DC Tom Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: Except half the people in the country think this is justified on the grounds of protecting the other half the country from his Russian propaganda. On a different note, I just read that Trump approved a quarter-billion dollar bailout of US bomb makers (for the AF, Navy, and such). During a shut-down. If Democrats had ANY brains, they'd run with that story, as "Trump spent money on bombs while federal workers aren't getting paid." They'll stick with "Orange Man Bad" of course, because they're idiots. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 10 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: i wonder what security they had whilst partying down in PR. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 (edited) Looks like Donald Trump just threw a wrench in Dems’ shutdown narrative Looks like congressional Dems will have to find another shutdown talking point now that Donald Trump has just signed this bill into law: So much for democrat propaganda that he'd refuse to sign this. Dan Bongino drops a hammer on Nancy Pelosi’s excuse for need to postpone Trump’s SOTU Former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino’s eyes rolled hard at Pelosi’s letter to Trump: Dan Bongino ✔@dbongino The Secret Service’s security plan for the SOTU will not change due to the partial shutdown. Pelosi knows this and yet she decided to fabricate a story in order to hurt Trump. Pathetic. 12.6K 1:33 PM - Jan 16, 2019 According to the Secret Service, they’d be on the job and ready: Pelosi hid from #AngelMoms yesterday--Moves to cancel #SOTU today, rather than sit on her hands as @POTUS introduces them at the SOTU . PELOSI LIED! DHS Say There Is “No Security Problem for the SOTU” (VIDEO) . Edited January 16, 2019 by B-Man 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Now this poop is getting real.. WTF both parties..stop this maddness https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2019/01/16/atlas-brew-works-sues-federal-government-over.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 58 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Trump can always deliver a written address (like they used to do) and deliver a speech from the Oval Office. I'm sure it would be televised the same way the State of the Union is. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 Keep hope alive Brutha PPPers! Ah... Shucks... FORWARD my delusional conservatives... https://federalnewsnetwork.com/government-shutdown/2019/01/furloughed-feds-wont-be-rifed-if-government-shutdown-extends-past-30-days-omb-says/ "...OPM’s 2015 guidance on shutdown furloughs also clarifies the matter. “Reductions in force furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements are not applicable to emergency shutdown furloughs because the ultimate duration of an emergency shutdown furlough is unknown at the outset and is dependent entirely on congressional action, rather than agency action,” OPM guidance reads. “The RIF furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements, on the other hand, contemplate planned, foreseeable, money-saving furloughs that, at the outset, are planned to exceed 30 days.” Title 5 statute describes how and when agencies should consider laying off certain groups of employees from their competitive levels if a furlough lasts more than 30 says, or due to a demotion, separation or reassignment requiring job displacement. Agencies can also consider layoffs if there’s a lack of work, shortage of funds or reduced personnel ceiling. Agency reorganizations or position reclassifications could also prompt a layoff, according to federal statue. RIFs typically go into effect within 180 days. But Title 5 RIF regulations apply to situations where an agency knows how long it plans to furlough its employees. Some agencies in 2013, for example, were forced to furlough their employees due to the effects of sequestration. The possibility of targeted layoffs was real for some agencies at the time, including the Defense Department, which warned of RIFs in 2014 if sequestration had continued...Read on!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said: Keep hope alive Brutha PPPers! Ah... Shucks... FORWARD my delusional conservatives... https://federalnewsnetwork.com/government-shutdown/2019/01/furloughed-feds-wont-be-rifed-if-government-shutdown-extends-past-30-days-omb-says/ "...OPM’s 2015 guidance on shutdown furloughs also clarifies the matter. “Reductions in force furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements are not applicable to emergency shutdown furloughs because the ultimate duration of an emergency shutdown furlough is unknown at the outset and is dependent entirely on congressional action, rather than agency action,” OPM guidance reads. “The RIF furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements, on the other hand, contemplate planned, foreseeable, money-saving furloughs that, at the outset, are planned to exceed 30 days.” Title 5 statute describes how and when agencies should consider laying off certain groups of employees from their competitive levels if a furlough