Congress Agrees to 2.3 TRILLION Spending Package,
- Thread starter livingston
- Start date
Politico is claiming he signed it:
www.politico.com
Trump backs down, signs stimulus package
A government shutdown was averted after the president approved the Covid relief package and annual spending bill.
www.politico.com
That_FNG
.308 Win
If true how disappointingPolitico is claiming he signed it:
Trump backs down, signs stimulus package
A government shutdown was averted after the president approved the Covid relief package and annual spending bill.
Which version?
Carlos Hathcock
.450/400 Nitro Ex
There was no winning decision.
That_FNG
.308 Win
Yes there was. Hold out until Congress fixes the bill. If Congress doesn’t fix the bill then you never sign it. Let Congress do a 2/3 vote to override a presidents veto if congress wants it so bad.
WTF. What does he have to lose by vetoing the bill? After all the talk about vetoing he signs it but says he's sending it back to congress to fix it. No, it doesn't work that way. He signed it, it's now law, correct?
So much for 4D chess. What happened to the pocket veto option?
The guy has been used and abused by the washington establishment for four years and now has less than a month in office. Why play nice with these assholes? Why talk up the veto and then turn around and cave? Use the last month to make the establishment as uncomfortable as possible. Focus on the wasteful spending versus the pittance for americans. Make the bastards squirm enough to actually change the bill. Fuck with them the way they fucked with you.
Disheartening and disappointing.
So much for 4D chess. What happened to the pocket veto option?
The guy has been used and abused by the washington establishment for four years and now has less than a month in office. Why play nice with these assholes? Why talk up the veto and then turn around and cave? Use the last month to make the establishment as uncomfortable as possible. Focus on the wasteful spending versus the pittance for americans. Make the bastards squirm enough to actually change the bill. Fuck with them the way they fucked with you.
Disheartening and disappointing.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
I guess no one saw that Trump used this The Impoundment Control Act of 1974: What Is It? Why Does It Matter?
"Rescissions
Put simply, if the President wants to spend less money than Congress provided for a particular purpose, he or she must first secure a law providing Congressional approval to rescind the funding in question. The ICA requires that the President send a special message to Congress identifying the amount of the proposed rescission; the reasons for it; and the budgetary, economic, and programmatic effects of the rescission. Upon transmission of such special message, the President may withhold certain funding in the affected accounts for up to 45 legislative session days. If a law approving the rescission is not enacted within the 45 days, any withheld funds must be made available for obligation."
Still, he should have just vetoed it.
"Rescissions
Put simply, if the President wants to spend less money than Congress provided for a particular purpose, he or she must first secure a law providing Congressional approval to rescind the funding in question. The ICA requires that the President send a special message to Congress identifying the amount of the proposed rescission; the reasons for it; and the budgetary, economic, and programmatic effects of the rescission. Upon transmission of such special message, the President may withhold certain funding in the affected accounts for up to 45 legislative session days. If a law approving the rescission is not enacted within the 45 days, any withheld funds must be made available for obligation."
Still, he should have just vetoed it.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Trump Signs $2.3 Trillion Relief and Spending Bill, Says More Money to Come
www.theepochtimes.com
spat
.700 Nitro Express
Whether they give you $600 or $2k now, if there's $3k/taxpayer of overseas assistance in there it's a bad deal.
Even with $0 of foreign aid, it's at best a loan. You as a taxpayer *will* be paying it back later. You'll also be paying back the money that goes to non-taxpaying citizens too.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
Sickens me. The whole thing sickens me. Get ready for more of this with Biden coming in. He will hand out money left and right. Georgia is very important.
drowhawk
.44 mag
Trump signed the bill, exactly as I predicted. Once again proving that he is a spineless swamp monster. Just like the rest.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
Not saying you’re wrong but they are still working to get the payments up to $2,000 per this article. He signed it but it’s going back to the house where the $2,000 payment will be approved. Then to the senate where I think the pressure might just get to them with the Jan 5th run off election looming. Not sure how they can do this but hey it’s the government right?
I also think this explains what’s going on well.
Didn't get a stimulus check yet? Here's why you might not qualify
The IRS has been sending waves of third stimulus checks to over 100 million people, but there are still tens of millions who may not get it.
www.cnet.com
drowhawk
.44 mag
I don't care about direct payments. They are a joke. If they really want to help, they can bump the standard deduction up by 50% for everyone. Let me take home more of the money that I EARNED.Not saying you’re wrong but they are still working to get the payments up to $2,000 per this article. He signed it but it’s going back to the house where the $2,000 payment will be approved. Then to the senate where I think the pressure might just get to them with the Jan 5th run off election looming. Not sure how they can do this but hey it’s the government right?
I also think this explains what’s going on well.
Didn't get a stimulus check yet? Here's why you might not qualify
The IRS has been sending waves of third stimulus checks to over 100 million people, but there are still tens of millions who may not get it.
I'm tired of seeing all this money go to foreign countries that use it to buy arms from Russia.
