ChrisWeigant.com

Another "Infrastructure Week" Goes Down In Flames

[ Posted Wednesday, May 22nd, 2019 – 16:41 UTC ]

You just know it's going to be entertaining when the White House announces an upcoming "Infrastructure Week," because the end result is always a fiery trainwreck of epic proportions. In one of the first instances of this recurring phenomenon, Donald Trump hijacked (there's simply no better word for it) what was supposed to be a press announcement rolling out a plan to reduce regulations to get road projects built faster. With Elaine Chao helplessly looking on from the sidelines, Trump instead let fly his unhinged "very fine people on both sides" rant in response to the racist riots in Charlottesville, Virginia. That was the biggest and most spectacular Trumpian trainwreck during a planned Infrastructure Week, to date. But now we've got President Man-Baby's latest temper tantrum to compare it to. Because Infrastructure Week always means "never a dull moment" in the Trump White House.

What set the stage for today's fiasco was a previous meeting held last month between President Trump and the Democratic leaders in Congress (or "Chuck and Nancy," as Trump likes to call them). Surprisingly, this meeting was more successful than Schumer and Pelosi had likely anticipated. Previously, Democrats had proposed spending a trillion dollars on infrastructure projects, while the White House had put forward a plan with only a few hundred billion dollars in public money (the rest was somehow supposed to magically appear from the private sector). But three weeks ago, Trump surprised everyone by getting on board with an even bigger figure -- two trillion dollars of federal spending for infrastructure. While Pelosi and Schumer were open to such a plan, they intelligently put the onus on Trump and the White House to come up with a way to pay for it. That's an awfully lot of money, after all, and Democrats weren't going to be the ones left holding the bag when it came time to fund the plan. So everyone left the meeting with the clear understanding that they would meet again once Trump had come up with a way to pay for the two trillion. That's what today's meeting was theoretically supposed to be about.

Now, to raise two trillion dollars, you're going to have to tax somebody to get it. The most obvious answer to the problem would be to raise federal gasoline taxes, which haven't been raised in decades. Even that wouldn't fully fund a $2 trillion effort, but it'd be a big start. But Trump and the Republicans never want to raise any taxes, ever. So it was always a mystery what Trump was going to suggest in today's meeting -- how he'd square the circle of wanting to spend trillions on roads and bridges when Republicans hate the idea of raising any taxes. If these were normal times with a normal president, Trump might have announced some specific tax increases and then promised to get his own party on board with them so a bill could make it through a divided Congress. Of course, these aren't normal times and this certainly isn't a normal president.

What happened instead was Trump blustered his way into the meeting, spent three minutes ranting about Democratic oversight efforts in Congress and Nancy Pelosi's accusation that he's in the midst of a "coverup," followed by Trump promising that until all the congressional investigations stop, he wouldn't be doing anything at all on infrastructure, or on anything else for that matter. After dropping this bombshell, Trump stomped out of the meeting. In other words, he's taking his bat and ball and going home, so there!

The only real question is how much of this was planned? Did Trump just have nothing at all to propose, so he decided to divert attention away from that embarrassing fact with a tantrum for the ages? Or was it truly a spontaneous hissy-fit Trump threw after seeing Pelosi on television this morning? I suppose we'll never know. Even the N.T.S.B. couldn't get to the bottom of this spectacular trainwreck, in other words.

Trump then gave an impromptu press announcement (it's hard to call it a press conference, since Trump only took two questions at the end before stalking off), where he ranted and railed against those nasty Democrats in Congress having the temerity to investigate him. If the meeting with Pelosi and Schumer was the train flying off a cliff, this was the huge explosive fireball when it hit the bottom. Trump has now gotten rid of all of the "adults in the room" who were supposed to rein in his most childish impulses, and as a result he's now free to melt down for all to see, right in front of the cameras. The late-night comedians are going to have a field day, that's for sure (it's a shame Saturday Night Live just wrapped up their season, since now we won't get to see Alec Baldwin's impression of Trump's latest tantrum).

Trump seems to have forgotten one basic thing in all of this, though. He was the one who really wanted to have a big political win on infrastructure, because he had made such sweeping promises on the subject during his campaign. Infrastructure was supposed to be the one thing that Trump and the Democrats could agree upon and by producing a solid plan they'd both be able to show some real progress. Without infrastructure, Trump has only one legislative achievement from his entire first term to run on to try to get a second term, but unfortunately the one achievement Republicans have managed went over like a lead balloon. The Trump tax cuts were supposed to usher in a big wave of Republican votes, but that didn't exactly happen in the 2018 midterms. And there's no reason to expect it'll be any different in 2020, either.

