Shutdown

[Smoove_B]

If there's anyone out there that believes he's not going to maneuver to do exactly the same thing at the next opportunity, you're delusional. The "master negotiator" and "the man that is going to run America like a business" is without question going to run straight back into a brick wall with this, I have no doubts.

[Jolor]

In retrospect, perhaps the Grand People's Party of the American Republic should have surrendered to the Damned Dems of the Libs when the tides of battle offered the first organised repulsion, but the Party of MAGA would never bend to the unpaying powers of the the radical other.
Fighting against wave after wave of sj_warriors, the GPPotAR countered with bold and counter-intuitive factoids. Factoid after factoid were fired. The enemy cowered, mistakenly believing the Fake News that the factoids would soon run dry. But they not only continued but, through bold initiatives by the brave and dedicated, became even more brazen and non-nonsensical.
Finally, the tide was turned. The Enemy of the People were repulsed and the True Patriots were returned to Glorious Repression serving the Greater Good.

[pr0ner]

He's gonna close the government again.



Bonus Fox and Friends watch:

[El Guapo]

Fuck these guys

When I see stuff like this I remember the bold anonymous op ed by an administration official telling everyone how important it was that they stay in order to be the adult in the room.

Anywho, my guess is 50% chance that Trump declares an emergency, 30% chance of a shutdown, 20% chance of a deal.

[malchior]

Those numbers look right for now - emergency will likely creep up in probability over time. The CW is that McConnell et. al. don't want a shutdown. I suspect they won't veto it but instead will attempt to guide him into emergency. Heck I think that is what Graham is up to at this point with his 'declare an emergency' stance. The GOP in the Senate want an off-ramp knowing a second shutdown would be a disaster with the debt ceiling coming up again.

Edit: I also suspect they might be starting to brace for Brexit. No deal is looking more likely by the day too and no one really knows how bad it'll be or how the financial markets are going to react. Minimizing our exposure to contagion has to be on people's minds at this point with Tory politics feeling very much like the GOP situation here (e.g. party over country).

;tldr Rough waters ahead and they need to minimize Trump's penchant to fuck shit up constantly

[Kraken]

Emergency declaration is probably the best option, as it will absolve the rest of the GOP from responsibility and be a clear loss for Trump on a new front. There will be penalty flags all over the field, and Trump is unlikely to win those fights -- even in Republican-leaning courts -- since (1) there is no actual emergency; (2) if there were, a wall would not solve it; and (3) both of those statements are easily proven.

OTOH, he apparently doesn't realize that he lost the shutdown fight, so maybe he really is dumb enough to go there again.

[stessier]

I don't know that a court will look at the first point. I think it will come down that an emergency exists if the president says an emergency exists.

Which doesn't mean he'll get the wall built - there will be a ton of other items that will have to be litigated first.

[LordMortis]

Emergency declaration is probably the best option, as it will absolve the rest of the GOP from responsibility and be a clear loss for Trump on a new front. There will be penalty flags all over the field, and Trump is unlikely to win those fights -- even in Republican-leaning courts -- since (1) there is no actual emergency; (2) if there were, a wall would not solve it; and (3) both of those statements are easily proven.

OTOH, he apparently doesn't realize that he lost the shutdown fight, so maybe he really is dumb enough to go there again.

For the GOP and the deplorables, I think you are correct. Trump takes all the blame. The deplorables get what they want. They claim victory and then will double dip on Federal incompetence and corrupt DC and democrat obstruction ruining everything when five billion in Wall isn't the answer the demanded. The GOP walks away free and clear.

I can't imagine this is good "for key electoral battlegrounds" though. I don't see that jump. I can't see how it's even possible with anyone hasn't already gone all in with Insanity 45. But then, even if I saw him as competitive, I never saw him winning in 2016. So what do I know from stupid?

[El Guapo]

I don't know that a court will look at the first point. I think it will come down that an emergency exists if the president says an emergency exists.

Which doesn't mean he'll get the wall built - there will be a ton of other items that will have to be litigated first.

Yeah, I think people are underestimating the chances that Trump wins the legal fight over an emergency declaration, since this is the kind of thing that courts are reluctant to second-guess the executive on. Although in this case public opinion is likely to be against the administration, and I think courts are less likely to take Trump seriously on this stuff than other presidents.

What's super bonkers about all this shutdown stuff is that the one thing that could nearly 100% doom Trump's chances of reelection is a recession before Nov. 2020, and playing with stuff like this risks tipping the country into recession.