President invokes Impoundment Control Act of 1974, redlining areas of concern in COVID-19 relief bill
On Sunday, President Trump signed the COVID-19 relief bill to immediately renew increased unemployment benefits, protect against eviction and foreclosures,
noqreport.com
Relief Bill Causes Distress: Statement from Trump, Impoundment Control Act Explained, ‘Line Item Veto’?
President Donald J. Trump surprised his most dedicated supporters on Sunday night with the announcement that he had signed the
djhjmedia.com
Jmac00
.475 A&M Magnum
well lets look at it this way, if every dollar of the foreign aid/relief package went to American's the government could give every single man, women and child in America one million dollars.
I bet none of them assholes in congress thought of that
I bet none of them assholes in congress thought of that
drowhawk
.44 mag
Under no uncertain terms, the bill has been signed. Congress can tell Trump to pound salt with his requests (which they almost certainly will) and the spending will go through.
The art of the deal: giving up any negotiating leverage you might have had, signing the bad deal (which he vowed he'd never do again), and then asking the other party to "please reconsider."
The art of the deal: giving up any negotiating leverage you might have had, signing the bad deal (which he vowed he'd never do again), and then asking the other party to "please reconsider."
Not quite. Foreign aid adds up to about 4.7 billion. That’s about $14 per US citizen. I don’t think there should be any foreign aid given the circumstances, but still.
None of them thought of it because of basic arithmetic...
There are about 320 million American citizens. Giving every one of them 1 million dollars would equate to 320 trillion dollars in direct payments. Last time I checked the spending package is a wee bit less than that.
Expert negotiating tactics brought to you by the man who though selling steaks at an electronics store was a good idea, haha.
@FRB Gotcha
Section 230 says that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" (47 U.S.C. § 230). In other words, online intermediaries that host or republish speech are protected against a range of laws that might otherwise be used to hold them legally responsible for what others say and do. The protected intermediaries include not only regular Internet Service Providers (ISPs), but also a range of "interactive computer service providers," including basically any online service that publishes third-party content.
I wonder if Trump understands that will make Twitter, etc. delete his account. If 230 goes away and websites like twitter, etc. are legally responsible for user posted content, then they won't be able to carry Trump's constant lies and misinformation. It would put them at way too much legal exposure for lawsuits.
Section 230 is pro free speech. If websites are responsible for everything a user posts, then there really won't be any sites willing to take on that legal risk of letting the general public post things. The Internet will all be curated MSM style "approved" content. Sites like this one, NYGF, could be legally liable if a user posts something that slanders, etc. On an Internet without 230 you'll have as much say as to what is posted online as you do regarding what shows a TV channel decides to run.
Is that what ya'll want?
Last edited:
Robin
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Government, nothing is ever as it seems. The swamp is winning and fools like DumbOFSON relish in it.
Robin
Robin
spat
.700 Nitro Express
Only if they exercise "editorial" control over their content.
Twitter et al. would have to choose between their vague "community standards" and having any users.
If they have less nebulous standards and put forth a good faith effort to adhere to them, then they could remain "not a publisher".
Imagine if the phone company or your ISP decided to implement these "community standards" and you could lose your account for discussing conservative topics over their media ?
Imagine if the phrase "Hillary is a crook" could get you digitally shunned and completely cut off from modern life if uttered in a private conversation online ?
They are getting very close to that with "cancel culture" now. People are afraid for their jobs (and employers are afraid to tolerate speech by their employees, no matter how disconnected from work).
Eh?
If understanding math (giving everyone a million dollars would cost orders of magnitude more than all the pork in the recently passed bill) and supporting section 230 so sites like this one can exist is the swamp.... then bring on the swamp.
Of course I don't support all the pork and foreign aid in the spending package that just passed, but if we're going to talk about it, I think an understanding of what is in the bill is important. I don't often agree with Ted Cruz, but he is 100% right on one thing... they only had about 2 hours to review the 5000 page bill before voting on it. How the F are they supposed to review a 5000 page bill in 2 hours?
Also, why does a stimulus bill need to be 5000 pages long (it doesn't)? Riders need to go away forever.
Last edited:
My understanding of this is that without section 230 they would be responsible for user posted content, editorial control or not.
Cancel culture is another issue, I'll 100% agree there. Cancel culture is toxic nonsense, however it won't go away with 230 changes/elimination/etc. It's more of it's own separate thing.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
230 is just about who is a publisher and who isn't.
The New York Times is responsible for statements they publish on their editorial page (whether they wrote them or not). They get a pass on the classifieds.
The difference is that they pick and choose what to put on the editorial page, but the classifieds get everything that meets the objective standards. This was the case long before the Internet or section 230 was even an idea.
If twitter or facebook, etc... could objectively define their "community standards" and apply them consistently then they would be able to maintain their "neutral platform" status.
When they pick and choose which articles (or posts) they will allow arbitrarily like a publisher, then they are a publisher.
Modean
.223 Rem
230 is only pro free-speech if the platforms like what you are posting. That’s the whole problem. They want to pick and choose content like a publisher does, but they don’t want the liability. After the way they actively suppressed the Hunter Biden story, it’s time they lose that protection.