Utopia Talk / Politics / Pelosi grabbed Trump by the pussy!

murder Member	Fri Jan 25 14:31:05 Trump caved like a bitch! I don't know if those Russian hookers pee'd on Trump, but Nancy just shat all over him. The Art of Running your Mouth and then Capitulating! If Hot Rod had lived to see this, it would have killed him.
Paramount Member	Fri Jan 25 14:44:16 ”but Nancy just shat all over him” Rofl
yankeessuck123 Member	Fri Jan 25 14:59:52 The master negotiator quits the field and gets nothing for it. Wonder if McConnell can figure out how to pin the next shutdown on the Democrats in the next 3 weeks.
patom Member	Fri Jan 25 16:33:37 Trump may be going into rehab after the intervention.
kargen Member	Fri Jan 25 18:33:54 Nancy actually looked good today politically. Shumer gloated like he had just single handed removed President Trump from office. Nancy knows a shit storm is coming in three weeks or less and she was smart enough not to offer up any ammo. There likely isn't going to be another shutdown. Congress has three weeks to allocate funding for the wall or President Trump will as President Obama put it use a phone and a pen. Democrats have to decide do they offer a partial payment for the wall so they can spin that in 2020 or do they let President Trump fully fund it through executive order. Most legal experts on these types of things say President Trump does have the authority to reallocate funds for a wall if he decides to go that route.
Dukhat Member	Fri Jan 25 20:20:28 The 10 million extra voters who gave Democrats a majority in the house didn't elect Democrats so that they could give Trump his fucking wall. Trump had a solid Republican senate and house for 2 years and was unable to accomplish anything towards his number 1 campaign promise. Instead he tried to destroy our healthcare system and give his billionaire buddies a tax cut on the back of other Americans. He only succeeded in the latter and, fortunately for America, barely failed at the former. Let Trump fund the wall with emergency funds. When the next disaster hits and we have less money to deal with it; he'll look like even more of a fucking moron.
kargen Member	Fri Jan 25 20:28:53 Dukhat the wall required sixty votes in the Senate. Still does. That is why I am saying in three weeks we are probably going to see an executive order. And there are several options available to draw the money from. We can also toss in disaster funds can be added as part of a supplementary spending bill at any time.
Dukhat Member	Fri Jan 25 21:46:55 He could've played the brinksmanship game when the Republicans had a majority in the house too. It would've been a shorter mountain to climb. But he didn't bother because Trump could care less about the wall or his supporters. It's all political posturing and they all eat it up because they are stupid dumb fucks. Trump was the leader of the idiot birther movement and that didn't disqualify Trump to them to start. They just bounce from one lie to another and let themselves be manipulated because they are that fucking stupid.
kargen Member	Fri Jan 25 23:03:39 Ya know same applies to the other side. Schumer and Pelosi are still pretending this is about a wall and their lap dogs are eating it up just as quick as the hard line Trump supporters go all aboard with what President Trump says. You would think as no nonsense as a barrier on the border is that it would have been done several presidents back.
jergul large member	Sat Jan 26 04:46:05 You guys are a bit to cynical for your own good. The issue answered a fundamental question: Do checks and balances work? The answer is: Yes. The president wanted 5 billion for something. He will get 1.7 billion for it eventually. Congress has already agreed to that.
Billah Member	Sat Jan 26 04:48:38 *posse
Dukhat Member	Sat Jan 26 08:29:05 Kargen's false equivalency to finish off was sad. All based on lies and not worth responding too.
murder Member	Sat Jan 26 09:28:33 "Congress has three weeks to allocate funding for the wall or President Trump will as President Obama put it use a phone and a pen." Trump can declare all the national emergencies he likes ... but misappropriating federal funds is an impeachable offense. Trump has 2 choices: 1. Swallow his shitburger and let down his racist base. 2. Misappropriate federal funds and dare Pelosi to impeach him. Based on the fact that he's already hedging like crazy, I'd say that Trump doesn't want to get impeached.
murder Member	Sat Jan 26 09:30:21 "The president wanted 5 billion for something. He will get 1.7 billion for it eventually." No he won't.