lasts more than 30 says, or due to a demotion, separation or reassignment requiring job displacement. Agencies can also consider layoffs if there’s a lack of work, shortage of funds or reduced personnel ceiling. Agency reorganizations or position reclassifications could also prompt a layoff, according to federal statue. RIFs typically go into effect within 180 days. But Title 5 RIF regulations apply to situations where an agency knows how long it plans to furlough its employees. Some agencies in 2013, for example, were forced to furlough their employees due to the effects of sequestration. The possibility of targeted layoffs was real for some agencies at the time, including the Defense Department, which warned of RIFs in 2014 if sequestration had continued...Read on!" That's too bad. An imminent RIF might have prompted the toddlers in Congress and the White House to do something. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 2 minutes ago, DC Tom said: That's too bad. An imminent RIF might have prompted the toddlers in Congress and the White House to do something. I agree. But... Nope... Let it ride now. "The Art of the Deal." By: A Terrible Two-Year Old Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 6 minutes ago, DC Tom said: That's too bad. An imminent RIF might have prompted the toddlers in Congress and the White House to do something. He can still RIF. They'd just get 1 month of back pay, plus severance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Dude Posted January 16, 2019 Share Posted January 16, 2019 (edited) https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/01/10/politics/shutdown-effects-list/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F I didn’t pay myself last week because I wasn’t sure if I’d have enough to pay my payroll taxes on the 15th. I hate the IRS. I hope they all starve. Boo hoo, they missed a paycheck with their cushy government job. It’s almost like they’re being subjected to the horrors of the — gasp — private sector. Ive literally kicked in 1000 doors for Uncle Sam and does he care? Nope. He just stops by on the 15th of every month to shake me down. ‘B word, you got my money? I’m gonna redistribute it to some lazy communist that doesn’t work but who voted for a politician that promised their ghetto-ass your money.’ Cause god knows the ghetto savages need my money more than I deserve it. Edited January 16, 2019 by The_Dude 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Pelosi’s stunt is just more progressive de-platforming FTA: All of the Post’s left-wing opinion writers seem very enthusiastic about this plan to take away Trump’s platform. That’s not really a surprise if you’ve been paying attention to the left’s behavior for the past couple of years. De-platforming is all the rage with college revolutionaries. Of course, Pelosi doesn’t actually have the power to stop Trump from speaking. The president can hold a State of the Union-style speech anywhere he wants, minus the trappings and the Democrats. He could hold a speech it in the White House or at the San Diego border for that matter. But give Pelosi credit for trying. If Trump were smart he’d lean into this resistance. Holding the speech in the White House in front of a select audience that applauds everything he says will feel canned and inauthentic, like a sitcom laugh-track. He’d be better off selecting a public venue and letting the resistance fill it with trolls in pink hats. Let the Democratic base finish the job Pelosi started. Let them scream and interrupt to their heart’s desire. Granted, Trump probably wouldn’t be able to finish his speech but the spectacle of him being shouted down would remind a lot of Americans what the far left is about these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Dude Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, DC Tom said: Except half the people in the country think this is justified on the grounds of protecting the other half the country from his Russian propaganda. On a different note, I just read that Trump approved a quarter-billion dollar bailout of US bomb makers (for the AF, Navy, and such). During a shut-down. If Democrats had ANY brains, they'd run with that story, as "Trump spent money on bombs while federal workers aren't getting paid." They'll stick with "Orange Man Bad" of course, because they're idiots. The only reason I read this drivel was to see if there was something I could mock you with. But thats actually a perfect take and point. Its been wonderful for Trump having enemies who never know which front to fight him on. ...oh wait. Just got it. Thought of something witty. Hey Tom, you’re a woman, Tammy. ? holy ***** that was good! Edited January 17, 2019 by The_Dude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Anecdotal ... So tonight at dinner I hear someone mention "Nancy Pelosi" so my ears perk up (because I'm nosey, and they were not quiet). There was a table of five two seatings away from us making no effort to lower their voices as they discussed how ridiculous it was for Nancy Pelosi to disinvite Trump for the state of the union, with chirping and chiming from the others at the table about the Democrats "not wanting border security." Now for all I know this lady was the head of the local Republican party, and she was out to dinner with staff. But, that would not explain the second table we overheard on our way out the door complaining about "the Democrats not wanting to open the government". It is possible more people are paying attention to this shut down than I would have supposed, and it is also possible that many people are not blaming the Rs nor Trump, in spite of what the MSM is spewing. (This is Florida though, so who knows.) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 10 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Anecdotal ... So tonight at dinner I hear someone mention "Nancy Pelosi" so my ears perk up (because I'm nosey, and they were not quiet). There was a table of five two seatings away from us making no effort to lower their voices as they discussed how ridiculous it was for Nancy Pelosi to disinvite Trump for the state of the union, with chirping and chiming from the others at the table about the Democrats "not wanting border security." Now for all I know this lady was the head of the local Republican party, and she was out to dinner with staff. But, that would not explain the second table we overheard on our way out the door complaining about "the Democrats not wanting to open the government". It is possible more people are paying attention to this shut down than I would have supposed, and it is also possible that many people are not blaming the Rs nor Trump, in spite of what the MSM is spewing. (This is Florida though, so who knows.) Or you are in a Republican Bubble. Where was this? Exactly where in Fla... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 If I were Cocaine Mitch, I'd invite Trump to deliver his speech from the floor of the Senate chamber. Invite as much of the House as can be accommodated in the Senate chamber/gallery, minus the Democrat leadership. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Trump should reschedule the SOTU... and have it during half time at the Super Bowl ? Nancy P. has left the decision making for the guest list and venue of the SOTU address exclusively in the hands of President Donald Trump - master marketer and showman. Smart Nancy, real smart. I am gonna run out of popcorn if this shut down lasts much longer. ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 6 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Trump should reschedule the SOTU... and have it during half time at the Super Bowl ? Nancy P. has left the decision making for the guest list and venue of the SOTU address exclusively in the hands of President Donald Trump - master marketer and showman. Smart Nancy, real smart. I am gonna run out of popcorn if this shut down lasts much longer. ? think you might enjoy this article... https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/she-wields-the-knife-pelosi-moves-to-belittle-and-undercut-trump-in-shutdown-fight/2019/01/16/e6861fbe-19b0-11e9-88fe-f9f77a3bcb6c_story.html?utm_term=.3e1f739d2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 Just now, plenzmd1 said: think you might enjoy this article... https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/she-wields-the-knife-pelosi-moves-to-belittle-and-undercut-trump-in-shutdown-fight/2019/01/16/e6861fbe-19b0-11e9-88fe-f9f77a3bcb6c_story.html?utm_term=.3e1f739d2000 Or this! (thread) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swill Merchant Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 7 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Or this! (thread) She was wise to walk that one back. That was the kind of move that exposes their true nature to moderate Dems and independents who are otherwise inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 (edited) Quote Mark MeadowsVerified account @RepMarkMeadows 3h3 hours ago Nancy Pelosi's claim that she's canceling the State of the Union over "security concerns" related to the shutdown would almost be believable--if she hadn't already scheduled and invited the President to speak on January 3rd, when the shutdown was 2 weeks old . Poll: Just 6 percent of voters say shutdown has affected them 'a lot' https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/poll-just-6-percent-of-voters-say-shutdown-has-affected-them-a-lot The new Morning Consult/POLITICO poll finds that the largest number of voters, 40 percent, say the shutdown has "not at all" affected them or their families, and 26 percent say there hasn't been much impact. Another 19 percent say they've seen only "some" impact. The data suggest that even though voters broadly place more blame on President Trump for the shutdown, there's no particular sense of urgency to resolve it. Right now, each party's base pretty much agrees with their side's position, so from a political perspective, there's still no incentive to compromise. At the same time, lawmakers aren't feeling much pressure from voters to resolve the issue because the overwhelming majority of the population is unaffected. . Edited January 17, 2019 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts