Pelosi is super mad that Trump helped folks she ignored

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slammed the executive actions President Trump took this weekend to provide assistance for Americans struggling amid the coronavirus as weak and an "illusion" on "Fox News Sunday" with Chris Wallace, as she defended Democrats' stance asking for trillions more in aid as negotiations with the White House and Senate Republicans have stalled.

www.foxnews.com...

But here is the real deal:

Pelosi on Thursday proposed the parties each give $1 trillion and pass a $2 trillion proposal, but Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Friday the idea was a "non-starter."

This is all about flucking PORK! If you don't see what the idiot democrats are doing, you are dumber than Chuck and Nancy. This has never ever been about helping the American who was forced to cower at home, this is about more power, more control, and more spending. When numbers are this big, what's another trillion? Just cave in boys, it's for the people.........

a reply to: network dude

I'm just waiting for them to scream that the president cannot unilaterally pass an E/O and try to challenge him in court.

You know, DACA and all.

This was a nice move from Trump. Dems look like the hypocrites that don't GAF about helping people who are hurting right now, no matter what they do.

a reply to: toolgal462

I can't see any way to spin this other than they want an extra trillion in pork. When will voters realize that Pelosi and her ilk aren't good for this nation. remove them. Perhaps we should start a BAMN campaign. It didn't get axed when it was against Trump, it should be fine to do one against the dems.

a reply to: network dude

When Nancy gets up set she annoys people.



And that's about it.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: toolgal462

I can't see any way to spin this other than they want an extra trillion in pork. When will voters realize that Pelosi and her ilk aren't good for this nation. remove them. Perhaps we should start a BAMN campaign. It didn't get axed when it was against Trump, it should be fine to do one against the dems.

Dems stay in power by relying on the disinterested and uninformed voter. and cheating, bribery and graft.

That's why msm constantly lying because even when their lies are called out they know that their target audience only needed to hear the lie once and they will continue to believe it.

I hate to say it but Dims really rely on stupid people to stay in power.

a reply to: network dude


California Using $100 Million of $550 Million Federal Coronavirus Funds to Put Homeless in Hotels



www.breitbart.com...


It's All About Bailing Out the Liberal State Governor's who through Mismanagement , have Bankrupted their State Treasuries . The President knows this and Will not be Party to this Criminal Behavior .

a reply to: toolgal462

Eventually, treating EOs as though they have the same force of authority as congressionally passed laws will turn this nation into a dictatorship.

I recognize that I like what Trump is doing politically. But I am not blind to what might be when he isn't the one at the helm.

We've had checks and balances built into the constitution legislated, adjudicated, and EO'd away. If we don't get a handle on this we're going to lose the country with the stroke of a pen one day. The SCOTUS giving the EO that much weight is a crime against the Constitution and a serious shot across the bow of American Constitutionalism.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: toolgal462

Eventually, treating EOs as though they have the same force of authority as congressionally passed laws will turn this nation into a dictatorship.

I recognize that I like what Trump is doing politically. But I am not blind to what might be when he isn't the one at the helm.

We've had checks and balances built into the constitution legislated, adjudicated, and EO'd away. If we don't get a handle on this we're going to lose the country with the stroke of a pen one day. The SCOTUS giving the EO that much weight is a crime against the Constitution and a serious shot across the bow of American Constitutionalism.

Precedent was already set by ZERO and the Dims.

a reply to: toolgal462

The Supreme Court ruling this Spring that OBAMA acted within his authority, when he used an Executive Order to give hundreds of thousands of illegal DACA children Amnesty, made Executive Orders almost as powerful as Congressional authority.

The Supreme Court also ruled that President Trump's Executive Order to "re-purpose" funds, for Border Wall Construction, was constitutional and within the President's authority.

I'd love to see Democrats launch an official challenge to President Trump helping millions of Americans!

DO IT NANCY.

(Then tell your House colleagues to get their resumes ready, lol.)

a reply to: toolgal462

"Because they did it" isn't a reason to shred the basis of our Republic. Otherwise, what the hell are we doing here?

a reply to: projectvxn

you are totally spot on. But when the idiots in power get to vote themselves all the perks they want and insider trading is A-OK for them, how are we going to stop them? It sure doesn't seem like the collective "we" are smart enough to actually find candidates who aren't sucking the tit of endless money and want to make the nation a better place and elect them.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: toolgal462

"Because they did it" isn't a reason to shred the basis of our Republic. Otherwise, what the hell are we doing here?

Except it's hard to beat someone when you are the only one playing by the rules. What exactly would you suggest?

R's typically don't stoop to the level that Dims will stoop to and look what it's gotten us?

I agree with you and you are technically right about everything you say but I just don't know how else to deal with a party of snakes like the Dims unless you outsnake them.

Just had this argument with a cousin that posted some talking heads rant that it was a purely political move... I said DUH... it election season, do you really think pelosi holding up the bill was for any other reason beyond more pork that will make them look good in election season.

As for how to stop them, nothing short of a convention of the states forcing term limits on congress can stop them.

a reply to: network dude

I'm fine with EOs being used to direct the activities of the executive branch. I'm not fine with binding one president to the tenets of an EO from a previous president. Nor am I OK with codifying an EO as a law when it is, in fact, and edict. Those are offensive to the constitution.

The SCOTUS handed dictatorial powers to the Office of the President. And while this may benefit Trump supporters and maybe even every single American alive, it is still not good to have a dictatorship in America.

It may not be Trump today. But it will definitely be someone and on that day we'll look back on this and realize we were never really fighting back at all.

a reply to: projectvxn

It's already been done by ZERO without any consequences. This means that the Dems, should they ever get the presidency again will continue to issue E/O that are outside of the constitution.

Better to have Trump pull the same move now and maybe now people will pay attention.

No matter how you look at this, Trump made a good move.

And I do not think this means we are doomed to a dictatorship. Letting the Dims do whatever they want without consequence is what is and was leading to a dictatorship or communism (which always results in dictatorship).

Maybe if Trump gets a few more SC judges in his next term this stuff will be looked at again.

Why shouldn't Trump beat them at their own game?

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: toolgal462

"Because they did it" isn't a reason to shred the basis of our Republic. Otherwise, what the hell are we doing here?

A small question. . . . do we still have a republic?

a reply to: toolgal462

You either have standards and discipline or you don't.

Lacking one or both makes you just like them.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: toolgal462

You either have standards and discipline or you don't.

Lacking one or both makes you just like them.

If one side doesn't play by the rules how can you beat them? If new rules are written, why shouldn't you play by them?

You think like the R losers have been thinking and that's why we are here right now.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Only if we let it go to people who want it destroyed. Then there's people who would destroy it to prevent the others from destroying it.

The problem is that we have a deeply unethical view of retribution and we call that justice. We recognize it on the left because of the woke BS and social justice nonsense. But we don't always see it on the right.