Dukhat Member	Sat Jan 26 09:52:24 He got 1.7 billion in the original budget that passed. Now he gets nothing. WINNING.
CrownRoyal Member	Sat Jan 26 10:11:13 "Dukhat the wall required sixty votes in the Senate. " Republicans could have used budget reconciliation to get the funds for the wall
CrownRoyal Member	Sat Jan 26 10:12:16 http://www...-through-budget-reconciliation It would've required some maneuvers, but it was doable
CrownRoyal Member	Sat Jan 26 10:18:32 You know how GOPers passed the tax cut for their corporate and and wealthy donors? They treated that issue (and it even polled badly) as a real national emergency, they used reconciliation to pass it, fuck democrats and sixty votes. Unlike the retarded wall
kargen Member	Sat Jan 26 15:25:21 It wouldn't be a misappropriation of funds. Nancy isn't going to impeach him over this. She isn't stupid. Right now things are trending her way. Getting serious about impeachment will cause a shift. The Democrats will be quick to launch a multitude of lawsuits trying to stop the actual building but President Trump can allocate the funds if he wishes. I don't like that he or any president has so much power when it comes to executive orders but they do and he is going to use it. CrownRoyal the tax cut actually fell under the umbrella of reconciliation without having to go through all the hoops a wall funding bill would have to go through. And the tax cuts were for everybody that pays taxes.
hood Member	Sat Jan 26 15:34:49 "President Trump can allocate the funds if he wishes." And he can get slapped down by the courts as well. It's like you don't remember the months-long delay his first border EO endured. He also lost on the first order and had to write an amended order to make it legal. The president trying to completely circumvent congress to build a wall over absolute bullshit "national emergency" rationale wouldn't/shouldn't go over well in court. And every single one of you fucks should be demanding to know why Trump has to find funding from congress or emergency funds. What the fuck happened to Mexico paying for it?
Hot Stick Member	Sat Jan 26 15:40:46 Trump *NEVER* said that Mexico would pay for the wall. As usual you liberals *LIE* and twist his words http://nyp...uld-directly-pay-for-the-wall/ -30-
CrownRoyal Member	Sat Jan 26 15:44:29 “CrownRoyal the tax cut actually fell under the umbrella of reconciliation without having to go through all the hoops a wall funding bill would have to go through. ” The “hoops” were not that difficult, as the article says. A matter of priorities. Obviously the wall is not that important, and there is no emergency. But I digress. They did not need 60 votes to get the wall funding, that’s the main point. “And the tax cuts were for everybody that pays taxes.” Right. Some just got more cut than others, therefore they lobbied harder for it, and they happened to be GOP wealthy donors. This is not a criticism, this is describing what happened, how republicans decided to pass tax cuts without sixty votes in the senate. Trump wall project apparently did not command same reaction when republicans controlled House&senate
kargen Member	Sat Jan 26 17:27:32 There is some back and forth on whether the wall can be under construction while this plays through the courts or not. Earlier executive orders fall under a different category than this one would as the others were policy change and this is redistribution of funds. Many are making the case that there can't be a stay on this while the courts decide so the wall can be under construction while this goes through the courts. Seems silly to me because as slow as federal courts move the wall will be done before the case is heard. But since it will be declared an emergency maybe they are right? I agree with you on executive orders. I'm fine with the president signing an executive order renaming a post office after some local hero and shit like that but the big things need to go through congress People who bring up Mexico paying for the wall harp on that because they have no logical reason for there not being some form of physical barrier along the border. Let the Democrats run on we had to pay for the wall not Mexico if they think it will help but some type of barrier is needed. The argument that people will just go around it, over it or under it is a bullshit argument. When you go to the mall you don't leave the windows on your car down because people could just break the window anyway. The only reason Democrats don't want a wall now is because they are still butt hurt about Hillary losing. That is it. And again CrownRoyal the tax plan was part of the budget so automatically only needed the fifty votes. The wall without some really iffy finagling needs sixty. President trump never had sixty. He might not have had fifty.
