Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Zaydin]

https://twitter.com/rebeccaballhaus/...987769857?s=19

I don't live in Wisconsin but if this is not used in political ads for upcoming elections would amaze me.

This goes more to Scott Walker, who is gone but you must educate the Wisconsin electorate that they are not on their side.

Walker was so desperate to strike a deal to use as a feather in his cap for re-election he gave away everything and it became such an albatross for him he couldn't even mention it without being bludgeoned with it.

- - - Updated - - -

In other news, Trump is suing Deutsche Bank to keep them from giving his financial records to Congress.

For a man who has repeatedly declared he has nothing wrong, he certainly acts like a man with something to hide a lot.

[beanman12345]

Trump has reached a new milestone. 10,000 lies.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.3164932e78c7

[Dontrike]

Trump has reached a new milestone. 10,000 lies.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.3164932e78c7

Didn't he just reach 9,000 about two months ago?

- - - Updated - - -

In other news, Trump is suing Deutsche Bank to keep them from giving his financial records to Congress.

For a man who has repeatedly declared he has nothing wrong, he certainly acts like a man with something to hide a lot.

This has been Trump from the start of any investigation into him or anything related to him. He'll scream at the top of his lungs how innocent he is in the hopes you are distracted long enough to ignore him trying his best to stop anything that shows he's guilty. From "I'm screwed" at the start of the mueller investigation, threatening to go to the supreme court to keep his tax returns secret, and now his most classic defense of suing anyone. suing random shmucks was great when they only had normal income but now he's finding out just throwing around lawsuits doesn't cut it.

[Paranoid Android]

Walker was so desperate to strike a deal to use as a feather in his cap for re-election he gave away everything and it became such an albatross for him he couldn't even mention it without being bludgeoned with it.

- - - Updated - - -

In other news, Trump is suing Deutsche Bank to keep them from giving his financial records to Congress.

For a man who has repeatedly declared he has nothing wrong, he certainly acts like a man with something to hide a lot.

Yes, for an innocent man he has alot to hide. I was always told by Trumpkins if you are innocent, then you should have nothing to hide.

[Breccia]

When Trump rose to power, there was a suspicion in many that his generals -- for example Mattis -- would attempt to limit the damage.

We now have more evidence this is correct.

For example, in the middle of Trump's "fire and fury like you have never seen" phase of failing talks with NK, there was supposed to be a military meeting to discuss options. Mattis blocked the meeting entirely. Also, when Bolton asked for ideas on how to handle Syria gassing its own people, Mattis apparently gave only one option: the one that was used.

Of course, he's gone now. The number of people willing to fight back against an impulsive, poorly-planned Trumper Tantrum are fewer now.

[kaelleria]

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are putting the ball squarely in Trump's court in regards to infrastructure funding... They're going to meet back in 3 weeks for Trump to present a funding proposal. The pricetag - $2 trillion.

LOL

Apparently Trump also agreed that infrastructure needs to include broadband. I give it 2 hours before the republicans try to walk everything back.

[Breccia]

Trump, now past halftime and looking at the extensive list of promises he hasn't delivered on, had a meeting today to get Infrastructure Week 5: A Wizard Did It up and running.

The meeting was with Nancy Pelosi.

I hope he has learned his lesson

-- Actual Goddam Nancy Pelosi Quote

At first glance, this might sound normal or even desirable. If it doesn't get through the House, it doesn't get through. And it's not like Democrats oppose social programs like "rebuilding roads".

But Pelosi isn't going to be fucked with. This time, she has the hostage: Trump's promise.

In a letter to Trump, found here, Pelosi has certain...well, let's be honest, demands.

America’s unmet infrastructure needs are massive, and a bipartisan infrastructure package must meet those needs with substantial, new and real revenue. We look forward to hearing your ideas on how to pay for this package to ensure that it is big and bold enough to meet our country’s needs.