While Democrats certainly will make a lot of political hay out of Trump's meltdown, there's a bigger picture they should be painting, to kick off the 2020 campaign. Sure, Trump is unstable and shows the restraint of a two-year-old, but then again everyone already knew that. So after poking some well-deserved fun at Trump's emotional immaturity, Democrats should hit not just Trump but the entire Republican Party (especially those sitting in the Senate) hard on their "do-nothing" record. Why should voters elect Republicans, after all, when they can't ever seem to get anything done?

Republicans held both houses of Congress and the White House for two years. Other than their tax cut giveaway to Wall Street and the ultrawealthy, they did precisely nothing. They tried to kill Obamacare, but they failed to do so. No other major legislation was passed at all. In two years' time, they passed one tax cut, and that was it.

Now that Democrats control the House, they have been passing many important bills. The Senate has ignored all of them, and Mitch McConnell has sworn that his chamber is not going to do anything at all for the next two years. Today, Trump joined in by announcing he wasn't going to do anything either until the Democrats stop investigating him. As a result, Republicans are now in full retreat from their constitutional duties, across the board.

Democrats want improvements made in healthcare, ethics reform, election reform, the minimum wage, civil rights, voting rights, and securing America's elections to protect our system from foreign attacks, among many other things. They have either passed bills out of the House dealing with these important subjects, or are in the process of moving such bills to the House floor for a vote. Nancy Pelosi is getting things done, even if Trump and the media haven't really noticed. But none of them will even be considered by Mitch McConnell.

Republicans don't even have any agenda to counter the Democratic agenda, either. Their legislative ideas cupboard is bare. What has the Senate proposed that Nancy Pelosi refuses to act upon? Nothing. What bright ideas have emerged from any Republican that Democrats are obstructing? Building a wall at the southern border. That's about it, really. What big bills has the Senate passed since Trump became president? There are none. They are out of ideas, plainly, and it's time Democrats started forcefully pointing this out.

While it's always fun to ridicule Trump and his Infrastructure Weeks for ending in epic disasters, Trump is now leaving his party open to a larger political attack. By petulantly refusing to do anything with congressional Democrats at all, Trump is merely becoming the poster boy for the larger Republican empty agenda. He's going to become a do-nothing president with a do-nothing Senate to back him up. Democrats, meanwhile, are busy passing good legislation to make people's lives better. The contrast couldn't be clearer. Politically, this is about as easy a case to make as can be imagined. Put Democrats in control, and they will get things done and improve people's lives. With Republicans in control, nothing happens because all the ideas they once had are both stale and unpopular, and they haven't had any new ideas in years. Just look at how little they accomplished with full control of the Oval Office and Congress. It's time to try something new, because Republicans have completely run out of ideas. Like I said, it's a pathetically easy case to make. And Trump's latest Infrastructure Week meltdown just made it all that much easier.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

58 Comments on “Another "Infrastructure Week" Goes Down In Flames”

  1. [1] 
    neilm wrote:

    Have to admit, laughed at this one a lot. Thanks CW :)

  2. [2] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Hey CW,

    The only real question is how much of this was planned? Did Trump just have nothing at all to propose, so he decided to divert attention away from that embarrassing fact with a tantrum for the ages? Or was it truly a spontaneous hissy-fit Trump threw after seeing Pelosi on television this morning? I suppose we'll never know.

    Trump had signage props and handouts prepared for the press announcement — this was planned!

    Trump is a coward who does not respond aggressively in the spur of the moment. He stews on how unfair he was treated and pouts like a small child. Once he is worked up enough, he plans out any acts of aggression he will commit — which typically involves blindsiding his victims so they are less likely to respond immediately. Gotta make it look like he won, after all.

  3. [3] 
    John M from Ct. wrote:

    Well, OK, but did the Republican voters elect Trump and a Republican Congress in 2016 because they wanted any new legislation - "good" (i.e. liberal), or otherwise?

    I submit they didn't. They voted for their party to run the country on a platform of spite, anger, nostalgia, and a massively conservative judiciary that can shred any liberal legislation for the next two generations. And that's what they got, campaign promises fulfilled etc., so why won't they vote for the same in 2020?

    That said, we might hope that this vengeful group's near-accidental presidential/electoral college majority in 2016 won't recur in 2020. The Dems have already retaken the House, but the Senate, I'm hearing, will likely remain impervious to a national majority's ideas about what a national government is for.

    So if the Dems campaign in 2020 on "look what we've passed so far - vote for us and we'll make it all into law, because we're the PARTY OF IDEAS", they're likely to look like fools and incompetents in 2022 and 2024, thanks to a GOP Senate.