[LordMortis]

What's super bonkers about all this shutdown stuff is that the one thing that could nearly 100% doom Trump's chances of reelection is a recession before Nov. 2020, and playing with stuff like this risks tipping the country into recession.

How so? I'd think 5 billion in infrastructure projects would be a boon for the economy and especially for southern states infused with the jobs and the tasks of providing materials and the quicker you get to spending it, the more it would be felt for the 2020 election.

[Jaymann]

What's super bonkers about all this shutdown stuff is that the one thing that could nearly 100% doom Trump's chances of reelection is a recession before Nov. 2020, and playing with stuff like this risks tipping the country into recession.

How so? I'd think 5 billion in infrastructure projects would be a boon for the economy and especially for southern states infused with the jobs and the tasks of providing materials and the quicker you get to spending it, the more it would be felt for the 2020 election.

So Trump is a stealth New Dealer?

[El Guapo]

What's super bonkers about all this shutdown stuff is that the one thing that could nearly 100% doom Trump's chances of reelection is a recession before Nov. 2020, and playing with stuff like this risks tipping the country into recession.

How so? I'd think 5 billion in infrastructure projects would be a boon for the economy and especially for southern states infused with the jobs and the tasks of providing materials and the quicker you get to spending it, the more it would be felt for the 2020 election.

I'm talking about the shutdown part. *That's* what exacerbates the risk of recession. Plus he has no way to compel the Democrats to build the wall via a shutdown, so he's not getting it that way.

Also, I would think that $5 billion on the wall would be a relatively inefficient way to do infrastructure spending, since it would likely get tied up in legal battles, would be tied to one part of the country, and wouldn't have positive second-order economic effects (like, say, building bridges and whatnot would).

[GreenGoo]

On the plus side the government gets all it's legal counsel free, so all the eminent domain lawsuits and such don't cost a thing.

[Kraken]

What's super bonkers about all this shutdown stuff is that the one thing that could nearly 100% doom Trump's chances of reelection is a recession before Nov. 2020, and playing with stuff like this risks tipping the country into recession.

How so? I'd think 5 billion in infrastructure projects would be a boon for the economy and especially for southern states infused with the jobs and the tasks of providing materials and the quicker you get to spending it, the more it would be felt for the 2020 election.

I'm talking about the shutdown part. *That's* what exacerbates the risk of recession. Plus he has no way to compel the Democrats to build the wall via a shutdown, so he's not getting it that way.

Also, I would think that $5 billion on the wall would be a relatively inefficient way to do infrastructure spending, since it would likely get tied up in legal battles, would be tied to one part of the country, and wouldn't have positive second-order economic effects (like, say, building bridges and whatnot would).

In order to have near-term economic benefits, infrastructure projects have to be shovel-ready. Even if using the Army Corps under an emergency declaration lets them skip environmental impact analyses and fast-track eminent-domain land seizures, they still have to design the damned thing. It creates zero jobs if the Army Corps is doing the work. The Pentagon would just be directed to move already-appropriated money from one account to another, so there's no new spending either (just redirected spending).

[Fireball]

What's super bonkers about all this shutdown stuff is that the one thing that could nearly 100% doom Trump's chances of reelection is a recession before Nov. 2020, and playing with stuff like this risks tipping the country into recession.

How so? I'd think 5 billion in infrastructure projects would be a boon for the economy and especially for southern states infused with the jobs and the tasks of providing materials and the quicker you get to spending it, the more it would be felt for the 2020 election.

A $5 billion infrastructure project, even if it could be completed in 2019-20, would be a blip in our $19 trillion economy, and it'd be mostly spent in California, Texas and New Mexico, none of which are likely swing states in 2020.

[Isgrimnur]

Salon

Not a single Republican senator has joined the effort to give back pay to hundreds of thousands of federal contractors who were unpaid during the partial government shutdown. But the party’s leaders are pushing ahead with a bill to repeal the federal estate tax on behalf of the wealthiest Americans.
...
According to Vox, the bill already has 20 co-sponsors in the Senate -- but not a single Republican is backing the bill.

Instead, on Monday, three top Republican senators introduced a bill to repeal the federal estate tax, which is paid by fewer than 2,000 of the wealthiest Americans per year.
...
The Republicans already kneecapped the estate tax in their 2017 tax law, allowing couples to pass on up to $22 million worth of assets tax-free. Prior to the law, an individual could pass up to $5.45 million in assets tax-free.
...
Under the new law, just 1,700 families per year would be expected to pay the estate tax, the Tax Policy Center’s Howard Gleckman told the Post. The estate tax funds about 0.6 percent of the federal budget in 2018.

