Walkaway
- Thread starter Diogenes
- Start date
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
When she says "I wish they (the Republicans) would have come to the table about this..." what she really means is, The Republicans refused to cave in to all our demands so we threw a tantrum, and I hope people suffer a lot so we can blame the Republicans for it.
Last edited:
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Pelosi caused this mess by passing Obamacare. Now she's blaming Republicans for doing EXACTLY what Obamacare--as written and passed by Democrats--was supposed to do. The subsidies were 'supposed' to be temporary. The Democrats almost certainly knew at the time they'd eventually have to be made permanent.
What's got the Democrats pissed is the Republicans are refusing to make the "temporary" subsidies they put in Obamacare permanent. That is 150% the Democrat's fault and Nancy Pelosi is the single more obvious culprit and ringleader for that fuck up, hands down.
If you're wondering what the SNAP TRO has to do with anything, I'll explain.
It seems obvious to me that Democrats have put together a strategy, as usual, to get what they couldn't win a election on.
This is just the latest salvo in their lawfare campaign.
They shut the government down, and now they're going to get a TRO that makes them look like they are the saviors who fed the poor; if Trump's
DOJ appeals it, they'll use that against the GOP in the midterms next week.
As an Obama pick (confirmed unanimously in 2014, but with that administration's fingerprints all over the vetting), Talwani's built a docket that's heavy on APA scrutiny and entitlements protection.
Just look up her track record: She greenlit a TRO against Trump's parole curbs in May, calling them "arbitrary and capricious" and slamming the admin for manufacturing crises that'd leave hundreds of thousands jobless and undocumented overnight.
Then in July, she blocked those Medicaid cuts targeting Planned Parenthood affiliates, ruling the funding squeeze was a targeted hit disguised as fiscal prudence—echoing your point on weaponized bureaucracy.
Fast-forward to yesterday's SNAP hearing: She grillid DOJ lawyers on why a shutdown isn't the "emergency" Congress baked into that $6B contingency fund, and quipping, "If you don't have money, you tighten your belt, but not by starving 42 million families".
Word from the courthouse is she's eyeing a ruling tilting plaintiffs' way, potentially forcing USDA's hand on those funds before November 1.
If she drops the hammer, and she almost certainly will, it's exhibit A for my Obama-era "firewall" strategy: lifetime bench appointments as insurance against the GOP funding overhauls that threaten the Democrat's taxpayer funding system.
If the Democrats get away with it, they can claim they "saved SNAP", and their base will believe it.
Savvy?
I believe this has been in the planning stages since November
It's a masterful plan.
Remember Obama's 2015 Executive Order (EO) on "Strengthening the SES"?
It wasn't billed as a bulwark against future Republican efforts to implement policiers, but it was.
Obama called it "reform", and the leftist media didn't challenge his spin.
He claimed it was all about better pay for federal government managers (up to 7.5%), mobility rotations (they'd get to move from one agency Department to another if things got hot), and a President's Management Council (PMC) subcommittee to "modernize" executive talent.
But peel back the progressive propaganda, and here's what happened: With the stroke of his pem, Barack Hussein swelled the unelected bosses' ranks by ~70%.
All of those he promoted were Obama's form that moment on, forever grateful to their benefactor.
Smart move, locking in a loyal cadre of committed careerists with 10-12 year tenures, (per OPM data).
Obama knew his party might need "insurance" against a Republican victory, so he assiduously embedded loyal Democrats who could covertly slow-walk deregulation, stall probes into dirty Democrats, or amplify "resistance" networks, and they could not be dislodged easily.
Obama got away with using taxpayer dollars to reward loyalty to party over obeisance to future Republican elected officials and their political appointees. That is the function of the Swamp.
Fast-forward, and it's why Trump's Schedule F push (to reclassify 50K federal policy wonks as at-will workers) hit such fierce blowback; unions sued, Democrats howled, and agencies that were supposed to carry out the Administrations' policies dragged their feet like they owned the place - and in a sense, they did.
Judicially, it was the same 4D chess: Obama's 329 confirmations (diverse in physical appearance, but blue-leaning in reality) faced GOP filibusters and blue slips as payback for Bush-era blocks, but the Democrat's exercise of the "nuclear option" in 2013 let him flood benches before the 2014 midterms flipped the Senate red.
No overt "anti-GOP" manifesto was ever reported on by the loyal leftist lapdog media, but the results speak for themselves.
No doubt you'll recall these events:
Judiciary hearings that (per Scholars Strategy Network) turned Trump's first term into a "minefield of delay," with nominees grilled on everything from post-bar weed to home-state blessings.
Trump's first go-round amplified it. Unelected bureaucrats slow-rolled the border wall, EPA staff leaked deregulation efforts outside the agency to weaponize opposition and Obama's DOJ holdovers fueled the Russian scam and Mueller's runaway investigation
Now, nine months in, it's a re-run.
USAID coders stonewalled DOGE audits, Treasury clerks "accidentally" routed funds to blue-state grants.
Operating in cells is what Marxists do, BTW.
Obama's "cells"? They're still humming along right now, activated via Capitol Hill leaks, NGO funding, and a central command; think about what Chuck Schumer's war room or the DNC's rapid-response pods do all day.
Social media chatter echoes it. Lefty "influencers (many of them paid) rail on DOGE as "Musk's hostile takeover," with Democrat proxies blasting it as "billionaire kleptocracy" and public- sector unions filing suits over alleged "privacy breaches". Remember that?
Why the DOGE freakout?
Simple. It's the ultimate disruptor to the embedded shadow government that Obama created and fostered. Musk's crew, those 20-something coders burrowing into ledgers, has axed $546M in contracts already, eyeing $200B more in "waste" like DEI slush funds and redundant grants.
Democrats see their fight as existential: DOGE's Treasury access (that $6T payments pipeline) could choke off USAID, improper ACA subsidies, Medicaid flows, or green pork, starving the left's patronage networks of taxpayer cash? If not look 'em up.
It's not just obstruction; it's activation.
Remember the rallies outside the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), letters demanding IG probes on "security breaches," and Schumer's filibuster threats tying shutdowns to DOGE overreach.
But DOGE ends next July 4th, and the obstructionists have done all they could to control the damage DOGE did to the Democrat gravy train so far.
They will continue to use lawfare (and Congress, if they win the midterms) to eradicate all the work DOGE did, and restore every single penny that was cut. The'll even get more taxpayer dollars, and to hell with the deficit and the debit. They'll blame Trump and the GOP fo that, and I have no doubt that their base will believe them unquestioningly.
The cell theory fits Democrats like a glove.
These aren't random events; they're coordinated and executed by the Obama/Biden alumni still dug in in the government, IMO.
It seems obvious to me that Democrats have put together a strategy, as usual, to get what they couldn't win a election on.
This is just the latest salvo in their lawfare campaign.
They shut the government down, and now they're going to get a TRO that makes them look like they are the saviors who fed the poor; if Trump's
DOJ appeals it, they'll use that against the GOP in the midterms next week.
As an Obama pick (confirmed unanimously in 2014, but with that administration's fingerprints all over the vetting), Talwani's built a docket that's heavy on APA scrutiny and entitlements protection.
Just look up her track record: She greenlit a TRO against Trump's parole curbs in May, calling them "arbitrary and capricious" and slamming the admin for manufacturing crises that'd leave hundreds of thousands jobless and undocumented overnight.
Then in July, she blocked those Medicaid cuts targeting Planned Parenthood affiliates, ruling the funding squeeze was a targeted hit disguised as fiscal prudence—echoing your point on weaponized bureaucracy.
Fast-forward to yesterday's SNAP hearing: She grillid DOJ lawyers on why a shutdown isn't the "emergency" Congress baked into that $6B contingency fund, and quipping, "If you don't have money, you tighten your belt, but not by starving 42 million families".
Word from the courthouse is she's eyeing a ruling tilting plaintiffs' way, potentially forcing USDA's hand on those funds before November 1.
If she drops the hammer, and she almost certainly will, it's exhibit A for my Obama-era "firewall" strategy: lifetime bench appointments as insurance against the GOP funding overhauls that threaten the Democrat's taxpayer funding system.
If the Democrats get away with it, they can claim they "saved SNAP", and their base will believe it.
Savvy?
I believe this has been in the planning stages since November
It's a masterful plan.
Remember Obama's 2015 Executive Order (EO) on "Strengthening the SES"?
It wasn't billed as a bulwark against future Republican efforts to implement policiers, but it was.
Obama called it "reform", and the leftist media didn't challenge his spin.
He claimed it was all about better pay for federal government managers (up to 7.5%), mobility rotations (they'd get to move from one agency Department to another if things got hot), and a President's Management Council (PMC) subcommittee to "modernize" executive talent.
But peel back the progressive propaganda, and here's what happened: With the stroke of his pem, Barack Hussein swelled the unelected bosses' ranks by ~70%.
All of those he promoted were Obama's form that moment on, forever grateful to their benefactor.
Smart move, locking in a loyal cadre of committed careerists with 10-12 year tenures, (per OPM data).
Obama knew his party might need "insurance" against a Republican victory, so he assiduously embedded loyal Democrats who could covertly slow-walk deregulation, stall probes into dirty Democrats, or amplify "resistance" networks, and they could not be dislodged easily.
Obama got away with using taxpayer dollars to reward loyalty to party over obeisance to future Republican elected officials and their political appointees. That is the function of the Swamp.
Fast-forward, and it's why Trump's Schedule F push (to reclassify 50K federal policy wonks as at-will workers) hit such fierce blowback; unions sued, Democrats howled, and agencies that were supposed to carry out the Administrations' policies dragged their feet like they owned the place - and in a sense, they did.
Judicially, it was the same 4D chess: Obama's 329 confirmations (diverse in physical appearance, but blue-leaning in reality) faced GOP filibusters and blue slips as payback for Bush-era blocks, but the Democrat's exercise of the "nuclear option" in 2013 let him flood benches before the 2014 midterms flipped the Senate red.
No overt "anti-GOP" manifesto was ever reported on by the loyal leftist lapdog media, but the results speak for themselves.
No doubt you'll recall these events:
Judiciary hearings that (per Scholars Strategy Network) turned Trump's first term into a "minefield of delay," with nominees grilled on everything from post-bar weed to home-state blessings.
Trump's first go-round amplified it. Unelected bureaucrats slow-rolled the border wall, EPA staff leaked deregulation efforts outside the agency to weaponize opposition and Obama's DOJ holdovers fueled the Russian scam and Mueller's runaway investigation
Now, nine months in, it's a re-run.
USAID coders stonewalled DOGE audits, Treasury clerks "accidentally" routed funds to blue-state grants.
Operating in cells is what Marxists do, BTW.
Obama's "cells"? They're still humming along right now, activated via Capitol Hill leaks, NGO funding, and a central command; think about what Chuck Schumer's war room or the DNC's rapid-response pods do all day.
Social media chatter echoes it. Lefty "influencers (many of them paid) rail on DOGE as "Musk's hostile takeover," with Democrat proxies blasting it as "billionaire kleptocracy" and public- sector unions filing suits over alleged "privacy breaches". Remember that?
Why the DOGE freakout?
Simple. It's the ultimate disruptor to the embedded shadow government that Obama created and fostered. Musk's crew, those 20-something coders burrowing into ledgers, has axed $546M in contracts already, eyeing $200B more in "waste" like DEI slush funds and redundant grants.
Democrats see their fight as existential: DOGE's Treasury access (that $6T payments pipeline) could choke off USAID, improper ACA subsidies, Medicaid flows, or green pork, starving the left's patronage networks of taxpayer cash? If not look 'em up.
It's not just obstruction; it's activation.
Remember the rallies outside the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), letters demanding IG probes on "security breaches," and Schumer's filibuster threats tying shutdowns to DOGE overreach.
But DOGE ends next July 4th, and the obstructionists have done all they could to control the damage DOGE did to the Democrat gravy train so far.
They will continue to use lawfare (and Congress, if they win the midterms) to eradicate all the work DOGE did, and restore every single penny that was cut. The'll even get more taxpayer dollars, and to hell with the deficit and the debit. They'll blame Trump and the GOP fo that, and I have no doubt that their base will believe them unquestioningly.
The cell theory fits Democrats like a glove.
These aren't random events; they're coordinated and executed by the Obama/Biden alumni still dug in in the government, IMO.