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    John,

    I guess the 2020 election will tell the tale about who and what America is and can be.

    With a healthy does of cynicism, I still have faith that Senator Biden, given the chance, can make a positive difference and start the country down a productive path.

    If not, then I'm afraid hope will have left the building.

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    You just know it's going to be entertaining when the White House announces an upcoming "Infrastructure Week," because the end result is always a fiery trainwreck of epic proportions.

    Yea.. Like the RECOVERY SUMMER.. :D

    Now that Democrats control the House, they have been passing many important bills.

    For example...????

    Democrats want improvements made in healthcare, ethics reform, election reform, the minimum wage, civil rights, voting rights, and securing America's elections to protect our system from foreign attacks, among many other things.

    And yet, ALL they can do is harass President Trump and his family with meaningless witch hunts..

    It's time to try something new, because Republicans have completely run out of ideas.

    And yet, the economy is humming along smoothly and people are actually proud to be Americans again...

    Nothing succeeds like success.. :D

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    So if the Dems campaign in 2020 on "look what we've passed so far - vote for us and we'll make it all into law, because we're the PARTY OF IDEAS", they're likely to look like fools and incompetents in 2022 and 2024, thanks to a GOP Senate.

    While I would agree with the result (Dumbocrats looking like fools) it will be because they ARE fools..

    They don't need the GOP Senate for that..

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    Dumbocrats can solve all their problems..

    Simply begin impeachment of President Trump..

    But they won't because they know they have no FACTS to support impeachment and they know that they will lose BIG TIME if they impeach President Trump..

    So, all they have left is to whine and cry hysterically and impotently and complain that President Trump keeps kicking their asses...

    :D

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump then gave an impromptu press announcement (it's hard to call it a press conference, since Trump only took two questions at the end before stalking off), where he ranted and railed against those nasty Democrats in Congress having the temerity to investigate him.

    Much like Odumbo and the Dumbocrats railed against the Republicans for having the temerity to investigate Odumbo and the Dumbocrats..

    What's the point???

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Yer an Iran-phile...

    Faced with relentless American pressure, Iran starts to hit back

    But its strategy stops short of measures that would result in an all-out war.
    https://www.pressherald.com/2019/05/22/faced-with-relentless-american-pressure-iran-starts-to-hit-back/

    Looks like the pressure is finally getting to Iran....

    Let's face reality..

    The WORST thing Iran could do is retaliate..

    They know their country would be a parking lot within hours...

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump rep Kellyanne Conway asked Pelosi if she would want to give President Trump a message...

    "I'm responding to the president, not staff"

    "Really great. That’s really pro-woman of you,”

    Pelosi get's bitch-slapped by Conway.. :D

  11. [11] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Excellent collection of party line bullshit.

    Your claims of Democrats wanting to "make improvements" on healthcare, ethics and election reform, etc. and that Pelosi is getting things done are party line bullshit lies.

    The only thing Pelosi is getting done is pass legislation in the House that will not become law so big money Democrats can lie aboot how they will pass them into law once they are in control to fool people into voting for Democrats in 2020.

    The only thing that is close to true is the "make improvements" part. The Democrats want to make superficial improvements on those issues that don't even cover the amount the issues are going in the other direction.

    They do not want to solve any of those problems because that would require going against the big money interests that fund the party and then they couldn't run on the same issues in the next election.

    The only idea the Democrats really have is to continue pretending to be an alternative to the big money Republicans. Every other "idea" is just an empty promise to perpetuate the deception.

    And since BOTH Republicans and Democrats are out of real ideas, then it is time as you said to "try something new".

    Your statement that your lie is a pathetically easy case to make simply is not true, but it is pathetic.

    If it were true, then why didn't you make the case?
    Why did you need to lie to make a pathetically easy case?

    Come back to reality and inform citizens aboot a real idea based on the original idea of democracy instead of perpetuating the lie.

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Your claims of Democrats wanting to "make improvements" on healthcare, ethics and election reform, etc. and that Pelosi is getting things done are party line bullshit lies.

    The only thing Pelosi is getting done is pass legislation in the House that will not become law so big money Democrats can lie aboot how they will pass them into law once they are in control to fool people into voting for Democrats in 2020.

    I won't comment on the why...

    But the WHAT is spot on......

  13. [13] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Chris

    Column idea, at least tangentially related to "Infrastructure Week".

    It occurs to me theat the Democratics have, by means of three yrs of preoccupation with Russiagate, essentially created a de-facto 'Government Shutdown', but so far, not a single person other than yours truly, seems to be perspicatious enough to recognize it!

  14. [14] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Liz M

    Re: [13] Sorry all to hell if that detracts from the sweet spirit of Kumbayah that you like to see prevail here.

  15. [15] 
    John M wrote:

    [13] C. R. Stucki

    "It occurs to me theat the Democratics have, by means of three yrs of preoccupation with Russiagate,"

    maybe you need to be reminded that the ACTUAL CRIMINAL activity that the president has been IMPLICATED in, namely hush money payments to porn stars, has NOTHING to do with RUSSIA.

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    maybe you need to be reminded that the ACTUAL CRIMINAL activity that the president has been IMPLICATED in, namely hush money payments to porn stars, has NOTHING to do with RUSSIA.

    And it also has NOTHING to do with "actual criminal activity"....

    Do you REALLY think it is illegal to pay someone to keep quiet on something that is NOT a crime???

    Seriously!!???

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    ‘American Taliban’ John Walker Lindh released from prison
    https://nypost.com/2019/05/23/american-taliban-john-philip-walker-lindh-released-from-prison/

    Where's a good sniper when ya need one?

  18. [18] 
    John M wrote:

    [10] Michale

    Trump rep Kellyanne Conway asked Pelosi if she would want to give President Trump a message...

    "I'm responding to the president, not staff"

    "Really great. That’s really pro-woman of you,”

    Pelosi get's bitch-slapped by Conway.. :D

    Seems to me it was the other way around. As Conway got BURNED by Pelosi as being ONLY MINOR UNIMPORTANT STAFF AT THAT,

  19. [19] 
    John M wrote:

    [16] Michale

    "Do you REALLY think it is illegal to pay someone to keep quiet on something that is NOT a crime???

    Seriously!!???"

    YES IT IS. When it is done as PART OF ILLEGAL CAMPAIGN FUNDS. MAYBE you should LOOK UP politicians and CORRUPTION laws!!!

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    Seems to me it was the other way around.

    Of course it SEEMS that way to you.

    YES IT IS. When it is done as PART OF ILLEGAL CAMPAIGN FUNDS. MAYBE you should LOOK UP politicians and CORRUPTION laws!!!

    Any facts to support that it was campaign funds???

    Any facts to support that it's illegal even if it was campaign funds???

    I mean, you don't even have any FACTS to support that Trump had sex with HorseFace...

    But even if he did, there was nothing illegal about it. Nor was there anything illegal about paying her to keep quiet about it..

    Hell, I wouldn't want it to get out that I had sex with such a skank either..

  21. [21] 
    John M wrote:

    [9] Michale

    "The WORST thing Iran could do is retaliate.."

    Yeah, like a volley of terrorism that would make 9/11 look like child's play in comparison. How about a dirty bomb in an American or European city? Or a chemical or biological attack like happened in the Japanese subway that would kill thousands rather than hundreds?

    "They know their country would be a parking lot within hours..."

    And yet Afghanistan seems to still be able to take out American soldiers regularly after being turned into a parking lot for the last 18 years.

    When will neo-cons like you learn that regime change is NEVER as easy as it is on paper????

  22. [22] 
    John M wrote:

    [20] Michale
    Any facts to support that it was campaign funds???

    "Any facts to support that it's illegal even if it was campaign funds???

    I mean, you don't even have any FACTS to support that Trump had sex with HorseFace...

    But even if he did, there was nothing illegal about it. Nor was there anything illegal about paying her to keep quiet about it.."

    Someone NEEDS to be SCHOOLED.

    It is illegal to make an unreported donation of more than $2,700 to a candidate in a general election. The initially unreported payments to McDougal and Daniels far exceeded that: McDougal received $150,000 as part of a “catch and kill” deal with American Media, Inc., and Daniels got $130,000 as part of a nondisclosure agreement. Arguably the value of keeping such information secret was even higher than that.

    The campaign-related purpose of the payments is clear: to hush up potential sex scandals in the weeks leading up to the presidential election. They were indeed meant to help Trump’s candidacy. Cohen was charged with campaign finance violations (among other crimes), pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to three years in prison.

    YOU DON'T get PRISON TIME FOR NOTHING.

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    When will neo-cons like you learn that regime change is NEVER as easy as it is on paper????

    Probably when ignorant PEACE AT ANY COST morons learn that appeasement NEVER works..

    Yeah, like a volley of terrorism that would make 9/11 look like child's play in comparison. How about a dirty bomb in an American or European city? Or a chemical or biological attack like happened in the Japanese subway that would kill thousands rather than hundreds?

    Thanx to Odumbo and the Dumbocrats, those are VERY real threats.. Paid for by the money Odumbo released to the Iranians..

    And yet Afghanistan seems to still be able to take out American soldiers regularly after being turned into a parking lot for the last 18 years.

    Sorry, but you show your complete ignorance of military matters with this bone-headed totally irrelevant comparison...

    'S OK... Not everyone has the cajones to serve in the military..

  24. [24] 
    John M wrote:

    [23] Michale

    "Sorry, but you show your complete ignorance of military matters with this bone-headed totally irrelevant comparison..."

    Again, stop talking about YOURSELF, we all KNOW how BONEHEADED YOU ARE.

    I have a degree in political science from a major American University. What's YOUR foreign policy expertise????

    If it's nothing other than your own armchair quarterbacking, than please stop pretending to be an expert on things you know NOTHING about.

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    Again, stop talking about YOURSELF, we all KNOW how BONEHEADED YOU ARE.

    Oh wow.. The old I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I rebuttal...

    You really burned me good.. If we were 3rd graders :eyeroll:

    I have a degree in political science from a major American University. What's YOUR foreign policy expertise????

    Two and a half decades in the military (USAF and USA), Law Enforcement, FSO and Security...

    You got "book learnin'" son.. I have been there and done that..

    If it's nothing other than your own armchair quarterbacking, than please stop pretending to be an expert on things you know NOTHING about.

    My bona fides are well established..

  26. [26] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    John M [15]

    The whole underlying premise of 'Russiagate' is that Trump defeated Clinton by 'cheating', by 'unfair/illegal' means, etc. For you, that obviously includes things ("getting dirt" from Russians, "paying off hookers", etc.,) which you on your own define as 'illegal' whether law enforcement folks agree that it's illegal or not).

    It's all a package deal with you Democratics, so spare me the shit of splitting hairs over minutia. YOU people have succeeded in "shutting down the gov't", but nobody seems to point that out.

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    The whole underlying premise of 'Russiagate' is that Trump defeated Clinton by 'cheating', by 'unfair/illegal' means, etc. For you, that obviously includes things ("getting dirt" from Russians, "paying off hookers", etc.,) which you on your own define as 'illegal' whether law enforcement folks agree that it's illegal or not).

    Bingo....

    The fact of the matter is President Trump is the legally fairly and freely elected President of the United States..

    But, with a very few exceptions, no one here can concede that fact..

    They are willfully deluded..

    And, as such, anything and everything they say is suspect because whatever they say does not necessarily comport with reality...

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Like the old saying goes..

    You are entitled to your own opinion but you are NOT entitled to your own facts..

    And you SURE AS HELL are not entitled to your own reality...

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    LEAKED: Kellyanne Conway Shuts Pelosi Down in Oval Office Meeting

    Kellyanne Conway shuts Nancy Pelosi Down in Oval office.

    Kellyanne Conway snarks to Pelosi: 'That’s really pro-woman of you'
    https://westernfreepress.com/kellyanne-conway-shuts-pelosi-down-in-oval-office-meeting-jl/

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    "We do believe that it’s important to follow the facts. We believe that no one is above the law, including the president of the United States. And we believe that the president of the United States is engaged in a cover-up."
    -Nancy Pelosi

    What exactly is President Trump covering up??

    The fact that he is completely and utterly innocent of Russia Collusion??

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1131230357846614016

    Nancy Pelosi is brain dead...

    Totally incoherent...

  32. [32] 
    TheStig wrote:

    While I appreciate the train wreck intro to the column, I think Infrastructure Week was more like Hindenburg at Lakehurst NJ than a generic trainwreck.

    Like the Hindenburg's crew and passengers, people on board Infrastructure Week knew the vehicle they were riding in was fragile, ponderous, highly flammable, susceptible to leakage - and that the lifting gas could be set off by the smallest spark. They also knew they were flying thru inclement weather and that the commander couldn't walk, talk or chew gum without throwing sparks.

  33. [33] 
    neilm wrote:

    The infrastructure failure might be a real problem for Trump if the figures from the economy are more than a blip:

    "Business activity growth falters to three-year low"

    https://www.markiteconomics.com/Public/Home/PressRelease/c0a77762175240d989bf5090d001cff2

    The PMI report is usually regarded as a leading indicator by investors.

    If the economy flat lines for multiple quarters, there will be pressure on Powell to lower rates. The problem with that is the pressure that Trump put on Powell not to raise interest rates. Basically he was told his remit was unemployment and inflation, and since both were tame, further increases were not required. If we have a period of stagnation with little impact on inflation and small increases in unemployment, Powell will be able to turn around to Trump and tell him that the instructions he gave last year were still in effect.

    Without the Fed to goose a stagnating economy, Trump will be running around trying to get a stimulus that he can get past Nancy, and guess what is the only area of compromise currently ... an infrastructure bill.

  34. [34] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    neilm

    I have never believed that the Fed's control of interest rates is the 'big hammer' that everybody else seems to believe it is. The problem is twofold: first off, lowering the cost of capital only has meaning if entrepreneurs are looking for capital, or if consumers are foolish enough to be looking to borrow heavily to finance current consumption, and secondly, it's a small jump from "normal' interest rates to zero, at which point the Fed quiver is empty!

    It's always been my opinion that most of the Fed interest rate tinkering throught post WW2 history has been DETRIMENTAL to the overall economy, resulting in harm to savers and misallocation of resources, ala the housing bubble.

    I fully realize I'm damn near alone in that, but then I'm damn near always alone in economic matters.

  35. [35] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Okay, First, Chris, Great Column. I imagine that it hit a nerve, because of the 32-post salute it got this morning from our house conservatives.

    Second, many (if not most) of the assertions made in the comments are false. CRS has forgotten, for instance, that Trump is named Individual-1 in many of Cohen's court documents. He'd have spent the last year on that alone, save for his presidency.

    Third, is that this was planned. The sign on the podium took at least 20 minutes to make at a local Kinkos. That's about 10 minutes more than they had.

    So..maybe the reason is that Trump really wasn't ready, and wanted an excuse to duck out? Something like that. I do know that righties start stammering and looking for exits as soon as you mention "pay-fors" to them.

    It seems as though all they can do is throw money at their donors and start wars, while basking in the latest Democratic fix to the economy. Six years later, back up and let the Dems fix it AGAIN before starting over.

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    CRS has forgotten, for instance, that Trump is named Individual-1 in many of Cohen's court documents.

    OH MY FRAKING GOD!!!!!!

    Trump was referred to as "AN INDI-FRAKIN'-VIDUAL"!!!!!

    WHY HASN'T THIS GUY, THIS ABHORRENT CRIMINAL!!! THIS.... THIS... THIS... "INDIVIDUAL" BEEN EXECUTED!!!!?????

    "OH MY GOD, WHAT A FUCKING NIGHTMARE!!!!"
    -Marisa Tomeii, MY COUSIN VINNY

    THat's it!!! If Trump was referred to as an "INDIVIDUAL" he should be immediately and summarily EXECUTED ON THE SPOT!!!!

    Because ***NOTHING*** says "criminal" like being called "INDIVIDUAL"... :eyeroll:

    Third, is that this was planned. The sign on the podium took at least 20 minutes to make at a local Kinkos. That's about 10 minutes more than they had.

    You mean, Trump PLANNED to make Dumbocrats look like grade A morons and PLANNED for Dumbocrats to make grade A moronic statements??

    Yea.. I agree... So??? What's yer point???

  37. [37] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    In other words, you agree with everything I've said?

    Okay.

  38. [38] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Aside, of course from all the CAPS and punctuation!

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    In other words, you agree with everything I've said?

    Okay.

    I guess the sarcasm was too subtle to penetrate your cloak of delusion....

    A person who is the SUBJECT of an investigation is referred to as SUBJECT in an official report...

    A person who is a suspect in a crime is referred to as SUSPECT in an official report..

    A person who is referred to as INDIVIDUAL or PERSON has no bearing on anything..

    In otherwords, Trump being referred to as "INDIVIDUAL 1" has absolutely no meaning and it certainly doesn't denote GUILT of anything..

    Jeezus, you people really have lost your minds, haven't ya'all?? :eyeroll:

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    In other words, you agree with everything I've said?

    No, actually I asked you what your point was..

    Do you have one??

    "She has no point. She often has no point. It's part of her charm."
    -Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

  41. [41] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    it certainly doesn't denote GUILT of anything

    Tell that to the guy doing time for him. Normally, someone so named would be co-indicted, but there's that pesky presidency again..

    I asked you what your point was.

    I guess it was that Trump in particular, and Republicans in general, are both stupid and lazy.

  42. [42] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    It's a general observation.

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    Tell that to the guy doing time for him.

    And did the INDIVIDUAL refer to the guy doing time??

    No, it did not..

    You really don't get it, do you..

    Trump was referred to in an indictment...

    SO!!!???

    Explain to me why that is ANYTHING???

    I guess it was that Trump in particular, and Republicans in general, are both stupid and lazy.

    Yea and, as usual, you have ZERO facts to support your bigoted claim...

    It's a general observation.

    No, it's blatant and textbook bigotry..

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    SO, lemme ask you Balthasar...

    You still think that going for impeachment now is not a good idea??

    You still lockstep with Pelosi?? :D

  45. [45] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    You're just being difficult. Everyone knows that Cohen fingered Trump as the guy that directed the Stormy Daniels payment, and many more.

    As for my 'general observation', well, what exactly have congressional Republicans done since the last election, huh?

    I mean other than vote for judges.

  46. [46] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    You still think that going for impeachment now is not a good idea?

    Yep. But your guy is making it more difficult.

    You still lockstep with Pelosi?

    Yep.

  47. [47] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    And as for those judges, whew! You're gonna go a long way with sterling legal minds like Wendy Vitter...

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    u're just being difficult.

    I know.. With ya'all the FACTS are ALWAYS difficult

    Everyone knows that Cohen fingered Trump as the guy that directed the Stormy Daniels payment

    Even if factually accurate... So???

    and many more.

    Facts to support???

    As for my 'general observation', well, what exactly have congressional Republicans done since the last election, huh?

    Lowest unemployment since the 1950s.. Black, youth and hispanic lowest umeployment EVER... Awesome economy..

    Regardless, you "observation" is still bigotry..

    You still think that going for impeachment now is not a good idea?

    Yep.

    OK.. So, according to ya'all, Trump is the WORST POTUS in history.. He's doing unimaginable and irreparable harm to this country..

    And yet... You want to leave him in office to do such horrendous and horrible damage until the politics are more favorable????

    Do you HONESTLY smell the bullshit yer shoveling??

    Either President Trump is not as bad as ya'all claim..

    OR....

    Or ya'all are putting PARTY POLITICS and PARTY AGENDA before the country..

    Which is it??

    "If you gave an order that Santiago wasn't to be touched.. And your orders are always followed... Why would he be in any danger?? Why would it be necessary to transfer him off the base??"
    -Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    You really don't get it, do you..

    Trump was referred to in an indictment...

    SO!!!???

    Explain to me why that is ANYTHING???

    Still waiting on this one...

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya gotta admit, JL..

    OK.. So, according to ya'all, Trump is the WORST POTUS in history.. He's doing unimaginable and irreparable harm to this country..

    And yet... You want to leave him in office to do such horrendous and horrible damage until the politics are more favorable????

    Do you HONESTLY smell the bullshit yer shoveling??

    Either President Trump is not as bad as ya'all claim..

    OR....

    Or ya'all are putting PARTY POLITICS and PARTY AGENDA before the country..

    Which is it??

    That's a pretty fanciful piece of logical footwork.. :D

  51. [51] 
    neilm wrote:

    CRS:

    I see the role of the Fed as to set the lower limit for risk pricing. Thus I think the rates are far too low currently, i.e. the overnight rates for reserves are not reflecting the risk premium that banks should be charging their lenders.

    My beef with the Fed is the remit they have from politicians - inflation and unemployment do not always reflect the risk levels in the economy - especially as the Phillips curve seems to have taken a sabbatical.

    Again you are right about the lack of arrows once rates hit 0% - they invented Q.E. for the latest downturn to mimic negative rates, however we have to subtract inflation from the nominal overnight rate - thus we went down to -1.9% (0.25% overnight - 2.15% inflation). Currently we are basically saying there is almost zero risk in the economy - ridiculous based on the stats of course (2.25% overnight - 1.9% inflation).

  52. [52] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale [from prev. article]

    Mueller was missing the authority to indict all involved parties if that was where the evidence led him.

    And yet, several indictments WERE handed down.. So your claim is not factually accurate..

    Several indictments were handed down, but that does not mean Mueller could indict everyone involved. Mueller flat out stated that DOJ policy prevented him from indicting a sitting president. He did not say that he would have indicted Trump if he could, but the point you seem to be in denial over is that Mueller could not indict Trump even if he thought the evidence supported an indictment.

    I think you meant to say:

    So your claim IS factually accurate..

  53. [53] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    neilm [51]

    Personally, as a dyed-in-the wool free-mkt guy, I think the country would be better off if the interest rate were to be set by the free mkt, simple supply and demand.

    Tinkering by politicians, economists (which in this day and age is simply a synonym fo 'politicians) or whoever, will rarely improve on supply and demand for purposes of establishing prices, including the price of money.

  54. [54] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale [50]

    OK.. So, according to ya'all, Trump is the WORST POTUS in history.. He's doing unimaginable and irreparable harm to this country..

    So far so good....

    And yet... You want to leave him in office to do such horrendous and horrible damage until the politics are more favorable????

    Nope. We do not WANT to leave him in office, but you seem to imply that if the Democrats wanted to remove him from office, they could do that at any time. Really? It’s that simple?


    Either President Trump is not as bad as ya'all claim..

    OR....

    Or ya'all are putting PARTY POLITICS and PARTY AGENDA before the country..

    Which is it??

    To start, to state it correctly, you should’ve said:

    Either Trump is not or bad as ya’ll claim...

    OR....

    Trump is as bad as ya’ll claim..

    Furthermore, impeachment IS a POLITICAL act!!! It is not based on the rule of law. Senators are not required to vote based on whether the president’s actions were right or wrong.

    Again, if all it took to impeach a president was to demonstrate that they broke the law, then it would have happened already! Your over-simplification of the process further demonstrates your dishonesty in discussing this topic.

  55. [55] 
    neilm wrote:

    Hi CRS:

    Personally, as a dyed-in-the wool free-mkt guy, I think the country would be better off if the interest rate were to be set by the free mkt, simple supply and demand.

    I get that and a lot of my friends think as you do.

    However I think the market is very bad at pricing risk, and thus we get under pricing due to greed and bubbles form.

    I see the Fed's main job to be ratcheting up the price of money when the market is getting frothy to let the air our more gradually and smooth out the roller coaster trajectory unfettered markets result in.

    Look at e.g. Bitcoin for an example of a market with no regulation - and the 2008 crisis is another example of the Fed asleep at the wheel and markets "governing" themselves.

    I think the markets are usually smarter than groups of people, but not always and we need to temper the market's exuberance at a macro scale where lots of real people can get hurt as collateral damage.

    Most people who suffered on 2008 did not have a no-doc mortgage or a portfolio of CDSs.

    You'd have more agreement from many of my friends, as I said, and this is a discussion I have frequently.

  56. [56] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    OK.. So, according to ya'all, Trump is the WORST POTUS in history.. He's doing unimaginable and irreparable harm to this country..

    And yet... You want to leave him in office to do such horrendous and horrible damage until the politics are more favorable?

    Yep. That's the political reality. On the other hand, we're winning the fight so far. Trump's taxes are getting closer and closer, and Mueller's getting closer to being free of DOJ. Also: Trump's NY taxes are gonna be released soon, too.

    Trump's freak-out yesterday helps. Pelosi is, as one pundit put it, "living inside his head rent free". He had his staff do another one of those demeaning 'agreement sessions' today, for instance, just to say that he was 'calm' (as if that matters) yesterday.

    Expect a huuuge tweet storm this weekend, as Trump tries hard to evict her from his head.

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    Several indictments were handed down, but that does not mean Mueller could indict everyone involved. Mueller flat out stated that DOJ policy prevented him from indicting a sitting president. He did not say that he would have indicted Trump if he could, but the point you seem to be in denial over is that Mueller could not indict Trump even if he thought the evidence supported an indictment.

    Do you have any facts to support that Mueller WANTED to indict President Trump?

    No you do not..

    NO ONE can indict a sitting President.. That was understood from the get-go..

    So your claim that Mueller was missing the authority to indict all involved parties if that was where the evidence led him. is utter bullshit..

    Mueller NEVER had that authority to begin with..

    Nope. We do not WANT to leave him in office, but you seem to imply that if the Democrats wanted to remove him from office, they could do that at any time. Really? It’s that simple?

    They could impeach if the President was as big a threat as ya'all claim..

    But they WONT'T impeach because A) they know they have NOTHING to impeach over and B) they know it would be disastrous for the Democrat Party..

    They are putting Party before Country..

    Something ya'all accuse the GOP of all the time.

    And yet, *I* have the facts.. As usual, you have none..

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yep. That's the political reality. On the other hand, we're winning the fight so far.

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Like I said.. Completely and utterly delusional...

    Trump's taxes are getting closer and closer, and Mueller's getting closer to being free of DOJ.

    Facts to support??

    No??? Of course not.. You never do...

    Trump's freak-out yesterday helps. Pelosi is, as one pundit put it, "living inside his head rent free".

    Oh puuulleeeeezzeeeee Trump has been living inside Pelosi's head, Schumer's head and YA'ALL's head for the past 3 years...

    One only has to look at the number of commentaries about Trump and compare them to the number of commentaries about Bush in the Bush years..

    Easily 3x as many Trump bashing commentaries as there was Bush bashing commentaries..

    Trump plays the tune and ya'all dance to it.. :D

    Expect a huuuge tweet storm this weekend, as Trump tries hard to evict her from his head.

    Yea.. And when it doesn't happen?? Will you admit you were wrong??

    Of course not.. yer delusional and in your little world, you are always right..

Comments for this article are closed.