How is Trump handling Nancy negotiating like him?
Pretty much foldering her arms and saying no.
He’s offering DACA, which she wants, for the Wall, which he wants.
So open up the government, which everyone wants, and then make that offer.
Why is keeping the government closed even part of this?
L L wrote:
How is Trump handling Nancy negotiating like him?
Pretty much foldering her arms and saying no.
He’s offering DACA, which she wants, for the Wall, which he wants.
So open up the government, which everyone wants, and then make that offer.
Why is keeping the government closed even part of this?
Permanent DACA, including new people, and allowing asylum seekers (and promptly processing their claims, and not sending them back just because they are not white), and no confiscation of land for the wall (instead advanced surveillance systems deployed, and enough border guards and equipment to promptly pick up illegal crossers, including in the remote desserts where many illegal crossers die). Those ideas are far superior, more effective, and more respectful of property rights that Trump's Wall of Ego.
"Trump's offer should be welcomed, if not the final word. To refuse to even talk until the government reopens does no favors to the sidelined federal workers and contractors." ~ Washington Post
Even the anti-Trump WaPo understands that Nancy Pelosi is an obstructionist radical.
Trump refuses to talk unless the government is closed.
That does no favors to the sidelined federal workers and contractors.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
"Trump's offer should be welcomed, if not the final word. To refuse to even talk until the government reopens does no favors to the sidelined federal workers and contractors." ~ Washington Post
Even the anti-Trump WaPo understands that Nancy Pelosi is an obstructionist radical.
WaPo didn't say she is an obstructionist radial. You said that.
But WaPo is indeed right about this and I'm glad you recognize that WaPo is right.
Nancy's "reopen the government first" position is just posturing. She won't stick with it much longer.
Confirming that the Numbnuts in Chief doesn't know the difference between weather and climate:
"Be careful and try staying in your house. Large parts of the Country are suffering from tremendous amounts of snow and near record setting cold. Amazing how big this system is. Wouldn’t be bad to have a little of that good old fashioned Global Warming right now!"
rehsrae wrote:
Confirming that the Numbnuts in Chief doesn't know the difference between weather and climate:
"Be careful and try staying in your house. Large parts of the Country are suffering from tremendous amounts of snow and near record setting cold. Amazing how big this system is. Wouldn’t be bad to have a little of that good old fashioned Global Warming right now!"
He does know the difference. He's just playing to the base.
Tiny probably even believes in the science about global warming and he knows that it will soon be the source of massive human suffering.
He just doesn't care.
I, agip, do hereby withdraw my accusations of misconduct against the m@ga kids in DC.
The full evidence suggests that there was no 'build the wall' chanting and that the native american guy walked right into the group of kids and they were pretty much dancing with the drum beat.
the main kid trying to stare down the native guy was in the wrong - that was just inappropriate and aggressive. But the native guy walked right into his face, the white kid thought he was being challenged or something.
Score another point for 'hot takes are very very bad'
good viddy - from 7:00 on, or so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=437&v=jVvpVRJ-NH4
agip wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
This is turning into Buzzfeed Part 2. This is propaganda/fake news and the libs got suckered, again.
Go to 1:39 min mark. "Go back to Europe, this is not your land."
2:30 Student asks, "What did we do?" Native American protestor: "You're being white. That's all you need to do."
Black guys are shouting homophobic slurs too- the media never brought that up, why? Doesn't fit the narrative, I guess.
Really paints a different picture of the situation, doesn't it? Once again, the libs have rushed to judgment. There was no mob hounding a Native American. The guy who started all this, Nathan Phillips has a history of being a "professional victim." He walked in the group of kids and started drumming inches from one HS kid's face. The kid never taunted him. More fake news like the Buzzfeed story from Friday.
1xLSFY&feature=youtu.be
the native american guy sees a conflict between black and white, he walks into the melee to try to calm things down. That's a good, brave move - something all adults should do.
Then the white kids stock taunting and mocking the native american guy, shouting about the wall.
Some other native guy gets into a shouting fight, not the old guy.
It's important to know that the white boys didnt' go after the native old guy, yes. Important context.
But taunting, intimidating and mocking a guy in racial terms while he is trying to difuse a conflict is fratboy garbage.
There are only two trumpers left on this thread. One cites incorrectly translated Armenian news articles as fact and the other can’t stop consuming ZeroHedge. Using logic won’t help you much here.
Trumper Trollies??? wrote:
Amazing, as always. There are mass postings by the Trumpers under a bunch of names, and then suddenly they all stop posting . . . . at the same time. That level of coordination for posting timeframes on LRC is "unpresidented".
Over the last two years a number of “real” trump supporters caved in. The last two are die hard trump-swimmer guzzlers, the tail end of the curve - there’s no helping that.
lol Gary wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
What’s sad is your trolling skills. You’re supposed to mimic Gary!
Where is that crazy delusional sucker these days? Always entertaining, never quite there. Pretty sure he's posting from a loony bin. Great to see the usual suspects, rigged, jamin, ghost of i, sallyv et al. go at it in full force. And flag holding the flag in one hand his member in the other! I hope Trump goes down but don't think it's inevitable in 2019; likely the 2020 election if we're all still standing. However, rigged's line of clownpole forever still makes me laugh. So stupid but also funny.
The shutdown is really dumb and tying it to the wall is insanity. It's got Miller and Bannon written all over it. And they got a clown showman--burgers for the national championships, you can't make that sh!t up! You stupid pro-trump morons.
He was spotted at the Lincoln Memorial recently.
KeepItRealBruh wrote:
Trumper Trollies??? wrote:
Amazing, as always. There are mass postings by the Trumpers under a bunch of names, and then suddenly they all stop posting . . . . at the same time. That level of coordination for posting timeframes on LRC is "unpresidented".
Over the last two years a number of “real” trump supporters caved in. The last two are die hard trump-swimmer guzzlers, the tail end of the curve - there’s no helping that.
May the mental masturbation continue.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
"Trump's offer should be welcomed, if not the final word. To refuse to even talk until the government reopens does no favors to the sidelined federal workers and contractors." ~ Washington Post
Even the anti-Trump WaPo understands that Nancy Pelosi is an obstructionist radical.
A year ago, Trump was offered by Dems $25 billion for the wall in exchange for DACA TWICE! Let me repeat this part — $25 billion for the wall today, in exchange for a 10- to 14-year path to citizenship for 1.8 million children of undocumented immigrants brought to the United States when they were young. And twice Trump agreed to it before turning it down 24 hours later (thanks Stephen Miller and John Kelly).
The THIRD time he could’ve had a deal, a group of bipartisan Senators came up with another offer which could win the support of 60 Senators. A path to citizenship for DACA recipients, $25 billion for border security, and it prevented DACA recipients from sponsoring their parents for legal status. Trump was on board in theory to let the “King of the Hill” plan play out (4 immigration bills on the floor and let the best man win), but the morning before the vote, Trump threatened to veto this bipartisan bill. As a result, it failed 54-45. The night before, there were 60. The Trump favored bill, which gutted legal immigration to the US and provided $25 billion for the wall in exchange for DACA, only got 39 votes that same day, to be clear. The lowest number of votes of the 4 immigration bills voted on that day.
Months ago the Senate approps Committee passed a bipartisan $1.6 billion for border security—no new barriers could be constructed. That’s what DHS asked for in the appropriations process. And in the 11th hour, Trump said that wasn’t good enough.
This idea that some how Democrats are being unreasonable here is laughable. Every time they think they have a deal he changes his mind on the terms. Staff meets but everyone knows no one but him at the WH is authorized to agree to anything. It is like negotiating with Jell-O. And he has already said he is not willing this time to trade for anything — DACA, TPS, etc. He wants $5 billion, no strings attached. And when your friends ask, why Democrats won’t agree to that after being willing to give him $25 billion a year ago — say these three words: elections have consequences. The makeup of the House and Senate has shifted and so have the votes.
oopsieeeee wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
"Trump's offer should be welcomed, if not the final word. To refuse to even talk until the government reopens does no favors to the sidelined federal workers and contractors." ~ Washington Post
Even the anti-Trump WaPo understands that Nancy Pelosi is an obstructionist radical.
A year ago, Trump was offered by Dems $25 billion for the wall in exchange for DACA TWICE! Let me repeat this part — $25 billion for the wall today, in exchange for a 10- to 14-year path to citizenship for 1.8 million children of undocumented immigrants brought to the United States when they were young. And twice Trump agreed to it before turning it down 24 hours later (thanks Stephen Miller and John Kelly).
