President Donald Trump

[gcstomp]

You literally could find twitter comments about anyone, with an entire spectrum of positive to negative, the barrier to entry is what, online access. You have made, what, 10 posts about this, looking for something that is eluding you, just seems odd.

What does it mean to be a Trump supporter, wearing a MAGA hat? The very foundation of Trump is intolerance to the dark skin other. As an exercise, it might be useful to make a list of what you think a "lefty" is, because the basic foundation is opposite of someone who wears MAGA hat.

When the President tweets, you get that is different, or you dont. It should be obvious how it is different.

[DMT]

So Pelosi has denied Trump permission to give the SOTU speech until the government re-opens. What will happen if he shows up anyways?

[baldgriff]

So Pelosi has denied Trump permission to give the SOTU speech until the government re-opens. What will happen if he shows up anyways?

I thought I heard he was going to do an impromptu rally elsewhere if this happened. Honestly, I would rather this is such a shit show.

[B-Fly]

So Pelosi has denied Trump permission to give the SOTU speech until the government re-opens. What will happen if he shows up anyways?

Constitutionally, he can just deliver it in writing. He could also schedule an address from the White House, hope the TV news media covers it, and/or livestream it on the White House website. But I don't think he can make an address in the House chamber without an invitation.

[Judge Jude]

Seems like this would be a strategic blunder by Pelosi.
she already was caught lying about how this speech would be "a national security problem" because..... well, let's not get bogged down in the details, folks.

most people aren't paying much attention to any of this and won't watch Trump's speech anyway. but bucking tradition and not opening the doors to Trump's State speech will look, well, like Trump-level pettiness.

[In the Corn]

Seems like this would be a strategic blunder by Pelosi.
she already was caught lying about how this speech would be "a national security problem" because..... well, let's not get bogged down in the details, folks.

most people aren't paying much attention to any of this and won't watch Trump's speech anyway. but bucking tradition and not opening the doors to Trump's State speech will look, well, like Trump-level pettiness.

Seems like no one can get out of their own way from looking more and more petty...

[baldgriff]

Seems like this would be a strategic blunder by Pelosi.
she already was caught lying about how this speech would be "a national security problem" because..... well, let's not get bogged down in the details, folks.

most people aren't paying much attention to any of this and won't watch Trump's speech anyway. but bucking tradition and not opening the doors to Trump's State speech will look, well, like Trump-level pettiness.

Yep - politics as usual in our current world.

[gcstomp]

"she already was caught lying about how this speech would be "a national security problem" because..... well, let's not get bogged down in the details, folks"

This is just incorrect. Pelosi wasnt caught in a lie. U.S. Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security havent been funded during shutdown, neither have the FBI. The concerns are that during a shutdown maybe these people who arent getting paid are open to being disgruntled, compromised, or otherwise less than enthusiastic over their situation. This shutdown is entirely a Trump creation, he proudly stated he owns it, over a vanity project. Pelosi sees a concrete wall (that mexico was to pay for) as same as Trump demanding a 300 ft sculpture of him dressed in a toga, an immorality that can never be funded.

Every day House has been voting on bills to reopen govt, waiting to be voted in senate but Mcconnell is acting like a paid for lackey of Trump, on exactly the same funding levels that the republican majority has already passed. The Dems want border security, the way this will end will have to be Trump claiming victory over a "wall" spending bill that is not a wall, and he can claim it is what he wanted all along.

[Judge Jude]

"The concerns are that during a shutdown maybe these people who arent getting paid are open to being disgruntled, compromised, or otherwise less than enthusiastic over their situation."

you realize these people are professionals, don't you? they have one job.....

I'm a little surprised you fell for this one - hook, line, and sinker.

It's also more than a little insulting to these national security folks. I'm amazed what a low opinion you have of them.
........

also, from factcheck.org (drink when you read "hamstrung by furloughs"):

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/01/examining-shutdown-claims-from-democrats/

"[Pelosi] said the Secret Service, which falls under the Department of Homeland Security, was designated “the lead federal agency” responsible for the security for the speech. “However, both the U.S. Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security have not been funded for 26 days now – with critical departments hamstrung by furloughs,” she said, adding that these “security concerns” were the reason she was suggesting a delay.

