Author Topic: The US Presidency 2020  (Read 64511 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #50 on: February 02, 2020, 08:23:14 »
Brihard,Brad, awesome. Thanks a lot for taking the time to explain all that.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #51 on: February 02, 2020, 08:34:08 »
You anti-Trumpers, have no fear this was just impeachment 1.0 .They will try again. If they wait until the election they might pick up a majority in the Senate but of course they might lose their House majority.

SAD.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 553,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,693
    • The job.
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #52 on: February 02, 2020, 09:32:17 »
Makes you wonder though if Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan, Warren Harding and Franklin Pierce's supporters thought they were the greatest thing since sliced bread or regretted their choice.  :dunno:

 :cheers:

They all rank in the bottom ten.

But, the current occupant is ranked at the very bottom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_presidents_of_the_United_States#Siena_College_Research_Institute,_Presidential_Expert_Poll_of_2018

Quote
Note: Grover Cleveland was elected to two non-consecutive terms, serving as both the 22nd and 24th President of the United States; he is the only person to have held the office in non-consecutive terms. Because Cleveland had two presidencies, the number of persons who have served as president is one less than the number of presidents in order of succession.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2020, 13:05:50 by mariomike »

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #53 on: February 02, 2020, 10:41:31 »
Not sure if this is the right place to post this or if the topic deserves it's own thread, so here goes:

Quote
Why Democrats share the blame for the rise of Donald Trump
[/color]
Robert Reich

I was part of a Democratic administration that failed to fix a rigged system – I know our current president is a symptom of our disunion, not its only cause
...
But why are we so divided? We’re not fighting a hugely unpopular war on the scale of Vietnam. We’re not in a deep economic crisis like the Great Depression. Yes, we disagree about guns, gays, abortion and immigration, but we’ve disagreed about them for decades. Why are we so divided now?

Part of the answer is Trump himself. The Great Divider knows how to pit native-born Americans against immigrants, the working class against the poor, whites against blacks and Latinos, evangelicals against secularists, keeping almost everyone stirred up by vilifying, disparaging, denouncing, defaming and accusing others of the worst. Trump thrives off disruption and division.

But that begs the question of why we have been so ready to be divided by Trump. The answer derives in large part from what has happened to wealth and power.

In the fall of 2015, I visited Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Missouri and North Carolina, for a research project on the changing nature of work. I spoke with many of the people I had met 20 years before when I was secretary of labor, as well as with some of their grown children.

What I heard surprised me. Twenty years before, many said they’d been working hard and were frustrated they weren’t doing better. Now they were angry – angry at their employers, the government, Wall Street.

Many had lost jobs, savings, or homes in the Great Recession following the financial crisis of 2008, or knew others who had. Most were back in jobs but the jobs paid no more than they had two decades before, in terms of purchasing power.

I heard the term “rigged system” so often I began asking people what they meant. They spoke about flat wages, shrinking benefits, growing job insecurity. They talked about the bailout of Wall Street, political payoffs, insider deals, soaring CEO pay, and “crony capitalism”.

These complaints came from people who identified themselves as Republicans, Democrats and independents. A few had joined the Tea Party. A few had briefly been involved in the Occupy movement.

The 2016 rebellion is ongoing

With the 2016 political primaries looming, I asked which candidates they found most attractive. At the time, the leaders of the Democratic party favored Hillary Clinton and Republican leaders favored Jeb Bush. Yet no one I spoke with mentioned Clinton or Bush.

They talked instead about Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. When I asked why, they said Sanders or Trump would “shake things up” or “make the system work again” or “stop the corruption” or “end the rigging”.
...
Something very big had happened, and it wasn’t due to Sanders’ magnetism or Trump’s likeability. It was a rebellion against the establishment. That rebellion is still going on, although much of the establishment still denies it. They prefer to attribute Trump’s rise solely to racism.
...
Democrats did nothing to change a rigged system

Aided by Fox News and an army of rightwing outlets, Trump convinced many blue-collar workers feeling ignored by Washington that he was their champion. Clinton did not convince them that she was. Her decades of public service ended up being a negative, not a positive. She was indubitably part of the establishment, the epitome of decades of policies that left these blue-collar workers in the dust. (It’s notable that during the primaries, Sanders did far better than Clinton with blue-collar voters.)

