US Politics: #Musky DeSaster

[Mindwalker]

9 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Saw that far-right leader Stewart Rhodes was sentenced to 18 years for January 6 today. Couldn't help wonder whether the next Republican president will be enough of a nutjob to pardon him shortly after taking office.

Most definitely. And if, against all odds, 45 ended up in jail, the next Republican president would pardon him, too. For the sake of the office, and healing, yadda yadda... Unless it's himself, then it would be Witch Hunt etc.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

16 hours ago, Mindwalker said:

I'm sure someone is very close to moving towards inching closer to ponder an indictment, for something or other, any month or year now.

To be fair, Jack Smith seems to be operating quite differently than MG.

[DMC]

Politico has a succinct rundown of the debt ceiling deal as it stands now:

Quote

ON SPENDING CAPS: The two sides appear to be in agreement on raising the debt ceiling for two years (through the 2024 election) and essentially capping discretionary spending over that time frame for everything except the Pentagon and veterans programs.

Where Republicans relented: GOP negotiators initially demanded that Democrats reduce spending on non-defense programs to FY 2022 levels. But they’ve now agreed to pare back those expectations and meet the White House closer to (but below) its own offer of freezing spending at FY 2023 levels.

Where Democrats relented: Because the deal will reduce non-defense discretionary spending below the FY 2023 level, Republicans can say that they secured spending cuts. But the inchoate agreement will also include accounting maneuvers to allow Democrats to shift funds from other places, meaning that the cuts are almost a wash. More details from NYT’s Jim Tankersley and Catie Edmondson

Defense spending, meanwhile, will see a small increase, matching President JOE BIDEN’s proposed 2024 budget in yet another concession from Republicans who were demanding a large influx of cash for the Pentagon. More from Roxana Tiron and Jennifer Jacobs at Bloomberg

ON THE IRS CLAWBACKS: The still-being-ironed-out framework would also claw back $10 billion of Democrats’ $80 billion IRS funding infusion, a nod to GOP demands to rescind that money altogether. Part of that $10 billion, however, will be moved to other discretionary programs, helping Democrats avoid the steeper non-discretionary cuts demanded by the right. We’re told part of this matter is still under discussion; WaPo has more deets.

Disagreements on work requirements and permitting reform still have to hashed out, but if this is the general framework of the deal - granted a very big if - it's actually a far better deal for the Dems than the agreement Obama reached in 2011. 

That makes sense in part - the GOP House had a significantly stronger majority in 2011 than they do today.  But OTOH, the electorate is blaming Biden and not the GOP far more than in 2011 for the impasse, when they primarily blamed the GOP and not Obama.

Anyway, the right is gonna blow a gasket if something like this is the deal, and much of the left probably isn't gonna vote for it either.  Even Jared Golden - the most conservative member of the House Dem caucus - indicated he might vote against it due to the IRS rescissions.  So, again, big if on if this actually makes it to the finish line.

But if something close to it does, it plainly vindicates Biden/Dem leadership's decision not to pursue a unilateral raise/abolishment of the debt ceiling in Biden's first two years at the potential expense of legislative priorities.

Another clear effect of a deal of this type is McCarthy's job security as Speaker will officially move into Billy Martin/George Steinbrenner in the 80s territory.  I'd expect the HFC to force a no-confidence vote very quickly if such a deal is struck.

[Maithanet]

I have been hearing these reports, and it is really hard for me to believe that the Republicans are going to be so reasonable about achieving a small win and moving on.  That has been...not their MO this past decade.  I'm extremely skeptical that the Freedom Caucus is going to sign on to this.  And if McCarthy passes something like this with a mix of Republican and Democratic votes, then there's every reason to assume that the FC will vote him out. 

I think that it is much more likely that the Republicans are getting close to the deal, but it will get sabotaged one way or another before it actually passes.  Frankly I'll be a bit surprised if a deal is made before the economy feels at least some pain/shocks first. 

Hope I'm wrong.  I don't love this deal, but it's far from a poison pill.  Helluva lot better than an economic meltdown. 

[DMC]

12 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I'm extremely skeptical that the Freedom Caucus is going to sign on to this.

I don't think there's any chance the HFC signs on to this.  But, ya know, there are 177 other members of the House Republican Conference.  This deal clearly seems designed for the 290 members of the House that aren't aligned with either the HRC nor the CPC.  Even then, it's gonna be tough for McCarthy to get a majority of his conference to vote for a final bill that looks like this.

[Spockydog]

Can someone explain to me what this debt ceiling thingy is all about. What is it supposed to achieve? And why Americans have to put up with this nonsense every single year. 

Edited May 26 by Spockydog

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Can someone explain to me what this debt ceiling is all about. What is it supposed to achieve? And why Americans have to put up with this nonsense every single year. 

The legislative history of the debt ceiling in the US begins in 1917 during WWI.  Before then, the US had no debt ceiling - like most industrialized democracies.  Even then, the debt ceiling for the most part was not used as a political football for a very long time.  In 1979, Dick Gephardt instituted the Gephardt Rule, which deemed the debt ceiling would automatically be raised every time a budget was passed. 

This stood until the 1995 debt ceiling crisis following the 1994 Republican takeover, wherein Gingrich tied the debt ceiling to funding the government and the 1995-6 government shutdown ensued.

Still, the debt ceiling did not reach this type of brinkmanship until 2011 and 2013 - when there was a Democratic president and a GOP House.  Since then, you can count on the radical GOP to weaponize the raising of the debt ceiling in an insane game of chicken -- when there's a Democratic president.  When there's a Republican president, they raise it without incidence.

To directly answer your question, it doesn't achieve anything other than the GOP putting US credit - and subsequently the world economy - at risk in exchange for spending concessions.

[horangi]

13 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Can someone explain to me what this debt ceiling thingy is all about. What is it supposed to achieve? And why Americans have to put up with this nonsense every single year. 

Basically, the annual budget is the US credit card.  In typical American fashion, we decided that instead of putting a credit limit block on that credit card, we instead put a limit on how much of the credit card bill we are willing to pay back.  As for why, it gives a first-born son to the political right to execute if they feel the center has overstepped (e.g. Democrat Administration = True).

As for the current situation, I hope the administration is doing its best to communicate the near-deal.  Having the HFC torpedo it should shift the blame game, as small a consolation as it is. 

ETA: ... and DMC beat me to it with actual history.

Edited May 26 by horangi

[horangi]

DP

Edited May 26 by horangi

[DMC]

Best tour guide ever.

 

[DMC]

So Ken Paxton's likely impeachment trial promises to be one of the weirdest ones in American history.  Particularly with this wrinkle:

Quote

One is his wife, Angela, a two-term state senator who could be in the awkward position of voting on her husband’s political future. It’s unclear whether she would or should participate in the Senate trial, where the 31 members make margins tight.

In a twist, Paxton’s impeachment deals with an extramarital affair he acknowledged to members of his staff years earlier. The impeachment charges include bribery for one of Paxton’s donors, Austin real estate developer Nate Paul, allegedly employing the woman with whom he had the affair in exchange for legal help.

 

[Raja]

I wasn't prepared for the turns that quote took

[Tywin et al.]

5 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Can someone explain to me what this debt ceiling thingy is all about. What is it supposed to achieve? And why Americans have to put up with this nonsense every single year. 

Don't listen to the fancy nerd talk. This is what the debt ceiling is:

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

On 5/25/2023 at 4:51 PM, Mindwalker said:

Also, Musk is in an official campaign video. Which is so bad it's kind of hilarious. But anyway, you could almost think he was running for VP rather than being his sponsor/ donor/ daddy/ whatever.

ETA: It may not be an official video, but one made by sympathizers. Will check tomorrow, I'm tired.

Having watched it really seemed to me as he weirdly presenting Elon as a threat.

Like he kept getting shown when something bad was discussed just laughing.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

So George Clooney will not longer drive Tesla?

[Zorral]

TX votes to impeach Paxton - at least to hold a trial.  But in the meantime he's out of office.

https://apnews.com/article/texas-attorney-general-paxton-impeachment-d0fa9114868adca63d55a21a53765c45

 

[Martell Spy]

Are the Anti-Trump GOP Forces Starting to Implode?
A mission-control breakdown for DeSantis and smooth launch for Scott bode ill for those hoping to thwart the former president.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/05/26/are-the-anti-trump-gop-forces-starting-to-implode-00098934

Quote

 

Such potential is what will make Scott appealing to victory-hungry Republicans. They’re also the sort of party regulars DeSantis will ultimately need as part of any coalition he forms to stop Trump. If such voters migrate to Scott, that task gets harder.

While Thune’s appearance, along with the veritable battalion of former Bush and Romney strategists working for Scott, signaled establishment acceptability, Ellison demonstrated why coalescence could prove difficult against Trump.

 

 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

A mission-control breakdown for DeSantis

This really makes me want to make a Ground Control to Major Ron joke.

[Zorral]

23 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Are the Anti-Trump GOP Forces Starting to Implode?

Well, the governor of ND has thrown his hat into the ring for the nomination.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/05/26/republican-presidential-primary-burgum-north-dakota/

Totally against everything that matters to me.  And yet, people used to inquire why I was so HOT to get the hell out of the hell that is North Dakota than and now.

[Larry of the Lawn]

33 minutes ago, DMC said:

This really makes me want to make a Ground Control to Major Ron joke.

this is ground control to major ron

you've really banned the word gay

and the papers want to know what boots you we-ear

And it's time to laugh like normal if you dare