Trump’s EPA Sending $100 Million to Michigan for Flint Water Relief

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: mOjOm

How about commenting on the issue of the money going to Flint instead of calling Members liars.

Like maybe who benefits the most from upcoming contracts or how many new jobs might be created.

Bank loans to businesses etc. etc.

Don't like Hannity's version then don't look at it.

Your OP and title is a LIE. This stuff has to stop. No more alternative facts. People should not blatantly try to do this, especially on a site like this. Maybe if your OP was worded to reflect the truth, there would be more interest in discussing the health of Flint's water and economy in this space. But the topic has become the lack of veracity of your OP.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: mOjOm

How about commenting on the issue of the money going to Flint instead of calling Members liars.

Like maybe who benefits the most from upcoming contracts or how many new jobs might be created.

Bank loans to businesses etc. etc.

Don't like Hannity's version then don't look at it.

Yeah I get it. Now I'm the problem because I call out your lies and propaganda. That was expected.

Let me ask you. Why do you report FAKE NEWS giving someone credit for something they had nothing to do with???

Why don't you change the Title of the thread and replace Trump with Obama???

It's not about whether or not I like Hannity's article or not. There is nothing to like about someone who reports lies and propaganda.

a reply to: mOjOm

Sort of like the way Spicer says, "Well, Fox News said the British wiretapped Trump. Just repeating what Fox News said. Not my fault."

a reply to: mOjOm

Because right wing trolls have been emboldened by Trump becoming president.

Problem is the lefties bite back.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: xuenchen

that's a hell of a lot more than Obama did.

Obama signed this into law and it included money for Flint.

He knew Trump would approve.

No, actually he probably thought Trump would attempt to cut the funding.

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
Think this is news we can all get behind.

Hate to be 'that guy', but this is a reward for bad behavior. I want to know who is going to the poor house because of bad management decisions.

If I had control of the money, I'd be willing to let it go Flint, as long as:
All of the city managers forfeited their pensions ... and I mean all of them.

Then, you'd have a lesson for others to draw on.

I agree, my comment was for thoughts for the children.

a reply to: Phage

The law was passed and signed while Trump was President-Elect.

Perhaps that was the point.

A little influence from Campaign statements goes a long way when somebody wins an election.

Thank goodness Trump's campaign finally drew huge national attention to the Flint water crisis...and the Republican-controlled congress also deserves plenty of credit for passing this.

Trump EPA head, Scott Pruitt is definitely taking Trump's campaign commitment to safe drinking water and efficient wastewater infrastructure to heart as well.

Under President Trump’s budget blueprint SRF remains fully funded, and the proposal provides robust funding for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program to finance critical drinking and wastewater infrastructure.

www.epa.gov...

Very clear to see why Trump won Michigan.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Thank goodness Trump's campaign finally drew huge national attention to the Flint water crisis...and the Republican-controlled congress also deserves plenty of credit for passing this.

Right. Because killing it would have made a lot of sense.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: mOjOm

How about commenting on the issue of the money going to Flint instead of calling Members liars.

Like maybe who benefits the most from upcoming contracts or how many new jobs might be created.

Bank loans to businesses etc. etc.

Don't like Hannity's version then don't look at it.

Your OP and title is a LIE. This stuff has to stop. No more alternative facts. People should not blatantly try to do this, especially on a site like this. Maybe if your OP was worded to reflect the truth, there would be more interest in discussing the health of Flint's water and economy in this space. But the topic has become the lack of veracity of your OP.

Well Trump’s EPA *is* Sending $100 Million to Michigan for Flint Water Relief right ?

He could have held up if he wanted to.

a reply to: xuenchen

Right. It was all because of a Trump campaign rally.

The point is that Trump had nothing to do with it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: xuenchen

Right. It was all because of a Trump campaign rally.

The point is that Trump had nothing to do with it.

I think he may have had some big influence with Congress.

And Obama signed it because he liked it too and helped preserve some legacy.

a reply to: xuenchen


Sure. It passed the Senate in May.

It would have made a ton of sense for the House to kill it. Right? You know the law is not only about Flint, right?

a reply to: shooterbrody


isnt michael moore from flint?


No Davison Flint wouldn't have him. I drank beer with him in Flint many years ago. He wanted to talk politics and issues I wanted to pick up chicks. I guess we both did good.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: xuenchen

Right. It was all because of a Trump campaign rally.

The point is that Trump had nothing to do with it.

The Flint water crisis began in 2014

Source

So , after almost 2 years (and in the last few days of his presidency) (and after President Elect Trump had made it a major campaign issue) Obama decides to do something ?
Speaks volumes about our ex-president , doesnt it ?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: xuenchen


Sure. It passed the Senate in May.

It would have made a ton of sense for the House to kill it. Right? You know the law is not only about Flint, right?

And it didn't get passed by the House until December.

I think Trump's influence may have played a big part.

a reply to: Gothmog

Lot's of fumbling since it became an issue in 2014.

Wonder why.

a reply to: xuenchen

Right. It would have made a lot of sense for the House to kill it if Clinton had won.

a reply to: Gothmog

Obama decides to do something ?

The president does not make laws. He signs them (or not) after Congress passes them.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: xuenchen

Right. It would have made a lot of sense for the House to kill it if Clinton had won.

They may have made some changes if Clinton was PE.

I wonder what.