Trump's Second and Third year in office
Session's researched it, found out there was a easy work-a-around to regaining the pension, but let Trump think he had really smacked down the guy. Maybe Sessions is having a good laugh.
Quote: ThatDonGuyEr, I was hired by the federal government at the end of 1984, and not only did FERS already exist, but I don't think CSRS was an option for me.
As for FERS, you normally have to be somewhere between 55 and 57, depending on when you were born, to retire, and that's with 30 years of service; with 20-29, you need to be 60. There is a special rule allowing retirement at age 50 with 20 years' service for "law enforcement officers, firefighters, and nuclear weapons couriers." I have heard rumors that some congressmen are trying to have McCabe hired in a federal law enforcement position for two weeks (one pay period) so he would be eligible for his pension. Of course, the response could be, "That next continuing resolution I need to sign by Thursday (remember that?) in order to keep the government running had better have something in it that prevents this sort of loophole, or everybody is out of a job starting on Friday."
ATC is under that same special provision as LEO, firefighters, and nuclear weapons. I went into some detail above but he has to get to 20+ years and age 50 OR 25 years at any age. Normal federal retirement is 30 years, as you said above.
If you are fired for cause before you reach retirement eligibility, they can deny your pension and benefits. You are vested in your TSP at that point, though.
Interesting that you have an 84 hire date into FERS. I started the application process in 1984, waited to be hired until late 85. My paperwork showed I was hired under CSRS. But I was not successful in fighting my transfer into FERS, which they phased in from April to October 86 in the FAA. Which agency hired you, may I ask?
https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-we-know-and-dont-know-about-firing-andrew-mccabe
If the AG is telling the truth about the process of McCabe's dismissal, it looks like there was a fair review by the IG and he was canned on advice of career, not political, appointees based on department and government policies.
If Trump lies under oath or to the FBI, won't people demand that he be "fired"? Why would McCabe be any different?
I honestly don't know what will come of the Trump investigation. I do think that "Impeach 45" is a stupid campaign slogan for the fall at this point; I hope lots of Dems use it. I'm not saying 45 won't be impeached, but we're not there yet. The more time the Dems focus on Trump and collusion, the less time they spend focusing on winning as many seats as possible in an election that traditionally is good for the party out of power.
We'll see what happens...until then, I do remain glad that HRC is not our President. If Trump is kicked for legitimate reasons and Pence becomes President, I will still be glad that HRC is not our President. I'm not blindy following him, I have even written several letters expressing my concern about how he acts, but I am nowhere near reaching the point that I feel HRC is better for the job than President Trump.
...and for all the people who tend to downplay every time a Republican woman breaks through a glass ceiling, I have to wonder why you don't acknowledge the accomplishment and hope to get someone from your "side" to break the next barrier.
Quote: RonCI have to wonder why you don't acknowledge the accomplishment and hope to get someone from your "side" to break the next barrier.
Perhaps we can get a Mexican citizen elected with a Muslim wife.
What a wimp we have as a President
Quote: terapinedTrump congratulated Putin on winning a fixed election
What a wimp we have as a President
Deplorable.
Quote: terapinedTrump congratulated Putin on winning a fixed election
What a wimp we have as a President
Now now.... He was just being polite. Didn't Putin congratulate Trump on winning a fixed election also? (That's a bone I'm throwing to ams!)
Quote: SOOPOONow now.... He was just being polite. Didn't Putin congratulate Trump on winning a fixed election also? (That's a bone I'm throwing to ams!)
Yeah they made a movie about Trump and putin
Stepbrothers
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0838283/quotes
Quote: terapinedTrump congratulated Putin on winning a fixed election
What a wimp we have as a President
DO NOT CONGRATULATE
Quote: TigerWuDO NOT CONGRATULATE
I would have confronted Putin on using chemical weapons on UK soil to kill and poison people
A police officer remains in the hospital
That's a totally innocent victim paying for Putin's crimes
Trump needs to confront rather then wimping out
Pretty obvious Putin has a president in his pocket
disgusting
Quote: terapinedI would have confronted Putin on using chemical weapons on UK soil to kill and poison people
A police officer remains in the hospital
That's a totally innocent victim paying for Putin's crimes
Trump needs to confront rather then wimping out
Pretty obvious Putin has a president in his pocket
disgusting
Notice how all the righties that complained about Obama being soft on world leaders are silent on Trump doing the same thing? :crickets:
Quote: rsactuaryNotice how all the righties that complained about Obama being soft on world leaders are silent on Trump doing the same thing? :crickets:
Because they're hypocrites.
But yeah, Trump's foreign policy game is atrocious.
Quote: TigerWuBecause they're hypocrites.
But yeah, Trump's foreign policy game is atrocious.
There really isn't much good with Trump these days. There are supporters out their who strongly support the tax cuts, immigration policy, and even his stand with North Korea. And I am fine with that. Those positions are defensible.
But look what happened in the PAST WEEK ALONE:
- Taunts Mueller investigation, which is in itself attempting to obstruct justice
- Firing Tillerson, and McCabe (and then gloating about it)
- recommending the death penalty for drug dealers
- congratulating a dictator who poisons former spies with nerve agents of winning an unfair and unfree election
- engages in a lawsuit with Stormy Daniels.
- lied to Canada about trade numbers
- revelations that the company that got him elected stole and used private information against Facebook policy
- and more!
His behaviors and actions, not just as the leader of the free world, but just as a human being, are indefensible.
Quote: boymimbo
His behaviors and actions, not just as the leader of the free world, but just as a human being, are indefensible.
Yeah, his policies and whatnot are one thing... but he's a giant scumbag and just a terrible person. He is completely unprofessional and should not be representing our country or government. Whatever people think about Bush or Obama or just about any other president, at least they all acted like adults and could competently interact with other members of our government as well as those of other nations. If Trump hadn't been born rich he'd be that 70-year old guy working middle-management at some retail store in Jersey that's perpetually one bad quarter away from bankruptcy, and all his employees hate him.
Quote: TigerWuYeah, his policies and whatnot are one thing... but he's a giant scumbag and just a terrible person. He is completely unprofessional and should not be representing our country or government. Whatever people think about Bush or Obama or just about any other president, at least they all acted like adults and could competently interact with other members of our government as well as those of other nations. If Trump hadn't been born rich he'd be that 70-year old guy working middle-management at some retail store in Jersey that's perpetually one bad quarter away from bankruptcy, and all his employees hate him.
I give Trump credit for his success in real estate and for his success on "the Apprentice". Despite the substantial help that he got from Fred, he still managed to do something positive with it.
I have Republican friends out there, and the common message I hear from them is "he'd be fine if he would just shut up".
Quote: RonC"Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor—including under oath—on multiple occasions."--Attorney General Jeff Sessions
https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-we-know-and-dont-know-about-firing-andrew-mccabe
If the AG is telling the truth about the process of McCabe's dismissal, it looks like there was a fair review by the IG and he was canned on advice of career, not political, appointees based on department and government policies.
If Trump lies under oath or to the FBI, won't people demand that he be "fired"? Why would McCabe be any different?
I honestly don't know what will come of the Trump investigation. I do think that "Impeach 45" is a stupid campaign slogan for the fall at this point; I hope lots of Dems use it. I'm not saying 45 won't be impeached, but we're not there yet. The more time the Dems focus on Trump and collusion, the less time they spend focusing on winning as many seats as possible in an election that traditionally is good for the party out of power.
We'll see what happens...until then, I do remain glad that HRC is not our President. If Trump is kicked for legitimate reasons and Pence becomes President, I will still be glad that HRC is not our President. I'm not blindy following him, I have even written several letters expressing my concern about how he acts, but I am nowhere near reaching the point that I feel HRC is better for the job than President Trump.
...and for all the people who tend to downplay every time a Republican woman breaks through a glass ceiling, I have to wonder why you don't acknowledge the accomplishment and hope to get someone from your "side" to break the next barrier.
I am hearing it went something like this.
Trump ordered Sessions to fire McCabe prior to retirement.
Sessions sent in the OIG to do an investigative interview.
The OIG (part of the Executive, with oversight.of, but not part of the FBI) wrote up a report on what was said, along with a vague phrase that indicated they did not feel McCabe was "completely forthcoming" or something very similar.
The FBI was procedurally forced to use that conclusion to initiate a complaint against McCabe.
Due process was not followed; that initial impression was instead used as full justification for termination, which will be found to be at least premature under civil service law.
It will likely go before the MSPB, which provides protection to civil servants wrongfully terminated, and an avenue for reparations and a hearing, whatever the findings.
ALL of those people will be subpoenaed to testify before the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), who will have sole discretion as to process, reinstatement, reparations, etc. That includes Sessions and Trump.
I have testified in that court before, in a very complicated termination case of a person I helped train and had to recommend firing as public hazard. The Government will have to have done EVERYTHING right EVERY step of the way for this (McCabe) termination to stand.
In the case to which I was a party, they were extremely careful, followed all the rules, and had him gone. Except, our chief did not want to pass his problems on to another chief, and rather than waiting for the guy to go AWOL at his demotion reassignment (to which he refused to report), he processed the termination in our facility.
No good deed goes unpunished. The guy sued for wrongful, and kept his job due to that technicality, was even given another facility he liked better.
I can guarantee you, they have not followed the process. They allowed the birthday deadline to override due process for termination, even if for cause, and that alone will, at a minimum, give McCabe the time on duty he needed to retire. The gov't will also have to pay the legal costs for all sides once the hearing has ruled.
So Trump will have accomplished nothing beyond shooting himself in both feet, a shin, both thighs, and his groin, with us paying for the ER. Thanks, Obama.
Remember after the election, they said he would
never be sworn in? Then they said he would
never last 100 days? Then he would never last
6 months? Now all I hear is, who's running against
him in 2020. Are the predictors ever right about
anything?
And it's Hillary, of course, she's on deck for 2020.
It's only a year away, when the campaigns begin.
She keeps herself in the news every week, even
if it's sliding down stairs or drinking too much
wine and falling down in the shower again.
You go girl!!
Quote: EvenBobAre the predictors ever right about
anything?
Probably the same people that "predicted" Obama would take all our guns, destroy America, and turn it into a Muslim Socialist dictatorship.
Quote:And it's Hillary, of course, she's on deck for 2020.
Haha... no she isn't. Hillary is poison. She lost. Get over it. As much as Conservative media is obsessed with her, her political career is over.
Quote:
She keeps herself in the news every week, even
if it's sliding down stairs or drinking too much
wine and falling down in the shower again.
I haven't heard a peep from Hillary in months. Nobody cares about her anymore besides Trump and Fox News.
Quote: TigerWuProbably the same people that "predicted" Obama would take all our guns, destroy America, and turn it into a Muslim Socialist dictatorship.
EvenBob was SO SURE Romney was gonna win in 2012. He disappeared from the board for months afterwards out of embarrassment or something.
For some reason, he never mentions that when bashing Trump "predictors."
Quote: EvenBobWhat happened to the Trump 100 Day thread?
Remember after the election, they said he would
never be sworn in? Then they said he would
never last 100 days? Then he would never last
6 months? Now all I hear is, who's running against
him in 2020. Are the predictors ever right about
anything?
Heck, they said he was running for publicity. Running to help Hillary win. Wanted to lose. Would not get one EC vote. Would not show up to the debates. Don't they get tired of looking foolish?
Limbaugh had it right on the latest Putin comments. He is stroking the media and liberals. And it is working like a charm.
Quote:And it's Hillary, of course, she's on deck for 2020.
It's only a year away, when the campaigns begin.
She keeps herself in the news every week, even
if it's sliding down stairs or drinking too much
wine and falling down in the shower again.
This is going to be good. She looks to be jumping in. She will say, "It is just too important to stop Trump, I have to run!" Too hard to tell if she will freeze everyone else out or not. For sure not as much as last time, but a freeze out could happen. Then the superdelegates fall right into line. The rest fight over scraps. The Democrat Debates are held on Saturday night at 10:00 PM and carried on just some unwatched cable channel.
Quote: TigerWu
I haven't heard a peep from Hillary in months. Nobody cares about her anymore besides Trump and Fox News.
Weird. The rest of us heard her in India last week saying how she would have won if not for those stupid, married, white women.
Quote: AZDuffmanWeird. The rest of us heard her in India last week saying how she would have won if not for those stupid, married, white women.
That's cause you get your news from Fox News. They can't stop talking bout her
Prediction for 2020:
Lots of right wingers arriving at polls sure they got the election in the bag trying to figure out why Hillary Rodham Clinton isn't on the ballot
Shaking their heads as they leave the polls "but I was sure she was running. She's been in the news all summer and fall on Fox along with her running mate Barack Obama"
Quote: darkozThat's cause you get your news from Fox News.
So you are saying she did not say that on a big book tour in India?
Quote: AZDuffmanSo you are saying she did not say that on a big book tour in India?
I'm saying no one is talking about an old candidate except Fox News
The rest of the world is living in 2018 while Fox continues to live in 2016
Quote: AZDuffmanWeird. The rest of us heard her in India last week saying how she would have won if not for those stupid, married, white women.
I'm glad that she is still on your mind and Fox's collective unconsciousness 16+ months after the election.
Quote: boymimboI'm glad that she is still on your mind and Fox's collective unconsciousness 16+ months after the election.
She keeps putting herself out there, which is why EB and I keep saying she is running again. What I don't get is the liberals. 17 months ago she was "the most qualified POTUS candidate in history." Today they disavow her existence.
Quote: AZDuffmanShe keeps putting herself out there, which is why EB and I keep saying she is running again. What I don't get is the liberals. 17 months ago she was "the most qualified POTUS candidate in history." Today they disavow her existence.
Don't be ridiculous
You didn't see CNN and liberals discussing Romney as a serious threat after his failed election bid
And you didn't see Fox News act like Romney was going to seriously run again
After a failed election bid it's time to move on. Clinton had her chance
The righties fantasies of having Hillary run every four years until I guess 2040 or her death are fanciful fluff ala HG Wells
Quote: AZDuffmanShe keeps putting herself out there, which is why EB and I keep saying she is running again. What I don't get is the liberals. 17 months ago she was "the most qualified POTUS candidate in history." Today they disavow her existence.
You both just keep kidding yourselves.
I'm guessing the front runner hasn't emerged yet, but it won't be Hillary.
People more likely to run than Hillary from the Democratic side, not that I think any of them is the obvious winner:
Joe Biden
Kamala Harris
Amy Klobuchar
Cory Booker
Joaquin or Julien Castro
Al Franken
Elizabeth Warren
Adam Schiff
Oprah Winfrey
Al Gore
People most likely to challenge Trump in the primaries:
John Kasich
Scott Walker
Paul Ryan
Mitt Romney
Jon Huntsman
Marco Rubio
Rand Paul
Mike Pence
All JMHO. A lot will depend on the mid-terms.
Quote: AZDuffmanShe keeps putting herself out there, which is why EB and I keep saying she is running again. What I don't get is the liberals. 17 months ago she was "the most qualified POTUS candidate in history." Today they disavow her existence.
I don't disavow her existence. She lost and said that she wasn't going to run again. I hope she doesn't run again. She's entitled to go places and make money and speeches. Al Gore does it. McCain (still in politics) and Mitt Romney still does it. If you want to think that she's going to run for POTUS again, that's FoxNews getting in your head.
You're just deflecting from what Cambridge Analytics actually did in concert with Facebook and the Russian. Cheat (steal voter personal data), influence American voters, and win.
except Fox? Here's Hillary already
in a campaign ad featuring what she
said in India. Still think nobody is
paying attention to her?
Quote: AZDuffmanSo you are saying she did not say that on a big book tour in India?
Book tour in India
I had no idea
Is this newsworthy?
I could care less.
Whats next?
A 2hour Fox Hannity special on Dukakis?
lol
Quote: AZDuffmanShe keeps putting herself out there, which is why EB and I keep saying she is running again. What I don't get is the liberals. 17 months ago she was "the most qualified POTUS candidate in history." Today they disavow her existence.
She IS the most qualified POTUS candidate in history and would have been fantastic. But no one runs for the presidency twice any more, Nixon was the last and I don't think it will ever happen again.. for either party. That doesn't mean I disavow her.
Yes she did speak in India last week, and even CNN reported her unfortunate comments. She shouldn't have even thought that, let alone say it.
Quote: rsactuaryShe IS the most qualified POTUS candidate in history and would have been fantastic.
Unfortunately, not very likable though. IMO, about 50% of her problem. The other is her penchant for the occasional unexplainable unforced error. Ones bad enough that they make all her supporters cringe.
Quote: boymimboThere really isn't much good with Trump these days. There are supporters out their who strongly support the tax cuts, immigration policy, and even his stand with North Korea. And I am fine with that. Those positions are defensible.
But look what happened in the PAST WEEK ALONE:
- Taunts Mueller investigation, which is in itself attempting to obstruct justice
- Firing Tillerson, and McCabe (and then gloating about it)
- recommending the death penalty for drug dealers
- congratulating a dictator who poisons former spies with nerve agents of winning an unfair and unfree election
- engages in a lawsuit with Stormy Daniels.
- lied to Canada about trade numbers
- revelations that the company that got him elected stole and used private information against Facebook policy
- and more!
His behaviors and actions, not just as the leader of the free world, but just as a human being, are indefensible.
See what you did here? You caused two pages of "but Hillary!"
I guess they didn't want to talk about that trade deficit with Canada.
Quote: Dalex64See what you did here? You caused two pages of "but Hillary!"
I guess they didn't want to talk about that trade deficit with Canada.
Yup. And from Bob nonetheless! I must have made a really good point for that entity to respond.
Quote: EvenBobThink nobody saw Hillary in India
except Fox? Here's Hillary already
in a campaign ad featuring what she
said in India. Still think nobody is
paying attention to her?
Did you actually watch the video? What you typed and what I saw are radically different.
Quote: EvenBobThink nobody saw Hillary in India
except Fox? Here's Hillary already
in a campaign ad featuring what she
said in India. Still think nobody is
paying attention to her?
Oh, spare me. This is an attack ad against Claire. She's considered very vulnerable in Missouri.
Talk about fake news, EB. This is ridiculous tripe.
Quote: beachbumbabsOh, spare me. This is an attack ad against Claire. She's considered very vulnerable in Missouri.
Talk about fake news, EB. This is ridiculous tripe.
I'm sure he saw it on InfoWars and just listened to what Alex said instead of forming his own opinion. Standard procedure on the right.
Quote: beachbumbabs
Oh, spare me. This is an attack ad against Claire.
But look what they're doing, they're running
against Hillary! You said nobody cares about
her, yet here's somebody who cares so much,
who see's how dangerous and important she is,
they have campaign ads with her in them!
"McCaskill, who is considered one of the most vulnerable Senate incumbents on the ballot this fall, was the first member of Congress to endorse Clinton's 2016 presidential bid. McCaskill became one of the former secretary of State's most vocal backers on the campaign trail."
Did you see a single ad for 2014 with Mitt
Romney in it? Hell no, he had truly been
forgotten. Hillary is in the news almost
every day, she's running, whether Lib
heads are buried in the sand about it or not.
She will get the nomination again if she wants
it, too many insiders owe her.
Quote: EvenBobBut look what they're doing, they're running
against Hillary! You said nobody cares about
her, yet here's somebody who cares so much,
who see's how dangerous and important she is,
they have campaign ads with her in them!
"McCaskill, who is considered one of the most vulnerable Senate incumbents on the ballot this fall, was the first member of Congress to endorse Clinton's 2016 presidential bid. McCaskill became one of the former secretary of State's most vocal backers on the campaign trail."
Did you see a single ad for 2014 with Mitt
Romney in it? Hell no, he had truly been
forgotten. Hillary is in the news almost
every day, she's running, whether Lib
heads are buried in the sand about it or not.
She will get the nomination again if she wants
it, too many insiders owe her.
And this ladies and gentlemen is a perfect example of a delusional post, with no basis in fact. #youaredismissed
Quote: rsactuaryShe IS the most qualified POTUS candidate in history and would have been fantastic.
I laugh when I hear people say this. I cannot believe any intelligent person seriously believes it. Her qualifications were average at best, maybe a little below.
The only "qualification" she had that nobody else ever had is that she was married to a POTUS. That is no qualification at all, useless. I laugh because her "qualifications" are likes some kid just out of college saying to an employer to look at all the clubs and activities they have on their resume. As the talking heads say, "checked all the right boxes." But as Rush points out, she never DID ANYTHING. She was a Senator who was handed her seat and showed up for work. She was SOS who showed up for work, oh and made a bigger mess of the Middle East. I guess that was hard to do given the mess it always has been.
But to say she is more qualified than an Eisenhower who won the war in Europe? Whoever says that, tell me what you are drinking as I will have one!
Quote: boymimboI don't disavow her existence. She lost and said that she wasn't going to run again. I hope she doesn't run again. She's entitled to go places and make money and speeches. Al Gore does it. McCain (still in politics) and Mitt Romney still does it. If you want to think that she's going to run for POTUS again, that's FoxNews getting in your head.
No, that is looking at the power-hungry history of her and Bill. She said she would not run in 2008, yet she did. Gore is not putting himself out there to run for POTUS, he is putting himself out there to make money from suckers who believe in GW. Romney faded away. He may run for Senate, but that took years for him to consider.
Hillary is different. She thinks the job of POTUS will be handed to her. She thinks she was robbed. You look at how close she is keeping herself. Close enough that she can jump in if she thinks it is winnable. I will believe she is "out of it" when she is dead.
Quote: AZDuffmanNo, that is looking at the power-hungry history of her and Bill. She said she would not run in 2008, yet she did. Gore is not putting himself out there to run for POTUS, he is putting himself out there to make money from suckers who believe in GW. Romney faded away. He may run for Senate, but that took years for him to consider.
Hillary is different. She thinks the job of POTUS will be handed to her. She thinks she was robbed. You look at how close she is keeping herself. Close enough that she can jump in if she thinks it is winnable. I will believe she is "out of it" when she is dead.
Haha pretty much what I accused you of last page
You believe she is gonna run in every potus election till 2040 or she dies first
Quote: beachbumbabsYou both just keep kidding yourselves.
I'm guessing the front runner hasn't emerged yet, but it won't be Hillary.
People more likely to run than Hillary from the Democratic side, not that I think any of them is the obvious winner:
Joe Biden
Kamala Harris
Amy Klobuchar
Cory Booker
Joaquin or Julien Castro
Al Franken
Elizabeth Warren
Adam Schiff
Oprah Winfrey
Al Gore
.
I would vote for Klobuchar before Trump. She is the one person on your list qualified who can work across the aisle, despite her basically liberal ideals. Biden is too old. Kamala Harris is interesting. She is for Universal Health Care like Klobuchar. I would say the Dems would want to save her for Supreme Court. Cory Booker is way too polarizing. I think he would actually lose to Trump. Al Franken? I assume that is a joke! I think Oprah gives Trump a run for his money if she really commits. The Castros are interesting. Al Gore had his chance, like Hillary, and failed. Elizabeth Warren is too easy to dislike personally, kind of like Hillary. Adam Schiff? ReallY?
Quote: AZDuffmanI laugh when I hear people say this. I cannot believe any intelligent person seriously believes it. Her qualifications were average at best, maybe a little below.
The only "qualification" she had that nobody else ever had is that she was married to a POTUS. That is no qualification at all, useless. I laugh because her "qualifications" are likes some kid just out of college saying to an employer to look at all the clubs and activities they have on their resume. As the talking heads say, "checked all the right boxes." But as Rush points out, she never DID ANYTHING. She was a Senator who was handed her seat and showed up for work. She was SOS who showed up for work, oh and made a bigger mess of the Middle East. I guess that was hard to do given the mess it always has been.
But to say she is more qualified than an Eisenhower who won the war in Europe? Whoever says that, tell me what you are drinking as I will have one!
I laugh when people say she's not qualified. But as much as you want HRC to beech about as a distraction from the worst president in history, I'm not going there. HRC is done and she's not running for President again, so I'm not going to rehash ancient history.
"Got $1.6 Billion to start Wall on Southern Border, rest will be forthcoming. Most importantly, got $700 Billion to rebuild our Military, $716 Billion next year...most ever. Had to waste money on Dem giveaways in order to take care of military pay increase and new equipment."
WTF
1.6 BILLION
That aint chump change
That's a lot of money to waste
What happened to Mexico paying for the wall
Give the 1.6 billion back to the tax payers, cut out more pork like the wall and balance the dam budget
Quote: terapinedTrump Tweet
"Got $1.6 Billion to start Wall on Southern Border, rest will be forthcoming. Most importantly, got $700 Billion to rebuild our Military, $716 Billion next year...most ever. Had to waste money on Dem giveaways in order to take care of military pay increase and new equipment."
WTF
1.6 BILLION
That aint chump change
That's a lot of money to waste
What happened to Mexico paying for the wall
Give the 1.6 billion back to the tax payers, cut out more pork like the wall and balance the dam budget
He PROMISED that Mexico was paying for it. I'm sure the righties will be outraged and we'll hear all about it below.........
Quote: terapinedTrump Tweet
"Got $1.6 Billion to start Wall on Southern Border, rest will be forthcoming. Most importantly, got $700 Billion to rebuild our Military, $716 Billion next year...most ever. Had to waste money on Dem giveaways in order to take care of military pay increase and new equipment."
Why do we need to rebuild the military? We just spent several years downsizing it because we're not in the midst of fighting two huge wars anymore.
Why don't we take that $1.6 billion of wall money and rebuild some infrastructure, or build some solar and wind plants? Isn't that what the party of fiscal responsibility is supposed to be doing?