DHS is affected by the shutdown. Employees who are not considered essential aren’t working, and those who are working aren’t getting a paycheck. But the vast majority of Secret Service employees are essential workers.

In a Dec. 17, 2018, report titled “Procedures Relating to a Lapse in Appropriations,” DHS said that an estimated 5,978 Secret Service employees, out of a total workforce of 7,222, were “exempt/excepted and estimated to be retained during a lapse in appropriations.”

[gcstomp]

TSA are working. They arent getting paid. Coast Guard are working. They arent getting paid. Are you saying that DHS/secret service is getting paid while working? And I just said Pelosi wasnt caught lying, you feel she has been caught lying here?

Also, there are numerous sources online saying how demoralized FBI/Justice dept are over not only shutdown, but Trumps daily attacks. That you have managed to finese that it is me that has a low opinion of the worlds premier law enforcement agency, well, ok. It is exactly 100% wrong, but why would this be different from so many other times you have gone out of your way to somehow not understand, not even a little bit, what I said. Again, I disagree with hardcore Trumpers, and though you constantly say you are a centrist who is not a Trump supporter, you again post some bizarre hardline pro Trump takes.

[Redbirds Fan]

According to the FBI their mission has been compromised by lack of support staff and operational funding, if not lack of bureau manpower.

Is it unreasonable to think that overall security has been sacrificed somewhat? By as much as five percent?

Like it or not, it's Pelosi's House for the time being, and she is responsible for what goes on there. Her opinion and judgement are the ones that count in this instance, notwithstanding contrary opinions the President may have elicited.

All this to say someone isn't "caught in a lie" because someone else's opinion differs from theirs on a particular point.

[Judge Jude]

Trump has a low opinion of law enforcement and security officers - and do some here. both of those things can be true.

try this: take out the specifics. A Speaker of the House is threatening to prevent a President from giving the traditional State of the State address. This Speaker talks about "critical departments hamstring by furloughs" in hopes of confusing the issue, even though 83 percent of the people in the relevant departments - and a higher percent than that relevant to security - are still working.

The FBI union is speaking out, because that's what the union reps are supposed to do.

Yet if the speech is held, you seriously believe that the President's security is in any jeopardy?
and then if someone observes that you don't seem to have a very high opinion of these dedicated workers, here comes a "whataboutism."

Either these security officials are professionals, or they are stone-cold dangerous and in need of being fired because all it takes is missing a paycheck or two - which will be reimbursed later - to turn them into what, terrorist enablers?

I hope that without the political parties or the names, it's obvious what the answer is. just because someone wearing the proper laundry pulls a publicity stunt doesn't mean you have to fall for it. or maybe it does.

not a great hill to die on.

[revo]

Seems like this would be a strategic blunder by Pelosi.
she already was caught lying about how this speech would be "a national security problem" because..... well, let's not get bogged down in the details, folks.

This must be the same "national security issue" that Trump used to enact all these tariffs, lol.

Either these security officials are professionals, or they are stone-cold dangerous and in need of being fired because all it takes is missing a paycheck or two - which will be reimbursed later - to turn them into what, terrorist enablers?

Is this before or after they go to the food pantry to feed their family or declare bankruptcy?

[DMT]

I don't think there's any doubt that Pelosi is playing politics here. Trump has hi-jacked the government and she's not going to give an inch. Nor should she. Your hypothetical above makes the massive assumption that we could see this type of situation play out in normal times. In case you hadn't noticed, these aren't.

[Kevin Seitzer]

I don't think there's any doubt that Pelosi is playing politics here. Trump has hi-jacked the government and she's not going to give an inch. Nor should she. Your hypothetical above makes the massive assumption that we could see this type of situation play out in normal times. In case you hadn't noticed, these aren't.

Yes, I am thankful there is somebody who finally will stand up to Trump in terms he understands. My estimation of Pelosi has increased ten-fold in the last few weeks.