Trump 47

Chinese electric vehicles from BYD, can now recharge in just five minutes, thanks to advanced charging technology that allows for rapid battery replenishment. But I wonder how many years it will be before they are allowed to be sold in the U. S., in order to protect Tesla and other American companies that offer EVs. I also wonder if Musk ever boasted of charging your EV in 5 minutes or same as your gas car. If he did, the Chinese beat him to it.
 
Nothing matters anymore. Oh, it's against the Constitution you say? Meh, come at me.

Our "laws" trying to hold the rich and powerful accountable are nothing but a charade and joke.

Our Constitution, which has been regarded at the greatest living document in history, is an absolute joke piece of garbage. Fit for nothing more than a firestarter or tp
I strongly disagree that the Constitution is garbage. The implementation and following the Constitution by our own government is complete 💩.
 

‘Just wildly illegal’: top Democrats push to censure Trump’s plan to accept Qatar jet​


Top Democrats in the US Senate are pushing for a vote on the floor of the chamber censuring Donald Trump’s reported plan to accept a $400m luxury jet from the royal family of Qatar for use as Air Force One and later as a fixture in the Trump’s personal presidential library.

Four Democratic members of the Senate foreign relations committee said on Monday that they would press for a vote later this week. They said that elected officials, including the president, were not allowed to accept large gifts from foreign governments unless authorized to do so by Congress.


Cory Booker from New Jersey, Brian Schatz from Hawaii, Chris Coons from Delaware and Chris Murphy from Connecticut cast the reported gift of the Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet as a clear conflict of interest and a serious threat to national security.

“Air Force Once is more than just a plane – it’s a symbol of the presidency and of the United States itself,” the senators said in a joint statement. “No one should use public service for personal gain through foreign gifts.”
 
Chinese electric vehicles from BYD, can now recharge in just five minutes, thanks to advanced charging technology that allows for rapid battery replenishment. But I wonder how many years it will be before they are allowed to be sold in the U. S., in order to protect Tesla and other American companies that offer EVs. I also wonder if Musk ever boasted of charging your EV in 5 minutes or same as your gas car. If he did, the Chinese beat him to it.
I wonder what any of that had to do with tariffs...
 

‘Just wildly illegal’: top Democrats push to censure Trump’s plan to accept Qatar jet​


Top Democrats in the US Senate are pushing for a vote on the floor of the chamber censuring Donald Trump’s reported plan to accept a $400m luxury jet from the royal family of Qatar for use as Air Force One and later as a fixture in the Trump’s personal presidential library.

Four Democratic members of the Senate foreign relations committee said on Monday that they would press for a vote later this week. They said that elected officials, including the president, were not allowed to accept large gifts from foreign governments unless authorized to do so by Congress.


Cory Booker from New Jersey, Brian Schatz from Hawaii, Chris Coons from Delaware and Chris Murphy from Connecticut cast the reported gift of the Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet as a clear conflict of interest and a serious threat to national security.

“Air Force Once is more than just a plane – it’s a symbol of the presidency and of the United States itself,” the senators said in a joint statement. “No one should use public service for personal gain through foreign gifts.”
How is this not illegal?
 

Federally funded stay at home parents or Relatives. IE eliminate child tax credit and use that money to fund monthly Vouchers to child caregivers....expand child caregivers to include Parent or Relative and then one parent or relative could get a federally funded payment from the govt each month to stay at home with their kid.

Talk about the EXACT definition of Nanny State

Republicans are exploring ideas to incentivize one parent to ditch work and stay at home with the kids

The White House is working to adopt policies to allow Americans to have more babies, even as it cuts back on federally funded day care.

That’s because they want a stronger family unit, which they argue comes from one parent staying home.

White House staffers have discussed several options for encouraging parents to stay home with their children, three people who have been part of the discussions told The New York Times.

Ideas being discussed include

giving families more money for each child they have
removing federal tax credits for day care
opening up federal lands for home construction

Advocates argue that if families can spend less on housing, more of them will be able to live on a single income.

For instance, Indiana Republican Senator Jim Banks recently introduced a bill that would, in effect, pay stay-at-home parents.

Republicans have also suggested that the child tax credit be expanded partly by removing tax breaks intended for working parents to pay for day care.

Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley has suggested expanding the child tax credit to $5,000 per child in the hope that the additional money would allow parents to work less. During last year's presidential campaign, Vice President JD Vance also supported a $5,000 child tax credit. While the measure has bipartisan support, most Democrats also back subsidies for day care.


Even as the White House pushes a conservative social agenda promoting traditional marriage and gender roles, studies are unclear whether a child does better at a day care or at home with a parent.

This comes as many American families need two incomes to survive. Nearly 65 percent of mothers in two-parent households with at least one child under the age of 18 work outside the home, a figure which has increased significantly over the course of the past half-century. Similarly, child care costs have also increased, with an average cost of $11,000 per child per year as of 2023. Families in many larger cities pay more than double that.


Conservatives argue that they’re not pushing mothers to leave the workforce, simply giving them a choice to work less if they want to do so. They note that a Gallup poll in March found that 60 percent of American women say that they would prefer to work part-time or stay at home. Thirty-seven percent of men said the same.

“President Trump believes parents know how to best raise their children, and this administration is pursuing policies that empower parents with the flexibility to make the best choices for their kids while lowering child care costs,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers told The Times.

Conservatives generally don’t say which parent could decide to remain at home. However, more than 80 percent of stay-at-home parents are women.

Hawley told The Times that the effort is “not just about increasing the total number of children.”


“It is increasing the number of families, mothers, and fathers, and the ability of the family to spend time together,” he added.
 

Federally funded stay at home parents or Relatives. IE eliminate child tax credit and use that money to fund monthly Vouchers to child caregivers....expand child caregivers to include Parent or Relative and then one parent or relative could get a federally funded payment from the govt each month to stay at home with their kid.

Talk about the EXACT definition of Nanny State

Republicans are exploring ideas to incentivize one parent to ditch work and stay at home with the kids

The White House is working to adopt policies to allow Americans to have more babies, even as it cuts back on federally funded day care.

That’s because they want a stronger family unit, which they argue comes from one parent staying home.

White House staffers have discussed several options for encouraging parents to stay home with their children, three people who have been part of the discussions told The New York Times.

Ideas being discussed include

giving families more money for each child they have
removing federal tax credits for day care
opening up federal lands for home construction

Advocates argue that if families can spend less on housing, more of them will be able to live on a single income.

For instance, Indiana Republican Senator Jim Banks recently introduced a bill that would, in effect, pay stay-at-home parents.

Republicans have also suggested that the child tax credit be expanded partly by removing tax breaks intended for working parents to pay for day care.

Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley has suggested expanding the child tax credit to $5,000 per child in the hope that the additional money would allow parents to work less. During last year's presidential campaign, Vice President JD Vance also supported a $5,000 child tax credit. While the measure has bipartisan support, most Democrats also back subsidies for day care.


Even as the White House pushes a conservative social agenda promoting traditional marriage and gender roles, studies are unclear whether a child does better at a day care or at home with a parent.

This comes as many American families need two incomes to survive. Nearly 65 percent of mothers in two-parent households with at least one child under the age of 18 work outside the home, a figure which has increased significantly over the course of the past half-century. Similarly, child care costs have also increased, with an average cost of $11,000 per child per year as of 2023. Families in many larger cities pay more than double that.


Conservatives argue that they’re not pushing mothers to leave the workforce, simply giving them a choice to work less if they want to do so. They note that a Gallup poll in March found that 60 percent of American women say that they would prefer to work part-time or stay at home. Thirty-seven percent of men said the same.

“President Trump believes parents know how to best raise their children, and this administration is pursuing policies that empower parents with the flexibility to make the best choices for their kids while lowering child care costs,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers told The Times.

Conservatives generally don’t say which parent could decide to remain at home. However, more than 80 percent of stay-at-home parents are women.

Hawley told The Times that the effort is “not just about increasing the total number of children.”


“It is increasing the number of families, mothers, and fathers, and the ability of the family to spend time together,” he added.
There are no actual conservatives left in the Republican Party. They are all big government, with simply different spending priorities than the Big Government Democrats. Which means we're screwed. We're on a death spiral and there is no way out because it doesn't matter who is in power, they are simply going to throw money down a different money hole.
 
How is this not illegal?
Literally Unconstitutional


REPORTER: What do you say to people who view that luxury jet as a personal gift to you?

TRUMP: You're ABC fake news, right? Let me tell you -- you should be embarrassed asking that question. They're giving us a free jet ... when they give you a putt, you pick it up and you walk to the next hole

 


"The White House confirmed on Sunday that Qatar had offered to donate a plane to the Department of Defense,"
Trump said Monday that the plane isn't a gift to him, but to the Department of Defense. He added that it will be decommissioned after his term for his presidential library, and that he will not use it after leaving office.

Richard Briffault, a Columbia Law School professor who specializes in government ethics, says that distinction doesn't matter: If the plane goes to Trump's presidential library after he leaves office, "then it's not really a gift to the United States at all" OR the Dept of Defense.