The THIRD time he could’ve had a deal, a group of bipartisan Senators came up with another offer which could win the support of 60 Senators. A path to citizenship for DACA recipients, $25 billion for border security, and it prevented DACA recipients from sponsoring their parents for legal status. Trump was on board in theory to let the “King of the Hill” plan play out (4 immigration bills on the floor and let the best man win), but the morning before the vote, Trump threatened to veto this bipartisan bill. As a result, it failed 54-45. The night before, there were 60. The Trump favored bill, which gutted legal immigration to the US and provided $25 billion for the wall in exchange for DACA, only got 39 votes that same day, to be clear. The lowest number of votes of the 4 immigration bills voted on that day.
Months ago the Senate approps Committee passed a bipartisan $1.6 billion for border security—no new barriers could be constructed. That’s what DHS asked for in the appropriations process. And in the 11th hour, Trump said that wasn’t good enough.
This idea that some how Democrats are being unreasonable here is laughable. Every time they think they have a deal he changes his mind on the terms. Staff meets but everyone knows no one but him at the WH is authorized to agree to anything. It is like negotiating with Jell-O. And he has already said he is not willing this time to trade for anything — DACA, TPS, etc. He wants $5 billion, no strings attached. And when your friends ask, why Democrats won’t agree to that after being willing to give him $25 billion a year ago — say these three words: elections have consequences. The makeup of the House and Senate has shifted and so have the votes.
Trump had two years of GOP control and much better proposals from the Dems to get his wall - he didn’t do it. Obviously it’s not a conincidence the GOP-led government allowed the shut down to happen right before the Dems officially took the House. 1) Neither nor the GOP really give a fvck about the wall they can’t even really define, and 2) The timing makes for good finger pointing (aka what you do when you don’t have any solutions and need to kill time without taking blame).
But on this issue it’s clear - Trump owned the shutdown before it happened and it happened under the GOP’s watch.
The Dems will absolutely not let the lime move an inch on this one, as they shouldn’t. The GOP allowed the shutdown to happen before the Dems took control of the House and as such the Dems are absolutely correct in their form position that any negotiation about wall funding will only happen after the shutdown ends.
Trump is bleeding more and more each day. The Dems hurt too due to collateral damage but it’s not even close. Trump has proven what an imbecile egomaniac he is. He can forget about 2020. By the time he folds (if he does) he will have a disastrous approval rating along with the GOP.
Dumbest POTUS of all time.
Trump’s incapable of making a deal; in fact he enjoys watching constant coverage of the shutdown/himself on TV. He’s too stupid to look ahead & see that prison guards & airport workers, etc can’t wait forever for their pay. McConMan will fold, trump’s headed to the same prisons he won’t fund. Ironic...
Dems final offer will be to start impeachment proceedings early just to stay ahead of the news cycle. By the time they vote, mueller will have reported already. By then even the gop will dump trump just to get their own re-election campaigns started.
jesseriley wrote:
Dems final offer will be to start impeachment proceedings early just to stay ahead of the news cycle. By the time they vote, mueller will have reported already. By then even the gop will dump trump just to get their own re-election campaigns started.
That is a possibility. The house would need to issue subpoenas to find out how accurate the Buzzfeed article is. If it turns out that hard evidence exists that Tiny told Cohen to lie then Democrats could start impeachment before Mueller issues his report. But that would be a gamble.
It's possible, but I don't think it will play out that way. I think most in congress on both sides prefer to wait and see what Mueller has to say before taking major steps to remove the president.
And I still say it would be extremely foolish to start impeachment proceedings without a reasonable chance that it leads to removal in the senate.
Fat hurts wrote:
And I still say it would be extremely foolish to start impeachment proceedings without a reasonable chance that it leads to removal in the senate.
It would be more foolish to simply sit back, do nothing and let this president do whatever he wants, get away with whatever he wants.
Here are two scenarios of a Trump impeachment acquittal:
1) Trump is acquitted 53-47, strictly party line. That doesn't really help Trump or Republicans in the 2020 election. That fires up Democrats to get more control.
2) Some Republican senators vote to convict and you get a majority of conviction votes, but not the super majority for removal. Maybe 55-45 to convict.
That looks really bad when the majority of both houses cast guilty votes and the American public also wants him removed but by law he stays in office.
That will not play out well for Trump in 2020.
One FULL MONTH of the DONALD TRUMP SHUTDOWN . . . hang in there, everybody!
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/20/trump-tweet-shutdown-1116078