CrownRoyal Member	Sat Jan 26 18:39:50 "And again CrownRoyal the tax plan was part of the budget so automatically only needed the fifty votes. " Wrong, retard. "The individual and pass-through tax cuts fade over time and become net tax increases starting in 2027 while the corporate tax cuts are permanent. This enabled the Senate to pass the bill with only 51 votes, without the need to defeat a filibuster, under the budget reconciliation process.[9" http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Cuts_and_Jobs_Act_of_2017
kargen Member	Sat Jan 26 19:00:50 No I was right. The bill needed fifty votes because of the budget reconciliation act and the Senate didn't have to go through a bunch of hoops to do it. The bill for the wall would need to go through all kinds of hoops and still might not meet the requirements to allow for simple majority. "The budget reconciliation process, created by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, was designed to allow for expedited consideration of certain tax, spending, and debt limit legislation. The process begins with the passage of a budget resolution in both chambers of Congress, which include reconciliation instructions." Thanks for playing you fucking idiot. In case you missed it "passage of a budget resolution" is the part you need to pay attention to as related to my comments.
CrownRoyal Member	Sat Jan 26 19:10:31 “This enabled the Senate to pass the bill with only 51 votes, without the need to defeat a filibuster, under the budget reconciliation process.[9" ” Cretin doesn’t know how many votes needed to defeat a filibuster. Ask me, I’ll help you
CrownRoyal Member	Sat Jan 26 19:22:24 “The bill for the wall would need to go through all kinds of hoops and still might not meet the requirements to allow for simple majority. ” From the link, the hoops described and how to deal with them - “And there’s another big problem: Neither chamber has passed a budget resolution this year. House and Senate leaders, however, could easily put together a so-called shell budget for the purposes of providing reconciliation instructions for legislation to appropriate border wall funding. “ Don’t like to go through that process for the wall funding? Don’t do it then. Matter of priorities. But,you didn’t need 60 votes, that’s just your retardardation.
hood Member	Sat Jan 26 20:11:24 "People who bring up Mexico paying for the wall harp on that because they have no logical reason for there not being some form of physical barrier along the border" kargen showing his logical prowess. No, people who bring it up are simply pointing out the rank hypocrisy of the trump supporters. This is completely unrelated to the complete lack of need of a physical barrier between the US and Mexico (which completely ignores the fucking river...). That is an entirely different conversation than "you retards keep moving the goalposts because you just can't seem to win."
kargen Member	Sat Jan 26 21:46:36 The bill needed sixty votes. The shell budget is a part of the hoops needed to go through to require only a majority and even then it was speculative if that would work. hood Trump supporters and moderates are over the Mexico will pay for it fuck-up. Only people harping on it now are some on the left that can't justify their opposition to the wall. And of course where there is a natural barrier there would be no need for a man made barrier. A well manicured lawn such as pelosi suggested isn't much of a barrier. There is a good portion of the border that would be more secure with a fence.
hood Member	Sat Jan 26 22:20:07 Fuck up? It was practically campaign slogan #2, after his equally bullshit "make america great again." It is a broken promise (no matter how off-the-scale retarded it was) that you dim witted shit eaters just go on ignoring, as with everything Trump does.
CrownRoyal Member	Sat Jan 26 22:31:36 “The bill needed sixty votes. ” Correct. And yet Republicans managed to pass the tax cuts with 51 vote, because they used reconciliation. Why? Because tax cuts to their donors mattered. Unlike the trump wall. In fact, they had to do it twice, the first time the parliamentarian said the text couldn’t clear the Bird Rule. So republicans reworked the wording, came back, and did the tax cut under reconciliation, with 51 senate votes. You observe the difference in attitude? “The shell budget is a part of the hoops needed to go through to require only a majority and even then it was speculative if that would work. ” Indeed, they would have to take risks, spent political capital, maybe rework something, if they wanted to pass the wall funding during the years GOP controlled the House, without having to overturn filibuster.. They chose not to do it. And that’s fine. Stop stupidly claiming that it was the need for sixty senate votes that stopped GOP. Same exact requirement did not stop the tax cuts. One mattered, the other didn’t
murder Member	Sun Jan 27 20:21:29 Apparently there's some confusion so ... appropriation: an act of a legislature authorizing money to be paid from the treasury for a specified use. misappropriation: any other use of funds from the treasury.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: