DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Republican Cra Cra Again Part.... Aw, who the hell can keep count...

Thanks.

Maybe. I know we lost the easy checks and balances, but I know the left will fight Trump’s worst moves. I also know some things will happen that they can’t stop.

And there is a faction of the left that will try to twist crap Trump wants into a win for dems. Obstruct, delay, and defend while being loudly outraged and publicly disgusted about everything bad for us that Trump tries. Being powerless and whiny worked for citizen Trump.

There are things that are likely wide open for an EO but others would get shut down pretty quickly. For instance the dissolution of FDIC. This would take an act of Congress, an EO would not be effective. If he tried to use an EO it would be challenged and enjoined pretty quickly. It would be obvious that an EO is no legal to dissolve FDIC. He could change policies for FDIC, but I am not sure what that would accomplish towards any agenda he might have.

I'm certainly not going to try and predict how this will all play out. But on paper I don't see this being good for many sectors of our society. On a personal level I don't believe that most of it will negatively impact me as an individual as much as it will many of the marginalized in our country. Let's face it, I'm an older white man living in a heavily red state. I understand that puts me at a huge advantage. I do however think he along with other Republicans will come after cuts in Social Security. Once again it won't impact me as much as it will many. I never expect or trust our government to live up to their end of the bargain on anything.

I'm in my mid 60's. In the grand scheme of things many of the issues facing us today doesn't pertain to me. My time on this planet is limited. When I vote it isn't about me. It's about the future for my grandchildren, great grandchildren and the generations to come. I would like to hope when I leave this world I will have in some small way have helped make it a better planet for them. But it's an uphill battle.

I don't doubt some of his EO's would be challenged in court the same way they were in his first term. I agree with you that there are limitations to just how far he can go with EO's. I agree that some of them would be defeated in court. But it may not be done as quickly as you seem to indicate.

The thing about the legal process is that you can appeal a decision to a higher court. That process can sometimes work its way all the way up to the SCOTUS. So there are two scenarios which could play out here. One is that his EO's could remain in place pending a final legal outcome or a court could put a hold on the EO pending that outcome. I'm in a wait and see pattern as to how that will play itself out.

And no doubt he'll whatever is possible to get it changed. When he does, it will be challenged, end up at SCOTUS and he'll win again because the lips of 6 justices are firmly attached to his butt.

Another sign of a NAZI state.

At least you got to say NAZI again.

There is already a thread in the Everything Else forum about the drones but this is simply too political to post in that forum.

The Cra Cra has taken the lead in this one as has been expected..........................

What is the Project Blue Beam drone conspiracy theory?

As drones become more visible across New Jersey and New York, conspiracy theories continue to spread.

Project Blue Beam is a conspiracy theory dating back to the 1990s, but some believe the current drone sightings are a sign of it coming to fruition.

What is Project Blue Beam?

Canadian journalist Serge Monast is credited with coming up with the theory of Project Blue Beam, wherein there is a plot to engender a dictatorial, universal government that abolishes Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) in favor of a new world order.

In theory, this totalitarian state would be achieved through staged futuristic NASA technology that pretends to be proof of alien presence or attacks.

Monast claimed NASA and the U.S. were collaborating to abolish Abrahamic religions to establish a “New Age” religion with the Antichrist as the figurehead.

Who is talking about Project Blue Beam?

Several prominent figures have discussed how they believe continued drone sightings and Project Blue Beam are intertwined.

Actress Roseanne Barr posted on X Sunday: “Now you see why I mention Project Blue Beam every week on my podcast….”

Alex Jones also discussed the topic, sharing a 2021 interview with ufologist and former physician Dr. Steven Greer in which the latter suggested a “hoax cosmic threat” would soon be coming into effect.

A fan page of influencer Charlie Kirk shared an image of a post from a Reddit “conspiracy” thread on X, purportedly written by a “25-year radar operator for a major [government] agency” that echoed similar rhetoric to Jones.

On Sunday, Jones quote-tweeted footage of drones appearing in New Jersey, describing their presence as “part of a larger psychological warfare operation ahead of major events.”

Experts’ opinions on drone sightings

University of Pennsylvania mechanical engineering professor Vijay Kumar told Newsweek he does not believe the drones are a foreign state actor but rather a U.S. government initiative.

“Firstly, it’s not a coincidence, I think, that all these sightings have been near military bases. I’ll just leave it at that,” Kumar told the outlet. “If I was an adversary, I would take great trouble to conceal what I was doing. So that leads me to believe that it’s not a military power that’s trying to attack the U.S.”

Missy Cummings, director of the Mason Autonomy and Robotics Center at George Mason University, suggested to Newsweek they may not be drones at all.

“It is highly unlikely these are large drones as you describe, and if they are drones, they likely would be controlled by line-of-sight, so possibly from the water but probably not miles out to sea,” she said.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/project-blue-beam-drone-conspiracy-180415355.html

Trump chooses Kari Lake as director for Voice of America

By Faris Tanyos
Updated on: December 11, 2024 / 10:42 PM EST / CBS News

President-elect Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he has tapped Kari Lake as director of the government-funded Voice of America, the nation's largest international broadcaster.

The move comes after the 55-year-old Lake lost her Arizona Senate bid to Democratic Rep. Ruben Gallego in November.

"She will be appointed by, and work closely with, our next head of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, who I will announce soon," Trump said in a post to his Truth Social platform.

Lake, a former longtime TV news anchor in Phoenix, is a fierce Trump loyalist who also lost her campaign for Arizona governor in 2022. During her campaigns, she often echoed Trump's false claims about the 2020 election.

Voice of America, which is part of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, broadcasts news internationally in 49 languages on radio, television and online to an audience of an estimated 354 million people per week, according to its website.

It first began broadcasting in 1942. It has about 2,000 employees and an annual budget of approximately $260 million. USAGM is considered an independent federal agency.

In a social media post Wednesday night, Lake wrote that she was "honored" to have been tabbed for the role, adding that "under my leadership, the VOA will excel in its mission: chronicling America's achievements worldwide."

Lake's appointment must still be confirmed by the Senate.

During Trump's first term in 2020, USAGM's editorial independence came into question after Trump named Michael Pack — a conservative filmmaker and close ally of one-time Trump adviser Steve Bannon — its CEO.

Pack subsequently made the decision not to renew the visas of 10 VOA journalists and dozens of others who work at networks under USAGM, increasing concerns by members of Congress and the international community alike over the potential of diminished editorial independence of the VOA news outlet.

John Lippman is currently the acting director of VOA, a post he's held since October 2023, while Amanda Bennett is CEO of USAGM.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-chooses-kari-lake-director-for-voice-of-america/

Tokyo Rose the Trump version.

House rejects Trump-backed plan on government shutdown, leaving next steps uncertain

LISA MASCARO and KEVIN FREKING
Updated Thu, December 19, 2024 at 8:29 PM EST
6 min read
ASSOCIATED PRESS


WASHINGTON (AP) — A day before a potential government shutdown, the House resoundingly rejected President-elect Donald Trump's new plan Thursday to fund operations and suspend the debt ceiling, as Democrats and dozens of Republicans refused to accommodate his sudden demands.

In a hastily convened evening vote punctuated by angry outbursts over the self-made crisis, the lawmakers failed to reach the two-thirds threshold needed for passage — but House Speaker Mike Johnson appeared determined to reassess, before Friday's midnight deadline.

“We're going to regroup and we will come up with another solution, so stay tuned,” Johnson said after the vote. The cobbled-together plan didn’t even get a majority, with the bill failing 174-235.

The outcome proved a massive setback for Trump and his billionaire ally, Elon Musk, who rampaged against Johnson's bipartisan compromise, which Republicans and Democrats had reached earlier to prevent a Christmastime government shutdown.

It provides a preview of the turbulence ahead when Trump returns to the White House with Republican control of the House and Senate. During his first term, Trump led Republicans into the longest government shutdown in history during the 2018 Christmas season, and interrupted the holidays in 2020 by tanking a bipartisan COVID-relief bill and forcing a do-over.

Hours earlier Thursday, Trump announced “SUCCESS in Washington!” in coming up with the new package which would keep government running for three more months, add $100.4 billion in disaster assistance including for hurricane-hit states, and allow more borrowing through Jan. 30, 2027.

"Speaker Mike Johnson and the House have come to a very good Deal,” Trump posted.

But Republicans, who had spent 24 hours largely negotiating with themselves to cut out the extras conservatives opposed and come up with the new plan, ran into a wall of resistance from Democrats, who were in no hurry to appease demands from Trump — or Musk.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Democrats were sticking with the original deal with Johnson and called the new one “laughable.”

“It's not a serious proposal,” Jeffries said as he walked to Democrats' own closed-door caucus meeting. Inside, Democrats were chanting, “Hell, no!”

All day, Johnson had been fighting to figure out how to meet Trump's almost impossible demands — and keep his own job — while federal offices are being told to prepare to shutter operations.

The new proposal whittled the 1,500-page bill to 116 pages and dropped a number of add-ons — notably the first pay raise for lawmakers in more than a decade, which could have allowed as much as a 3.8% bump. That drew particular scorn as Musk turned his social media army against the bill.

Trump said early Thursday that Johnson will “easily remain speaker” for the next Congress if he “acts decisively and tough” in coming up with a new plan to also raise the debt limit, a stunning request just before the Christmas holidays that has put the beleaguered speaker in a bind.

And if not, the president-elect warned of trouble ahead for Johnson and Republicans in Congress.

“Anybody that supports a bill that doesn’t take care of the Democrat quicksand known as the debt ceiling should be primaried and disposed of as quickly as possible,” Trump told Fox News Digital.

The tumultuous turn of events, coming as lawmakers were preparing to head home for the holidays, sparks a familiar reminder of what it's like in Trump-run Washington.

For Johnson, who faces his own problems ahead of a Jan. 3 House vote to remain speaker, Trump's demands left him severely weakened, forced to abandon his word with Democrats and work into the night to broker the new approach.

Trump’s allies even floated the far-fetched idea of giving Musk the speaker’s gavel, since the speaker is not required to be a member of the Congress. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., posted she was “open” to the idea.

Democrats were beside themselves, seeing this as a fitting coda after one of the most unproductive congressional sessions in modern times.

“Here we are once again in chaos,” said House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark, who detailed the harm a government shutdown would cause Americans. “And what for? Because Elon Musk, an unelected man, said, ‘We’re not doing this deal, and Donald Trump followed along.’”

As he left the Capitol, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said, "Now it’s time to go back to the bipartisan agreement.”

The debate in the House chamber grew heated as lawmakers blamed each other for the mess.

At one point, Rep. Marc Molinaro, who was presiding, slammed the speaker’s gavel with such force that it broke.

The stakes couldn't be higher. Trump was publicly turning on those who opposed him.

One hardline Republican, Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, drew Trump’s ire for refusing to along with the plan. Roy in turn told his own GOP colleagues they had no self-respect for piling onto the nation’s debt.

“It’s shameful!” Roy thundered, standing on the Democratic side of the aisle and pointing at his fellow Republicans.

The slimmed-down package does include federal funds to rebuild Baltimore’s collapsed Key Bridge, but dropped a separate land transfer that could have paved the way for a new Washington Commanders football stadium.

It abandons a long list of other bipartisan bills that had support as lawmakers in both parties try to wrap work for the year. It extends government funds through March 14.

Adding an increase in the debt ceiling to what had been a bipartisan package is a show-stopper for Republicans who want to slash government and routinely vote against more borrowing. Almost three dozen Republicans voted against it.

While Democrats have floated their own ideas in the past for lifting or even doing away with the debt limit caps — Sen. Elizabeth Warren had suggested as much — they appear to be in no bargaining mood to save Johnson from Trump — even before the president-elect is sworn into office.

The current debt limit expires Jan. 1, 2025, and Trump wants the problem off the table before he joins the White House.

Musk, in his new foray into politics, led the charge. The wealthiest man in the world used his social media platform X to amplify the unrest, and GOP lawmakers were besieged with phone calls to their offices telling them to oppose the plan.

Rep. Steve Womack, an Arkansas Republican and senior appropriator, said the bipartisan bill's collapse signaled what's ahead in the new year, “probably be a good trailer right now for the 119th Congress.”


https://www.yahoo.com/news/government-shutdown-risk-trumps-demands-162543907.html

Trump’s Rage at Liz Cheney Takes a Dark Turn—and Wrecks a Big GOP Lie
Greg Sargent
Thu, December 19, 2024 at 6:00 AM EST5 min read


Barely moments after Donald Trump announced that he’d chosen loyalist Kash Patel as FBI director, Republicans stampeded forth to insist that this in no way means Trump will unleash law enforcement on his enemies, even though Trump himself has threatened to do so. Senator John Cornyn suggested such threats were only for “public consumption.” Senator Rick Scott said Trump is “not gonna do it.” And Representative Dan Meuser scoffed that the very idea is “nonsense.”

These lawmakers should take a moment to consult Trump’s Truth Social feed. At 3:11 a.m. on Wednesday, demonstrating characteristic emotional balance, Trump posted this reaction to a new report from a House subcommittee chaired by GOP Representative Barry Loudermilk, which recommends that the FBI investigate former GOP Representative Liz Cheney over her role in the House’s January 6 inquiry:

Liz Cheney could be in a lot of trouble based on the evidence obtained by the subcommittee, which states that “numerous federal laws were likely broken by Liz Cheney, and these violations should be investigated by the FBI.” Thank you to Congressman Barry Loudermilk on a job well done.

Note the trademark mobspeak here: Cheney could be in a lot of trouble for federal lawbreaking, Trump declares, as if he’s merely a passive observer remarking on the danger she faces, rather than someone who will control the nation’s sprawling federal law enforcement apparatus in just over a month. Trump has been raging at Cheney for years and has amplified suggestions that she should face televised military tribunals.

Now, in a dark turn in this whole farcical saga, Trump is pretending that House Republicans have given him a legitimate basis for prosecuting Cheney, when in fact their claims were cooked up in bad faith for precisely that purpose.

Indeed, read this way, Trump’s new missive actually wrecks the spin from Republicans that there’s no reason to fear that Patel will improperly wield law enforcement against his political enemies, even though Patel has vowed to do exactly that. It clearly signals that this is exactly what Trump expects from him.

For starters, the House GOP report’s claim that Cheney “likely” broke federal laws is “likely” entirely baseless. The report argues that as vice chair of the House committee that investigated Trump’s insurrection on January 6, 2021, Cheney may have violated statutes barring witness tampering and the subornation of perjury. But legal experts tell me the allegations are extremely thin.

The witness-tampering claim is based on the charge that Cheney improperly communicated with Cassidy Hutchinson—a Trump White House aide who delivered damning testimony against Trump—without her lawyer’s knowledge. But as Cheney and Hutchinson have already detailed in their books—and the report itself recounts—Hutchinson is the one who initiated direct contact with Cheney, apparently without that lawyer’s knowledge, asking Cheney to recommend new attorneys she might choose from to replace him.

The GOP report insists that such a consultation behind a lawyer’s back was nonetheless unethical in an attorney (Cheney is also a lawyer). But law professor Jonathan Turley—not exactly a Resistance liberal—has noted that Cheney was functioning as a member of Congress in doing this, not as a lawyer, and that in pursuing the matter with Hutchinson, she was doing her congressional duty to pursue a witness.

Nor does the report demonstrate that what Cheney did do was witness tampering, said national security lawyer Bradley Moss. “For this to be criminal tampering, Cheney would have to work to get Hutchinson to change her testimony to provide knowingly false information,” Moss told me. “The report does not provide anything remotely sufficient to substantiate that.”

The same goes for the claim that Cheney may have unlawfully gotten Hutchinson to commit perjury, Moss said. The report details what it insists are Hutchinson’s falsehoods to the January 6 committee. But Moss argues that the findings don’t show that Hutchinson knowingly made false claims, and regardless, the GOP report “produces zero evidence that Cheney herself instructed Hutchinson to provide knowing false statements.”

“This is political cover for what Trump really wants: An excuse to prosecute Cheney,” Moss concluded.

Kristy Parker, counsel at Protect Democracy and a former federal prosecutor herself, agrees that the GOP report is exceedingly weak. “The FBI has very strict guidelines for when they can open investigations,” Parker said. “The GOP report does not provide any information that would credibly justify a criminal inquiry.”

Many of the headlines about the House GOP report and Trump’s endorsement of it treat this moment as akin to a conventional political battle. “House Republicans call for Liz Cheney to be investigated over Jan. 6 committee role,” blared The New York Times. NBC News told readers that “Republicans say Liz Cheney should be investigated.”

Meanwhile, a CNN headline read that the House GOP is siding with Trump against Cheney “after investigating January 6,” as if the GOP probe was merely another good-faith effort to gather facts about that day. Politico went with “Trump: Liz Cheney ‘could be in a lot of trouble’ over Jan. 6 committee,” treating Trump’s comment as a conventional statement from a politician about Cheney’s legal situation. Casual readers of these headlines might come away believing we’re having a real debate over whether Cheney did break federal laws and that Trump has a genuine, public-spirited interest in determining whether that legitimately happened.

But the real story here is the public conduct of Trump and Republicans, not that of Liz Cheney or what Trump supposedly “believes” about it. Trump is demonstrating that he’s eager for Cheney’s prosecution to proceed regardless of whether there’s any legitimate basis for it.

The story is that House Republicans are abusing their public roles to create a phony pretext for something that Trump already intended to do anyway: wield law enforcement as a weapon against his enemies with no serious legal predicate. And Senate Republicans appear willing to confirm Patel while knowing full well that Trump has expressly chosen him to carry out this extraordinary and degenerate abuse of power.

All of that is the story. How is it conceivable that the media is treating this as a conventional political moment? Trump’s veiled threat toward Cheney should prompt the press to revisit those reassurances from Republicans. GOP senators should be hounded mercilessly by reporters on whether they’ll knowingly support Patel now that Trump has made the corrupt reality of the situation so inescapably, alarmingly clear.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-rage-liz-cheney-takes-110000032.html

We having’ fun yet MAGA? Seems like the crap Trump is pulling is already hurting everybody. And since when was it legal to call the shots from the cheap seats? Don’t we have laws about obstructing congress? One POTUS at a time? Or did all the go the way of keeping insurrectionists and their leaders out of office? Trump wipe’s his ass on the constitution every day. My prediction from see the MAGA circus in transition is that the economy will be crashed no later than June 26 under Trump. It could happen within days of his inauguration and I wouldn’t be surprised.

And he’s going to cut spending two trillion, going to get the deficit down, going to stop Government waste… then why the hell is he demanding that the debt ceiling be abolished BEFORE he takes office? Does a little donny CON require that to get those trillions in the pockets of the donor class? Smfh, it’s obviously a heist. I think he sold the presidency to Elon on the DL. You can’t make this crap up.

Looks like I may be going without a paycheck next pay period. Merry Christmas to me!! Honestly, I'll be fine, but I can't say that for every federal employee, especially this time of year.

President Musk - er I mean Trump - really wanting to set a lot of fires.

You had it right. It's King Trump and President Musk..............................

Trump says any shutdown ‘is a Biden problem to solve’

The president-elect has insisted that any funding package include an extension, or elimination, of the debt limit.

President-elect Donald Trump worked Friday morning to foist the blame for any potential government shutdown onto the current White House, insisting that the funding fight on Capitol Hill “is a Biden problem to solve.”

Lawmakers had seemed on track earlier this week to fund the government with time to spare, settling on a bipartisan stopgap spending bill, known as a continuing resolution or CR, that would extend government spending into March and included a lot of add-ons to appease Democrats and others. But that plan quickly drew the ire of Trump ally Elon Musk, followed by the president-elect and Vice President-elect JD Vance, tanking that bill. Still, with government funding set to run out at midnight on Friday, Trump insisted that it is President Joe Biden who should be held responsible for any shutdown. “If there is going to be a shutdown of government, let it begin now, under the Biden Administration, not after January 20th, under ‘TRUMP,’” the president-elect wrote on Truth Social. “This is a Biden problem to solve, but if Republicans can help solve it, they will!”

Of particular interest to Trump amid the ongoing spending negotiations is an increase, or outright removal, of the government’s debt limit. The president-elect has insisted that any funding package include such a provision, an especially tough pill to swallow for conservatives who have for years forced painful debt limit fights on Capitol Hill.

“Congress must get rid of, or extend out to, perhaps, 2029, the ridiculous Debt Ceiling,” Trump wrote on Truth Social just after 1 a.m. Friday morning. “Without this, we should never make a deal. Remember, the pressure is on whoever is President.”

Lawmakers have so far struck out on legislation that would meet Trump’s demands. A hastily brokered deal to fund the government and extend the debt limit collapsed on the House floor — with 38 Republican defectors — Thursday night. Speaker Mike Johnson worked through the night Thursday into Friday on a “Plan C” after ditching the original bipartisan deal and failing to pass the new bill on the House floor. Johnson and Trump are both weighing the pros and cons of a government shutdown.

Speaking to reporters, Johnson said the House will vote on a funding bill Friday morning.

“We’re expecting votes this morning. So y’all stay tuned. We’ve got a plan,” he said. Asked if they had reached a new agreement, he added: “We’ll see.”

Johnson is balancing Trump’s demands with the reality that any deal will require Democratic support in both the House and the Democratic-controlled Senate. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is asking to return to the original bipartisan deal that Trump and Musk killed.

“It’s a good thing the bill failed in the House, and now it’s time to go back to the bipartisan agreement we came to,” Schumer said Thursday.

Like Trump, Vance is already working on shutdown messaging, telling reporters Thursday that Democrats are to blame for the looming shutdown. “They’ve asked for a shutdown and I think that’s exactly what they’re going to get,” he told reporters.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/12/20/trump-shutdown-biden-problem-00195574

How odd it must be to claim you're the party of fiscal responsibility, having refused to pass any annual budget because you want to install a debt ceiling to reduce the budget deficit........ Then suddenly trump comes along and demands you do away with any attempt to create a debt ceiling. Now why would he be against a debt ceiling when he claims he is going to reduce spending? "Things that make you go hmmmm for $500 Alex."

Musk and trump derailed a bipartisan agreement that had been reached now to only blame democrats for the situation we're in. When the fact is 38 members of their own party voted against the latest bill trump approved. Their own party can't get its act together and still refuse any responsibility for it. Murica!

It’s a Goper’s mess and they don’t know how to clean up their own messes. Oh well Murica!

If they can't raise the deficit they can't hand out huge tax cuts mainly geared to help the wealthy the most and they can't have that.

Tech billionaires flock to Mar-a-Lago before Trump inauguration

https://www.wpbf.com/article/florid...-lago-before-trump-inauguration/63206273

I can see bigger union strikes and boycotts in the future for these billionaires. Something in me says workers paying a higher tax percentage then their billionaire boss just won’t sit well.

In a previous PP post, I profiled the people who stormed Capitol Hill as being the same people who will eventually storm the next regime, as well. The discontent is real, and it will be aimed at whomever is in power.

If the new administration fails them, they will be just as angry, disaffected and bloodthirsty as they were in 2021.
Expect similar behavior in the future, regardless of who's in charge.

Trump got'em whipped up in 2015, and they're still in a froth.
If 47 doesn't deliver, he'll feel it like anyone else in his position. He won't be immune.

Will he sic the National Guard on those who voted him into office? He's already on record as expressing such inclinations regarding public demonstrations ("can't we just shoot'em in the legs?").
I can easily foresee a situation much like this, in the not-too-distant future.

America voted for this potentiality.
I'll wait to see how she responds, if such things come to pass.


Regardless of outcome, I'll be able to sleep knowing that I voted for something other than that.


.02

Like me, it doesn't seem you sleep all that well...lol

You are a musician. Maybe you have a side gig throwing down the cello notes in some ELO tribute band. No dis intended. Grab the green when you can for as long as you can.

I applaud that. My dad was a sax player. Before he settled on what he did, he did some sit in work with Harry James. Most don't know him, but you do. I have a couple of old 78's somewhere that he played on.