Jr. also had several business opportunities in the communist nation.

“Nancy Pelosi’s son, Paul Pelosi Jr., was also looking for commercial opportunities on mainland, and he embarked on a series of ventures that involved Chinese investors and clients,” Schweizer writes:

In June 2010, he became the chair of the Universal Energy and Services Group Advisory board for a company called Tree Top Industries. Upon announcing his appointment, the company declared that Paul Jr. and the company chairman “plan to travel to Vietnam and China to meet potential investors and are attempting to arrange meetings in Washington DC with appropriate federal agencies.”

Tree Top eventually changed its name to Global Tech Industries Group, and Paul Pelosi Jr. remains a shareholder in the company. The firm has long sought partnerships in China.

Paul Pelosi Jr. joined the board of another company, International Media Acquisition Corp, with ambitious plans in China. “We believe India and other emerging economics markets, as well as China, represent excellent markets in which to find strong candidates for our initial business combination because of their relatively high growth rates,” stated the firm when it filed.

In concluding the Pelosi section of the book, Schweizer notes that after the coronavirus pandemic hit the United States after being released in Wuhan, China, Pelosi used her position to block any and all investigations into the origins of the virus, which is bizarre…unless you understand where Pelosi’s bread is buttered.

“Beginning in 2020 and extending for more than a year, U.S. Speaker of the House Pelosi blocked efforts by Congress to investigate the origins of the COVID-19 virus,” Schweizer writes. “With much of the evidence pointing to the possibility of a lab leak of the virus in Wuhan Pelosi ordered the Democrats in Congress not to cooperate with any efforts to investigate the matter.”

Initially, Pelosi and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarty (D-CA) had reached a bipartisan agreement to impanel a special Congressional committee to investigate China, which McCarthy had worked on for over a year before Pelosi suddenly withdrew Democratic support in early 2020 just as the coronavirus started to rampage across the U.S.

McCarthy, however continued to push forward with a Republican-only panel to investigate China; that panel produced a report in the lead-up to the 2020 general election.

McCarthy has vowed that if and when Republicans regain the majority in the House after the 2022 midterms—which would essentially put Pelosi out to pasture—he intends to create a select committee on China in the House next year.

Sadly, Pelosi has announced her intention to run again for Congress at age 81. Some people just can’t let go of that access to $$$.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First
Submit a Correction
Related Posts