Briffault says accepting the plane would constitute a personal gift and a "pretty textbook case of a violation of the Emoluments Clause."
 
Trump said Monday that the plane isn't a gift to him, but to the Department of Defense. He added that it will be decommissioned after his term for his presidential library, and that he will not use it after leaving office.

Richard Briffault, a Columbia Law School professor who specializes in government ethics, says that distinction doesn't matter: If the plane goes to Trump's presidential library after he leaves office, "then it's not really a gift to the United States at all" OR the Dept of Defense.

Briffault says accepting the plane would constitute a personal gift and a "pretty textbook case of a violation of the Emoluments Clause."
Sounds like he can make the case when it happens. The presidential libraries are owned by the american people so I'm not sure how it's exactly a personal gift.
 
Sounds like he can make the case when it happens. The presidential libraries are owned by the american people so I'm not sure how it's exactly a personal gift.
they are not owned by the American People. However, they Are Staffed and Maintained by people funded by the American Tax Payer

Who pays for presidential libraries?​

According to the National Archives, presidential libraries are funded via "private or non-federal funds donated to non-profit organizations typically established by the former president for the express purpose of building a presidential library and supporting its programs." On occasion, state and/or local governments, or university partners, will kick in some money for the construction and development of the library itself.


Once it's completed, the library is maintained by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) through its congressionally appropriated operating budget, which is overseen by the Federal Government
 
There are no actual conservatives left in the Republican Party. They are all big government, with simply different spending priorities than the Big Government Democrats. Which means we're screwed. We're on a death spiral and there is no way out because it doesn't matter who is in power, they are simply going to throw money down a different money hole.

House GOP unveils plan to raise debt limit by $4 trillion

House Republicans are moving forward with plans to raise the nation’s debt ceiling by $4 trillion as part of a larger plan to advance President Trump’s tax agenda.

The proposal, which was included in legislative text unveiled by the House Ways and Means Committee on Monday, is in line with House instructions outlined in a blueprint adopted by congressional Republicans last month that kicked off the process by which the party is using to enact Trump’s tax priorities.


Including the debt ceiling in the broader bill will allow Republicans to avoid Democratic demands for concessions in exchange for their votes to raise the debt limit. But tacking debt limit action onto the same vehicle they’re using for Trump’s tax plans could also put a tight time crunch on Republicans to pass the sweeping tax bill.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is already calling on Congress to raise or suspend the debt ceiling by July to keep the federal government from defaulting on its more than $36 trillion debt.

In a letter to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Friday, Bessent said there is “reasonable probability” that the government’s “cash and extraordinary measures will be exhausted in August while Congress is scheduled to be in recess.”

There’s also a key difference in how both GOP-led chambers plan to address the debt limit in instructions for the budget framework Republicans adopted last month. While the House’s plans call for raising the debt limit by $4 trillion, the Senate’s instructions detail a $5 trillion increase to the debt ceiling.

Some Senate Republicans have argued the higher proposed figure would stave off the threat of default through the coming midterm elections. But not all Republicans were happy with the $5 trillion amount.


The debt ceiling has already increased two times under President Donald Trump, but the Trump administration also tinkered with the budget and the debt ceiling in other ways throughout its four years. When Trump was sworn into office in January 2017, the national debt stood at $19.9 trillion. By November 2020, the debt had increased to over $27 trillion.

Under Trump the debt ceiling increased:

  • by $1.7 trillion to $19.8 trillion (de facto) in March 2017,
  • by $2.2 trillion to $22 trillion in March 2019.
  • Proposed $4 trillion to $36 Trillion in 2025
Trump suspended the debt ceiling in August 2019, through July 2021. At the time of the 2020 election, the national debt stood at over $27 trillion, the fastest rate of increase of the national debt of any modern president.
 
they are not owned by the American People. However, they Are Staffed and Maintained by people funded by the American Tax Payer

Who pays for presidential libraries?​

According to the National Archives, presidential libraries are funded via "private or non-federal funds donated to non-profit organizations typically established by the former president for the express purpose of building a presidential library and supporting its programs." On occasion, state and/or local governments, or university partners, will kick in some money for the construction and development of the library itself.


Once it's completed, the library is maintained by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) through its congressionally appropriated operating budget, which is overseen by the Federal Government

The Presidential Library System​

Presidential Libraries are archives and museums, bringing together the documents and artifacts of a President and his administration and presenting them to the public for study and discussion without regard for political considerations or affiliations. Presidential Libraries and Museums, like their holdings, belong to the American people.
 
Back
Top