Plot Twist - Trump now says he'll veto unless they increase the stimulus from $600 to $2000

lizkat

Bean Planter (yet again)
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,376
Reaction score
11,488
Location
Catskill Mountains
Was clear something like that was in the works when he didn't sign the thing immediately this morning, no? Everything since then has been advisors trying to tell Trump don't go there....

Moron. All it will do is cause Congress to have to come back and override the veto.

Since Hawley couldn't get $1200 into the Senate side of the thing, do you think Mitch is going to go for TWO THOUSAND?

This is just Trump doubling down on trashing the Republican Party because Mitch acknowledged that Joe won the election.
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
7,212
Reaction score
13,648
Was clear something like that was in the works when he didn't sign the thing immediately this morning, no? Everything since then has been advisors trying to tell Trump don't go there....

Moron. All it will do is cause Congress to have to come back and override the veto.

Since Hawley couldn't get $1200 into the Senate side of the thing, do you think Mitch is going to go for TWO THOUSAND?

This is just Trump doubling down on trashing the Republican Party because Mitch acknowledged that Joe won the election.
I guess he doesn’t care that he is trashing the American people who need the relief since their unemployment checks stop in a week and evictions can happen then too unless he signs it.
 

JayMysteri0

What the F?!!!
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
6,395
Reaction score
13,229
Location
Not HERE.
It doesn't matter.

45 reminded muscomitch & co, he has no F's for them, like he doesn't for anyone else.

Like Sen Barbara Boxer was saying on Maddow Show, everyone rally behind 45. I imagine 45 thinks maybe this will sway people to like him, since he sees everything as a transaction. Everyone should get the chance to use this @$$bag on his way out.
 

lizkat

Bean Planter (yet again)
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,376
Reaction score
11,488
Location
Catskill Mountains
I guess he doesn’t care that he is trashing the American people who need the relief since their unemployment checks stop in a week and evictions can happen then too unless he signs it.

29 more days of this kind of stuff and other things we probably can't even imagine.

The more people bail out of what's left of his inner circle of advisors now, the worse it's going to get.
 

DT

Hey sexy mama, wanna kill all humans?
Staff Member
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,253
Reaction score
8,819
Location
Planet Express
Hahaha, Pelosi jumped right on that, "OK, let's do it!"

It's like George driving Susan's parents to the Hamptons ... :D
 

DT

Hey sexy mama, wanna kill all humans?
Staff Member
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,253
Reaction score
8,819
Location
Planet Express
28 more days of this clown and then we'll be free, right?!!!! Liz, I think you're right: gonna be a long and painful 28 days from the looks of things....

Hmmm ...


1608694952136.png
 

JayMysteri0

What the F?!!!
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
6,395
Reaction score
13,229
Location
Not HERE.
ARRRRGHHHH!!!!!!! Just wanna scream in frustration right now!!!!

28 more days of this clown and then we'll be free, right?!!!! Liz, I think you're right: gonna be a long and painful 28 days from the looks of things....
What? You never heard of the January surprise?

A growing number of House Republicans say they will challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election when Congress meets to certify the Electoral College results on Jan. 6.

The latest Republican to say he will do so is Rep.-elect Madison Cawthorn (N.C.), who will be a part of the House when it convenes in early January.

He implored other Republicans to also challenge the results in a video message.

“I have a message for all other Republicans across the country,” Cawthorn said. “If you are not on the record calling for fair, free and just elections now and in the future, I will come to your district and I will fund a primary opponent against you.”

"It ain't over, until it's over." -Yogi Berra
 

Scepticalscribe

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
6,180
Reaction score
8,863
Was clear something like that was in the works when he didn't sign the thing immediately this morning, no? Everything since then has been advisors trying to tell Trump don't go there....

Moron. All it will do is cause Congress to have to come back and override the veto.

Since Hawley couldn't get $1200 into the Senate side of the thing, do you think Mitch is going to go for TWO THOUSAND?

This is just Trump doubling down on trashing the Republican Party because Mitch acknowledged that Joe won the election.
Mr Trump's manifest lack of appreciation for the fact that the GOP (spinelessly, yes, gutlessly, yes, and greedily, most certainly, yes) gave him a platform, and his desire to thrash the party as he burns everything down on the scenic route he is taking on his departure from office, calls to mind the wonderful remark of the Austrian Prime Minister, Prince Felix Schwarzenberg, who, when he was asked - at the time of the Crimean War, - whether Austria felt indebted to Russia for having crushed the Hungarian uprising of 1848, replied: "Austria will astound the world with the magnitude of her ingratitude."
29 more days of this kind of stuff and other things we probably can't even imagine.

The more people bail out of what's left of his inner circle of advisors now, the worse it's going to get.
Yes, it will be a long month.

Am counting the days and hours.
ARRRRGHHHH!!!!!!! Just wanna scream in frustration right now!!!!

28 more days of this clown and then we'll be free, right?!!!! Liz, I think you're right: gonna be a long and painful 28 days from the looks of things....

At least, he has been defeated - as a one term president - and rejected by the electorate - not that his malevolent narcissism allows him to admit this unwelcome fact to himself.
 

lizkat

Bean Planter (yet again)
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
5,376
Reaction score
11,488
Location
Catskill Mountains
This is really unconscionable for Trump to hold up the bill. He should have gotten involved while terms related to covid relief were being negotiated, including by his own Treasury department. And the GOP is never going to go for a $2k stimulus check. Meanwhile people are about to be evicted, lose their unemployment, some have already drained their savings....

 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
7,212
Reaction score
13,648
Congress easily could have passed a stimulus bill earlier; did they think little baby Donnie would sign it right away? December is usually the top month of the year for consumer spending. Just heard an economic report stating November which is usually quite high as well was very low. It will be a meager Christmas and we have Republicans in Congress and the president to blame. SHAME.
 

Clix Pix

Focused
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
2,293
Reaction score
4,769
Location
Eight Miles from the Tysons Apple Store, No. VA
Main Camera
Sony
Disgraceful, the whole situation! People are now going to be worrying all through Christmas whether or not they'll be able to even make a payment on the gifts they put on their credit cards (if they did) or will be wondering how they're going to eat and keep a roof over their heads once the eviction prevention program and the unemployment benefits program both grind to a halt.....

As for the amount of Stimulus payment checks, I absolutely agree that $600 just isn't going to cut the mustard for those who are in most need....the payments should've been $1200 again right from the start. Something else which occurs to me is that there's a cutoff point where people earning a certain income do not qualify for the full amount of the stimulus payment, but will qualify for a certain percentage..... I'm not sure what that cutoff point is -- maybe $75,000? It seems to me that rather than giving people who earn that and more even any percentage at all of the stimulus payment would save funds straightaway and make it even more possible to give those who are truly in need a larger stimulus payment in the first place. Why should a single individual with no dependents, a homeowner with the usual lifestyle items including a car, computer, probably two or three TVs, whatever else makes life comfortable, who is earning $75,000 or more, be getting any stimulus payment at all? I remember last time being really surprised when learning about someone who is pretty much in the situation I describe above getting a nice little percentage, although not the full $1200.00 stimulus payment, when in fact that individual earns close to $100,000/year..... Because of various deductions and contributions to various retirement savings plans that are not taxable when one is actively employed and still earning, based on their tax return, the person's adjusted income was somewhere around $80,000 and so they qualified for a percentage of the stimulus payment. Personally, I don't think that's right. I think the benefit should be flatly cut off completely at an income of $75,000.00 or whatever the stated amount is and not do percentages for higher incomes after that.

So now the US is still in a mess, thanks to the whole dallying-around for months on the part of Congress and of course to the one who thankfully will soon be evicted from the White House..... NOT a happy Christmas for many more families, especially those who had been counting on the bill being passed and at least some benefits coming their way shortly.....
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Vaccinated
Posts
7,212
Reaction score
13,648
Disgraceful, the whole situation! People are now going to be worrying all through Christmas whether or not they'll be able to even make a payment on the gifts they put on their credit cards (if they did) or will be wondering how they're going to eat and keep a roof over their heads once the eviction prevention program and the unemployment benefits program both grind to a halt.....

As for the amount of Stimulus payment checks, I absolutely agree that $600 just isn't going to cut the mustard for those who are in most need....the payments should've been $1200 again right from the start. Something else which occurs to me is that there's a cutoff point where people earning a certain income do not qualify for the full amount of the stimulus payment, but will qualify for a certain percentage..... I'm not sure what that cutoff point is -- maybe $75,000? It seems to me that rather than giving people who earn that and more even any percentage at all of the stimulus payment would save funds straightaway and make it even more possible to give those who are truly in need a larger stimulus payment in the first place. Why should a single individual with no dependents, a homeowner with the usual lifestyle items including a car, computer, probably two or three TVs, whatever else makes life comfortable, who is earning $75,000 or more, be getting any stimulus payment at all? I remember last time being really surprised when learning about someone who is pretty much in the situation I describe above getting a nice little percentage, although not the full $1200.00 stimulus payment, when in fact that individual earns close to $100,000/year..... Because of various deductions and contributions to various retirement savings plans that are not taxable when one is actively employed and still earning, based on their tax return, the person's adjusted income was somewhere around $80,000 and so they qualified for a percentage of the stimulus payment. Personally, I don't think that's right. I think the benefit should be flatly cut off completely at an income of $75,000.00 or whatever the stated amount is and not do percentages for higher incomes after that.

So now the US is still in a mess, thanks to the whole dallying-around for months on the part of Congress and of course to the one who thankfully will soon be evicted from the White House..... NOT a happy Christmas for many more families, especially those who had been counting on the bill being passed and at least some benefits coming their way shortly.....
There is a very good economic reason for limiting the payments to those with low incomes, related to the fact that they need it more. People that need the stimulus are going to spend it to cover necessities almost immediately. This is good for the economy. People that don’t need it will save it, doing nothing for the economy in the short term.

I don‘t know if the PPP was a good thing or not because a lot of businesses with no apparent need cashed in on it. But increased unemployment checks, direct stimulus money, money for local and state governments to keep the trash pickup going, are no-brainers and should have been passed months ago. Truly, F Mitch McConnell forever.
 

Clix Pix

Focused
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
2,293
Reaction score
4,769
Location
Eight Miles from the Tysons Apple Store, No. VA
Main Camera
Sony
Exactly! Give more money to the people who truly need the funds to just keep going on a day-to-day basis and cut off the stimulus payment at $75,000 income, none of this percentage crap.... People/individuals who are already making $75,000 or higher are already doing well enough for themselves that they are not worrying about getting food to eat, keeping a roof over their head, etc., etc. Yes, more than likely they just stashed their percentage of the last stimulus payment into savings and didn't use it because they did not need it in the first place.
 

thekev

Elite Member
Posts
1,067
Reaction score
1,607

I really liked that movie. It reignited zombie films, which really needed to happen.
Exactly! Give more money to the people who truly need the funds to just keep going on a day-to-day basis and cut off the stimulus payment at $75,000 income, none of this percentage crap.... People/individuals who are already making $75,000 or higher are already doing well enough for themselves that they are not worrying about getting food to eat, keeping a roof over their head, etc., etc. Yes, more than likely they just stashed their percentage of the last stimulus payment into savings and didn't use it because they did not need it in the first place.

The reason for graduating these things is to avoid someone making noticeably less as they cross between brackets. I would also point out that in a number of larger cities, it's hard to qualify for even a small 1 bedroom apartment on less than 70k/yr.
 
Top Bottom