Clinton and Obama chose not to wrest power back from the oligarchy. Why?

In the first two years of the Bill Clinton and Barack Obama administrations, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress. Yet both Clinton and Obama advocated free trade agreements without providing millions of blue-collar workers who consequently lost their jobs any means of getting new ones that paid at least as well. Clinton pushed for Nafta and for China joining the World Trade Organization, and Obama sought to restore the “confidence” of Wall Street instead of completely overhauling the banking system.

There is no longer a left or right. There is no longer a moderate ‘center’

By 2016, Americans understood full well that wealth and power had moved to the top. Big money had rigged our politics. This was the premise of Sanders’s 2016 campaign. It was also central to Trump’s appeal – “I’m so rich I can’t be bought off” – although once elected he delivered everything big money wanted.

The most powerful force in American politics today continues to be anti-establishment fury at a rigged system. There is no longer a left or right. There’s no longer a moderate “center”. There’s either Trump’s authoritarian populism or democratic – small “d” – populism.

Democrats cannot defeat authoritarian populism without an agenda of radical democratic reform, an anti-establishment movement. Trump has harnessed the frustrations of at least 40% of America. Although he’s been a Trojan Horse for big corporations and the rich, giving them all they’ve wanted in tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks, the working class continues to believe he’s on their side.

Democrats must stand squarely on the side of democracy against oligarchy. They must form a unified coalition of people of all races, genders, sexualities and classes, and band together to unrig the system.

Trump is not the cause of our divided nation. He is the symptom of a rigged system that was already dividing us. It’s not enough to defeat him. We must reform the system that got us here in the first place, to ensure that no future politician will ever again imitate Trump’s authoritarian demagoguery.

Topics

See the full article here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/01/donald-trump-impeachment-trial-state-of-the-union

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #54 on: February 03, 2020, 14:16:17 »
Quote
Taxpayers Get $3.4 Million Tab So Trump Can Host Super Bowl Party For His Club Members
The president’s latest trip to his Palm Beach resort and nearby golf course brings the taxpayer-funded total for his golfing hobby to $130.4 million.
By S.V. Date

Taxpayers shelled out another $3.4 million to send President Donald Trump to Florida this weekend so he could host a Super Bowl party for paying guests at his for-profit golf course.

The president’s official schedule shows him spending two and a half hours Sunday evening at a “Super Bowl LIV watch party” at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach. Tickets sold for $75 each, but were only available to members of the club — the initiation fee for which reportedly runs about $450,000, with annual dues costing several thousands of dollars more.

“Well, obviously there are no TVs in the White House, so what alternative did he have?” quipped Robert Weissman, president of the liberal group Public Citizen. “He could have saved money by chartering a plane and flying club members to watch the game at the White House.”

In response to a query, White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham defended Trump’s trip and attacked HuffPost: “The premise of your story is ridiculous and false, and just more left-wing media bias on display. The president never stops working, and that includes when he is at the Winter White House.”

Her phrase “Winter White House” refers to Mar-a-Lago, the for-profit resort in Palm Beach that is several miles east of the golf course and that doubled its initiation fee from $100,000 to $200,000 after Trump was elected in 2016. Trump frequently mingles with guests at social events there.

On Saturday, for example, Trump appeared at a dinner at Mar-a-Lago arranged by the “Trumpettes,” a group of his female supporters. The dinner did not appear on the president’s publicly released schedule, and in any case was a campaign event, not an “official” one.

When a pool reporter asked the White House on Saturday what work Trump did over the weekend, the reply was that he had calls and “meetings with staff.” The president did not attend a rally on Saturday for Venezuelan leader Juan Guaido, whom the United States and other governments have recognized as the legitimate president of that country. That rally began while Trump was still at his golf course, and attending it could have made him late for the start of the Trumpettes’ dinner.

Trump promised during his presidential campaign that he would separate himself from his businesses if he won. However, he reneged on that vow, as well as on his promise to release his tax returns.

On his most recent financial disclosure form, which was filed last May, Trump claimed he had received $12,325,355 in income from the West Palm Beach golf course over the previous year. It’s unclear how accurate that is, given Trump’s tendency to file widely varying figures to different government authorities.

He told the U.S. Office of Government Ethics in his 2018 financial disclosure, for example, that his Scotland golf courses are worth more than $50 million each, even as he told authorities in the United Kingdom that they had a combined net debt of $65 million.

In any event, money spent at Trump hotels and golf courses flows directly to the president, as he is the sole beneficiary of a trust that now owns his family business. U.S. taxpayers have been the source of at least a few million dollars that have gone to the Trump Organization in the form of hotel rooms, meals and other expenses for Secret Service agents and other government employees who have stayed on-site with Trump in Florida, New Jersey, Scotland and Ireland.

“When Donald Trump announced that he would break decades of precedent and hold onto his business, many were afraid it was to find ways to keep making money on the side of his work as president,” said Jordan Libowitz with the group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. “Turns out the presidency is more like a thing he does on the side to help make money for his business.”

This weekend’s trip to Mar-a-Lago was Trump’s 28th to the property since becoming president. Saturday’s and Sunday’s golf outings at the West Palm Beach club brings his total to 79 days there since taking office and 244 total golf days at properties that he owns.

Taxpayers’ total tab for his golf hobby, meanwhile, climbed to $130.4 million.


That figure and the $3.4 million for each Mar-a-Lago trip are based on a HuffPost analysis that included the costs of Air Force transportation, Coast Guard patrols, Secret Service security and other expenses, as detailed in a January 2019 report from the Government Accountability Office of Trump’s first four visits to Mar-a-Lago in early 2017.

Trump frequently criticized former President Barack Obama for golfing too much and promised during his campaign that he would be too busy to take any vacations at all, let alone play golf. Instead, he is on pace to play more than twice as much golf as Obama did ― at a cost three times that of Obama’s, because he insists on playing so many rounds at his courses in Florida and New Jersey, which require expensive flights on Air Force One. Obama mostly played golf at military bases within a short drive of the White House.

“Trump is and always has been a con man. In 2016, he said that, unlike Obama, he’d never golf and he’d never take personal trips outside the White House,” said former Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.), who is challenging Trump for the 2020 Republican nomination. “In addition, Trump is using taxpayer money to personally enrich himself because virtually all of his travel is to Trump properties. That is the swamp Trump pledged to drain. Trump is the swamp.”

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-super-bowl_n_5e3734edc5b611ac94d6b545

 :cheers:
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 15:49:43 by FJAG »
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 944,595
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,671
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #55 on: February 03, 2020, 14:32:28 »
Hey Fishbone Jones. Not sure what it was about the last post that drew your ire and merited a -300 Milpoints but I'm sure this one will draw your attention too.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-super-bowl_n_5e3734edc5b611ac94d6b545

 :cheers:
If there is issue with being docked or added milpoints, PM the member involved. Calling someone out in public is just going to drag the discourse down to a level we've been working hard to get rid of.

- Milnet.ca Staff

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 553,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,693
    • The job.
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #56 on: February 03, 2020, 16:26:24 »
Related to FJAG's post,


Quote
Jan 09, 2020

White House Says It’s Happy to Disclose Secret Service Spending on the Trump Clan—After the Election

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/trump-secret-service-cost-mar-a-lago-bedminster-golf-travel.html
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 18:39:10 by mariomike »

Offline Baz

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 26,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 693
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #57 on: February 06, 2020, 15:17:54 »
Nobody has any comment?  None?

My only comment over the last few days: I don't think anybody is going to take the high road any time soon...

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 553,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,693
    • The job.
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #58 on: February 06, 2020, 15:45:08 »
Nobody has any comment?  None?

What's to comment? It was a mathematical certainty,

Quote
The 48 Senators who found Trump GUILTY represent 18 million MORE people than the 52 who voted not guilty.
https://twitter.com/Lawrence/status/1225172773707952130



Offline Baz

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 26,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 693
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #59 on: February 06, 2020, 15:56:47 »
What's to comment? It was a mathematical certainty,

All the related political intrigue?

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #60 on: February 06, 2020, 16:12:26 »
All the related political intrigue?


I thought Pelosi ripping Trumps State of the Union speech especially trashy.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline QV

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 13,305
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 473
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #61 on: February 06, 2020, 16:23:52 »

I thought Pelosi ripping Trumps State of the Union speech especially trashy.

The whole coup attempt was.

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 312,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,644
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #62 on: February 06, 2020, 18:20:11 »
Nobody has any comment?  None?

My only comment over the last few days: I don't think anybody is going to take the high road any time soon...

What’s to say? The vast majority of members here have enough savvy that we knew this whole thing was doomed as a farce from early on. While it might be *particularly* disappointing that Republican senators denied a fair and objective trial with witnesses, I doubt anyone is particularly surprised that it went down like that. Before paths were even sworn several senators made it clear they meant nothing. Not much ‘intrigue’ to be found here, just pure partisan hackery from nearly all involved (with McConnell as an outlier).

So we can gnash our teeth and piss and moan and quip, or we can shrug and carry on with our lives.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 350,711
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,163
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #63 on: February 06, 2020, 18:46:00 »
It's all a silly show. Like Nancy Pelosi sneaking the speech down "out of view" so she can pre-rip the couple pieces of paper to ensure a clean "spontaneous" rip of the speech minutes later.

T-Shirts picturing her ripping the speech appear to be selling for a cool $25 greenbacks. Wish is letting MAGA hats go at $3.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 100,950
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,207
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #64 on: February 06, 2020, 18:53:40 »
Where do you get 
Quote
While it might be *particularly* disappointing that Republican senators denied a fair and objective trial with witnesses...
?

They heard ALL the evidence the Democratic House of Representatives had (whose job it is investigate; not the Senate), and ALL that the Impeachment Managers stated during hours of testimony.

The Republican senators refused to call new witnesses (to do the Democratic House of Representatives task) for the Democrats "iron clad case". https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/30/us/politics/impeachment-witnesses.html
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 312,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,644
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #65 on: February 06, 2020, 18:59:12 »
Where do you get  ?

They heard ALL the evidence the Democratic House of Representatives had (whose job it is investigate; not the Senate), and ALL that the Impeachment Managers stated during hours of testimony.

The Republican senators refused to call new witnesses (to do the Democratic House of Representatives task) for the Democrats "iron clad case". https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/30/us/politics/impeachment-witnesses.html

They denied a trial with witnesses. It's not rocket surgery. I get it from it being a self-evident, objectively verifiable fact. This is the first impeachment trial in Senate history without witnesses, be it presidents or judges. Hell, some of the Republican senators who voted not to allow witnesses stand bludgeoned by their own hypocrisy when their statements on the issue of witnesses in the Bill Clinton senate trial are looked back upon.

I'm well aware that there was investigation and witnesses in the house. While I know better than to mistake this proceeding for a judicial one, to my simple mind anyway, 'trial' suggests it's appropriate to have witnesses. This wasn't a trial in any recognizably meaningful judicial respect; I've been part of a number of those. It was two sides each giving a statement in a legislative house and than the side with controlling votes voting to shut the whole thing down. There was at least one extremely relevant, and reasonably compelling witnesses who was there ready to go and would have had directly relevant things to say. The Republican senate refused it.

That's fine; it's a partisan process, and it played out in a permissible manner. But it wasn't anything resembling a fair trial intended to actually determine facts or culpability.

The whole coup attempt was.

You seem to be really struggling with the underlying concepts here. I'm not sure how you call it a 'coup attempt' when the end result of a guilty verdict and a removal would have been '2ic take over' with Mike Pence stepping up. That's not a 'coup'. At worst if it had gone that way it could have been called 'due process', with the result being a constitutionally sound removal of a president from office, but his party retaining the presidency. A coup is inherently *outside* of the legal processes ('legal' as in both the formal law, and 'lawful' exercise of constitutionally granted political authorities). This was anything but that. It may have been farcical, but it fell well within the law.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2020, 19:13:35 by Brihard »
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,375
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #66 on: February 06, 2020, 19:52:43 »
>This is the first impeachment trial in Senate history without witnesses, be it presidents or judges.

Not exactly.  For those who might be interested: more stuff about witnesses and impeachment hearings.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 312,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,644
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #67 on: February 06, 2020, 19:57:20 »
>This is the first impeachment trial in Senate history without witnesses, be it presidents or judges.

Not exactly.  For those who might be interested: more stuff about witnesses and impeachment hearings.

I stand corrected on that point, thank you. Nonetheless, proceedings without witnesses can still be fairly said to be rare. I definitely disagree with the claim that this was an attempt to make some 'entirely new system of justice for one man'. No. They went with the system as it has existed for a long time and as it has been implemented in a majority of cases.

The Republican senate's refusal to allow new witnesses to be called when at least on significant and compelling one from within the administration had emerged is still a very telling and very partisan fact.I cannot see that and think that the bulk of Republican senators were faithful to the oath they swore. I bear no illusion that calling Bolton or other witnesses would have resulted in an impeachment in a Republican controlled senate, but they jammed a branch through the spokes of the wheels of justice on this one.

In any case, the matter now returns to the voters, which in parliamentary democracies is how many such things ultimately play out.
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,375
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #68 on: February 06, 2020, 20:12:13 »
There was never any hope of impartiality; Democrats and others have been trying to fit impeachment to circumstances since the inauguration.  Nor was there ever any hope of a fishing expedition in the Senate.

The lack of Republican "impartiality" was exceeded only by the lack of Democratic "impartiality".  The made-up obstruction charge would not have been a matter for finding guilt, let alone removal, for nearly any reasonable and impartial person.  Because the Senate vote is one answer for two questions (is the charge proven? does the charge merit removal?), Republicans can hide behind a fig leaf (proven, but not worth removal).  Democrats don't even have that, because each vote for removal on the obstruction charge implies a guilty finding.  That more than a handful of the most irredeemable partisans found "guilt" for asserting legal privileges and immunities was the worst single possible outcome of the whole sorry circus.

Witnesses with new evidence (Bolton) should have been heard, and might have been heard if Democrats hadn't pissed off Republicans.  As for the rest, what witnesses or documents were required that weren't in the package delivered with the articles?  The trial is to try the case already prepared; all the facts required (except Bolton's possible revelation) were available to the Senate.  It isn't as if people were needed to testify how evidence was gathered, that the chain of evidence was maintained, etc.

If there wasn't enough evidence, how could anyone vote to convict/remove?  Ergo, there was enough evidence.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 29,615
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 836
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #69 on: February 06, 2020, 21:43:53 »
Congress started after the president on the day he was elected.  They have spent 3 years and multi-millions or maybe billions trying to bring him down.  During all that time, can anyone point to a single, noteworthy piece of legislation initiated and passed by congress that has advanced the welfare of the people of the United States?  The  entire group needs to be impeached for grand theft of the tax payers money in the form of their salaries (not to mention the staff manyears that has gone into their research. 

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 553,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,693
    • The job.
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #70 on: February 06, 2020, 22:13:26 »

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #71 on: February 06, 2020, 22:55:24 »
Good question to ask the man who calls himself, "The Grim Reaper".

I think that you were entirely too subtle in your answer MM. As of last November, McConnell has held up 400 pieces of House legislation passing only a small handful. Not entirely unexpected for the man that held up a Supreme Court appointment for a year to spite Obama.

https://www.vox.com/2019/11/29/20977735/how-many-bills-passed-house-democrats-trump

Time for a Democrat Senate.

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 121,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,468
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #72 on: February 06, 2020, 23:15:37 »
I think that you were entirely too subtle in your answer MM. As of last November, McConnell has held up 400 pieces of House legislation passing only a small handful. Not entirely unexpected for the man that held up a Supreme Court appointment for a year to spite Obama.

https://www.vox.com/2019/11/29/20977735/how-many-bills-passed-house-democrats-trump

Time for a Democrat Senate.

 :cheers:

Not on Your Life !! What is needed is a broom to sweep the communists out of the House !! Maybe we can shift them North ?

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 273,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,242
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #73 on: February 06, 2020, 23:24:57 »
Not on Your Life !! What is needed is a broom to sweep the communists out of the House !! Maybe we can shift them North?

If you sent us your Democrats, it would shift our overall political spectrum to the far right.  ;D

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Baz

  • Donor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 26,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 693
Re: The US Presidency 2020
« Reply #74 on: February 07, 2020, 05:37:12 »
If you sent us your Democrats, it would shift our overall political spectrum to the far right.  ;D

 :cheers:

There's the irony.  All this rancor, which gets stoked by the press wanting to make money, between two parties that are both on the right...