[Zarathud]

Shut down the government or the wealthy don't pay taxes? Bullshit. This is a poison pill payoff to donors, knowing the Democrats will not accept a bad faith deal.

Let Trump declare his national emergency, and impeach him for abuse of power violating the Constitutional separation of powers.

[Enough]

LOLZ



https://twitter.com/RepSwalwell/status/ ... 6162660353

[malchior]

Trump insisted this afternoon that he did the shutdown--guess he did it again--to educate everyone about the humanitarian crisis at the border. How about the humanitarian crisis created in the federal workforce? What a piece of shit.

[raydude]

So, to pre-start any shutdown 2 posts of "it's both sides fault!", let me pose this question:
How the hell do you negotiate a compromise with this idiot?

[LawBeefaroni]

So, to pre-start any shutdown 2 posts of "it's both sides fault!", let me pose this question:
How the hell do you negotiate a compromise with this idiot?

Emoluments.

[stimpy]

So, to pre-start any shutdown 2 posts of "it's both sides fault!", let me pose this question:
How the hell do you negotiate a compromise with this idiot?

I agree!!
"There's not going to be any wall money in the legislation," Pelosi said, while adding that she could support a solution to the showdown that added some Normandy fencing -- large 'X' shaped barriers -- on the border.
"If the President wants to call that a wall, he can call it a wall," Pelosi said.

Why doe she insist on NOT calling it a wall???
Games, that's why. She's playin em too.

[ImLawBoy]

So, to pre-start any shutdown 2 posts of "it's both sides fault!", let me pose this question:
How the hell do you negotiate a compromise with this idiot?

I agree!!
"There's not going to be any wall money in the legislation," Pelosi said, while adding that she could support a solution to the showdown that added some Normandy fencing -- large 'X' shaped barriers -- on the border.
"If the President wants to call that a wall, he can call it a wall," Pelosi said.

Why doe she insist on NOT calling it a wall???
Games, that's why. She's playin em too.

So you're posting her compromise offer as proof that she won't compromise? Interesting strategy. I'm looking forward to seeing how this plays out.

[Kraken]

So, to pre-start any shutdown 2 posts of "it's both sides fault!", let me pose this question:
How the hell do you negotiate a compromise with this idiot?

I agree!!
"There's not going to be any wall money in the legislation," Pelosi said, while adding that she could support a solution to the showdown that added some Normandy fencing -- large 'X' shaped barriers -- on the border.
"If the President wants to call that a wall, he can call it a wall," Pelosi said.

Why doe she insist on NOT calling it a wall???
Games, that's why. She's playin em too.

All parties agree that directly involving Trump in negotiations guarantees that they will fail, so they need to hammer out a take-it-or-leave it deal that he'll see only when it's finished. Telegraphing certain positions via third parties (the media) helps them nail a deal that he'll take. In this instance, I'd guess that Pelosi already plans to call her fence a "wall" so that Trump will think she conceded something. Remember that he will only accept a deal that he thinks is a great victory.

[LordMortis]

All parties agree that directly involving Trump in negotiations guarantees that they will fail,

I don't doubt that many deplorable and the freedom Caucus consider involving Trump in negotiations guarantees that they will succeed, in that government will be shut down while ire can continue at the failure of Federal Government. Their sabotage would be fascinating if this were an examination of history and not, you know, about my life, my country, my planet, right here and now.

[raydude]

So, to pre-start any shutdown 2 posts of "it's both sides fault!", let me pose this question:
How the hell do you negotiate a compromise with this idiot?

I agree!!
"There's not going to be any wall money in the legislation," Pelosi said, while adding that she could support a solution to the showdown that added some Normandy fencing -- large 'X' shaped barriers -- on the border.
"If the President wants to call that a wall, he can call it a wall," Pelosi said.

Why doe she insist on NOT calling it a wall???
Games, that's why. She's playin em too.

That's weird. I read her comments in articles as saying "There will be no money for the steel slats or concrete barrier that the President is calling the wall." and at the same time acknowledging statements by Republicans, such as Senator Graham:

The wall has become a metaphor for border security.

by saying she could support a solution that had Normandy fencing, i.e. "additional border security that is not a concrete wall or steel slats that the President refers to as a wall".

Essentially she is putting forth two points:
1. The non-metaphoric President's wall is a non-starter.
2. The metaphoric wall is something she and Democrats can get behind.

Is there anyone else who's read articles and thinks she's merely playing semantics?

[Isgrimnur]

Normandy fencing

[Smoove_B]

Those would stop a caravan of tanks...from WW2.

[raydude]

Normandy fencing to finish the 30 - 50 miles of unfenced border authorized by the 2006 Secure Fence Act.

Apparently Congress in 2006 thought they were good enough.

[malchior]

That's weird. I read her comments in articles as saying "There will be no money for the steel slats or concrete barrier that the President is calling the wall." and at the same time acknowledging statements by Republicans, such as Senator Graham:

The wall has become a metaphor for border security.

by saying she could support a solution that had Normandy fencing, i.e. "additional border security that is not a concrete wall or steel slats that the President refers to as a wall".

Essentially she is putting forth two points:
1. The non-metaphoric President's wall is a non-starter.
2. The metaphoric wall is something she and Democrats can get behind.

Is there anyone else who's read articles and thinks she's merely playing semantics?

Exactly. The semantics game is how these problems were resolved in the past. Each side got to frame out a win to their respective constituents and walk away with something. Pelosi is literally saying that is what she is willing to do. Trump only wants a sea-to-sea wall made out of concrete or steel slats. That will never happen. He can accept something that he can call a wall and walk away with something. Instead, he insists for everything with no leverage to actually get it.

So to sum it up we have the time-honored method of compromise that Pelosi and probably nearly every Republican Senator would vote for. Trump is going for total victory and they get nothing. How the heck is that anyone but Trump's fault?

[Smoove_B]

Apparently Congress in 2006 thought they were good enough.

I'm guessing they were sitting in a military surplus warehouse somewhere and they thought it was the cheapest way to erect a "barrier" along the border. We could also use bags of solid waste or mountains of disposable plastic water bottles (which I know is technically solid waste).

[Jaymann]

Apparently Congress in 2006 thought they were good enough.

I'm guessing they were sitting in a military surplus warehouse somewhere and they thought it was the cheapest way to erect a "barrier" along the border. We could also use bags of solid waste or mountains of disposable plastic water bottles (which I know is technically solid waste).

I always thought solid waste meant, you know, excrement.

[malchior]

He is on tv again live right now saying they are building the wall with money 'on hand'. New wall in San Diego. I think he is claiming that fixing a wall equals building new wall. Whatever - it doesn't matter. I think we need everyone to just get together, the press and Congress as one and just LET HIM HAVE THAT.

[Smoove_B]

I desperately want someone to give him plans to erect a 12" wall in San Diego, he signs off on it and then have it revealed on TV during a live press conference, Spinal Tap style.

[malchior]

Some choice quotes from today's lunch-time insanity. There were more a few more but these are probably the choicest cuts for stupidity.

We've designed a much better-looking wall that is also actually a better wall which is an interesting combination. It's far more beautiful, and it's better. It's much more protective.

So we're building a lot of it. We'll be up to about 115 miles of wall, some renovated, some new, & we're going to make a big step in the next week or so prior to my doing anything. But actually having a national emergency does help the process. It would certainly help.

[$iljanus]

Some choice quotes from today's lunch-time insanity. There were more a few more but these are probably the choicest cuts for stupidity.

We've designed a much better-looking wall that is also actually a better wall which is an interesting combination. It's far more beautiful, and it's better. It's much more protective.

So we're building a lot of it. We'll be up to about 115 miles of wall, some renovated, some new, & we're going to make a big step in the next week or so prior to my doing anything. But actually having a national emergency does help the process. It would certainly help.

Arrgh I'm really tired of his man child rambling. Yes it is the biggest, beautiful wall now just have your juice box and Big Mac and shut the fuck up. Sigh, just another day in never ending playdate that passes for governance in America.

[LawBeefaroni]

Those would stop a caravan of tanks...from WW2.

If it can stop a Sherman, it can stop a very fast car driven by coyotes that walk like men with duct taped women in the trunk.

But if Trump doesn't accept this concession, they'll propose RoboCop. He's tough on crime. The toughest. Look what he did for Detroit.

[ImLawBoy]

Those would stop a caravan of tanks...from WW2.

If it can stop a Sherman, it can stop a very fast car driven by coyotes that walk like men with duct taped women in the trunk.

But if Trump doesn't accept this concession, they'll propose RoboCop. He's tough on crime. The toughest. Look what he did for Detroit.

I'd buy that for a dollar!

[Freyland]

Normandy fencing to finish the 30 - 50 miles of unfenced border authorized by the 2006 Secure Fence Act.

Apparently Congress in 2006 thought they were good enough.

Actually, if Central and South American countries are not aggressive about Tetanus vaccinations, that barrier might be (slowly) more effective than you think.

[Holman]

Those would stop a caravan of tanks...from WW2.

Pah. Ask Rommel how it worked in Normandy!