Yep. That's asking for money. That's asking for taxes. Pelosi is coming out swinging. It sounds like she's not a fan of "let's give away $200 billion we don't have and hope that it works". Trump, in the past, has said he would support a gas tax, but
a) he also said he wouldn't, because Trump, and
b) good luck getting that past the GOP.
So the options seem limited, but don't expect Pelosi to budge far on this. Incidentally, Trump's last mentioned target of $200 billion over ten years would be about 14 cents per gallon, if that was the route taken.

EDIT:

They're going to meet back in 3 weeks for Trump to present a funding proposal.

A big and bold infrastructure package must be comprehensive and include clean energy and resiliency priorities. To truly be a gamechanger for the American people, we should go beyond transportation and into broadband, water, energy, schools, housing and other initiatives. We must also invest in resiliency and risk mitigation of our current infrastructure to deal with climate change.

HAHAHAHAHAHA Yep, that's a demand for clean energy. And I can't help but notice some other faltering Trump issues (DeVos's education, the EPA, etc) on the list.

"Okay, but why make green energy -- "

Because we've already seen Trump try to tear down Obama-era regulations about building something that won't survive climate change. It makes zero to negative sense to build a bridge that won't survive the next flood. As the Midwest recently learned when they couldn't get their stockpiled grain out with washed-out roads and underwater train tracks, this is a problem that needs to be part and parcel of the whole thing, or there's no point.

A big and bold infrastructure plan must have strong Buy America, labor, and women, veteran and minority-owned business protections in any package. This bill can and should be a major jobs and ownership boost for the American people – manufacturers, labor contractors, and women, veteran and minority-owned businesses.

Okay this sounds dangerous. There is no way Trump would publicly oppose using American workers for this, so there's a catch.

"Minorities?"

Maybe, but I say unions. I think Pelosi is laying the groundwork to refuse anything Trump proposes that blocks unions from getting involved.

This bipartisanship is a reflection of the American people’s recognition of the need to rebuild our infrastructure to promote commerce, create jobs, advance public health with clean air and clean water, and make our transportation systems safer — indeed, to improve the quality of life of all Americans.

[Endus]

Yep. That's asking for money. That's asking for taxes. Pelosi is coming out swinging. It sounds like she's not a fan of "let's give away $200 billion we don't have and hope that it works". Trump, in the past, has said he would support a gas tax, but
a) he also said he wouldn't, because Trump, and
b) good luck getting that past the GOP.
So the options seem limited, but don't expect Pelosi to budge far on this. Incidentally, Trump's last mentioned target of $200 billion over ten years would be about 14 cents per gallon, if that was the route taken.

It is asking for money.

I'm going to quibble and say there are other options besides taxes. Reducing spending in a major budget sector, for instance, to shift the funds. I'd like to suggest that cutting that from the military budget would be sensible, but that's never gonna pass, so Trump and co will probably try and pull it out of Medicare or something.

[Elegiac]

It is asking for money.

I'm going to quibble and say there are other options besides taxes. Reducing spending in a major budget sector, for instance, to shift the funds. I'd like to suggest that cutting that from the military budget would be sensible, but that's never gonna pass, so Trump and co will probably try and pull it out of Medicare or something.

Doing such would pretty much guarantee a Democrat victory in 2020.

It's almost like Pelosi is an experienced politician or something, who would have thunk it?

[Endus]

Doing such would pretty much guarantee a Democrat victory in 2020.

It's almost like Pelosi is an experienced politician or something, who would have thunk it?

Oh, I'm not saying this is a bad move. I don't like Pelosi; I think she's manipulative and way too neoliberal for my tastes. But this (and securing funding) is what she excels at.

The problem is, she's a grandmaster chess player. And Trump is a pigeon. She might make the best moves in the world, but he's still gonna shit on the board and strut around like he's won.

[Elegiac]

Oh, I'm not saying this is a bad move. I don't like Pelosi; I think she's manipulative and way too neoliberal for my tastes. But this (and securing funding) is what she excels at.

The problem is, she's a grandmaster chess player. And Trump is a pigeon. She might make the best moves in the world, but he's still gonna shit on the board and strut around like he's won.

Speaking as a member of The Gays™, I think Pelosi gets an unfair cop. She has the difficult task of balancing two often conflicting wings of a big tent party and has actually spent the greater part of her political career trying to advance beneficial legislation.

But yes, she is a Third Way democrat and should be criticised for such.

[kaelleria]

So while their whole meeting was going on Mick Mulvaney went out of his way to throw water on the entire thing -
https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...structure-deal

Mulvaney casts doubt on chances of infrastructure deal

[Elegiac]

So while their whole meeting was going on Mick Mulvaney went out of his way to throw water on the entire thing -
https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...structure-deal

So basically, they aren't going to fund any infrastructure if Trump can't stick his name on it. Okay.

[Edge-]

So while their whole meeting was going on Mick Mulvaney went out of his way to throw water on the entire thing -
https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...structure-deal

The White House isn't in lock-step and is constantly contradicting and undercutting itself? This is so depressingly commonplace I can't even be surprised by what should be a truly rare and surprising occurrence.

Operating like a well greased kitchen fire.

[Rasulis]

Oh, I'm not saying this is a bad move. I don't like Pelosi; I think she's manipulative and way too neoliberal for my tastes. But this (and securing funding) is what she excels at.

The problem is, she's a grandmaster chess player. And Trump is a pigeon. She might make the best moves in the world, but he's still gonna shit on the board and strut around like he's won.

Too many people painted Nancy Pelosi as cold-hearted manipulative witch, or even worse. However, there is a reason why her constituents re-elected her almost unanimously eighteen times in a row. What other politicians won their elections by almost 90% of their constituents. The woman has saved millions of lives throughout the world through her AIDS advocacy. Obamacare would not have passed without her. She was the one that did all the backroom negotiation. She was the one that took the heat from Planned Parenthood because ACA does not cover abortions. She did the work and Obama took the credit. Although at that time it probably was not much of a credit.


Queer history for the people - Nancy Pelosi 30 years an aids advocate

[Breccia]

I'm going to quibble and say there are other options besides taxes.

Yes, it's possible to pull funds from other programs.

Yes, Pelosi has to agree to the programs to be cut.

No, she's not going to agree to cutting Medicare.

And also

Mick Mulvaney went out of his way to throw water on the entire thing

Team Trump knew before they even started that Pelosi would have demands. I mean, they'd have to be stupid not to. Problem is, "you have to tell me where the money to pay for this is coming from" is a very reasonable demand. More so, after Trump signed so much new deficit/debt into being despite pledging to do the exact opposite.

Maybe there are other factors that are the real obstacle. Doesn't matter. If Trump doesn't have a plan to pay for it, he doesn't have a plan. See y'all in three weeks.

- - - Updated - - -

So basically, they aren't going to fund any infrastructure if Trump can't stick his name on it. Okay.

This is not too far from the truth, really. The idea was always to encourage private ownership of the roads, bridges, and tunnels. You can't get $1.5 trillion from $200 billion in any other useful way -- and states don't have the cash, either.

[Elegiac]

This is not too far from the truth, really. The idea was always to encourage private ownership of the roads, bridges, and tunnels. You can't get $1.5 trillion from $200 billion in any other useful way -- and states don't have the cash, either.

Well I mean, that's essentially the statement that Mulvaney is giving; they don't want to spend money on infrastructure because they wouldn't see returns until after Trump left office. I.e. he can't claim credit for it.

I mean, we been knew sis, but it's just hilarious watching these clowns trying to square up to Pelosi and failing miserably.

[kaelleria]

Big Fat Guy with Early stage Dementia goes off topic a lot

Ignoring that one of the current hold ups is Chuck Grassley in the Senate.

[Breccia]

Sounds like Pelosi and Trump reached a preliminary deal.

We'll see what the funding is in 3 weeks. But Trump flat-out caved on the green energy thing. Should be interesting to see what, specifically, Pelosi had in mind.

- - - Updated - - -

Ignoring that one of the current hold ups is Chuck Grassley in the Senate.

Indeed, it's interesting to see the GOP when they're forced to deal with the consequences of their actions. Retaliatory tariffs eating away at farm income definitely counts.

[kaelleria]

Only the best people

Trump Fed pick said in 2016 that he supports removing 'a lot' of child labor laws