Trump "Considering" Vetoing the Budget

This sounds like hot gas. He ought to veto it, but honestly he ought to have played a leadership role in this from the beginning, laying down the line, for example, that he would not sign any budget that didn't have majority support from the Freedom Caucus.

Paul Ryan is, we've all now learned, a cuck and not at all the fiscal conservative he posed as for years; he wants to cut entitlements, and that's great, but he doesn't want to cut much else, certainly none of the things liberals want, like Planned Parenthood.

When Trump sits out of these, and does not elevate a counterweight to Ryan (like the Freedom Caucus) to push back against his cuckery, we get Ryan making deals with the Democrats and of course no funding for any wall.

It's a bit too late for Trump to start bluffing about a veto everyone knows he doesn't have the stones to carry through with.

The time to take an interest was a month ago.

The about-face comes a day after the White House had said Trump would sign the legislation despite his misgivings. The government will shut down at 12:01 a.m. Saturday if Trump does not sign a funding bill into law.

In a tweet, Trump said he is "considering a VETO" because the proposal does not extend protections for hundreds of thousands of young undocumented immigrants or fully fund his proposed border wall.

...

A White House official who declined to be named told CNBC that Trump was "frustrated" by what he deems Democrats' refusal to reach a deal on shielding the young immigrants. An official emphasized that Trump only said he was "considering" a veto.

...

While Trump cheered the military funding levels, he was apparently irked by the level of border security funding. The legislation would boost border enforcement funds by about $1.6 billion, to go toward surveillance technology and fencing along the border with Mexico. While Republicans have said the bill funds Trump's "wall," the money goes to fencing structures similar to ones that already exist.

Also known as "not walls."

Freedom Caucus member Jim Jordan encouraged Trump to veto the bill.

You know, a long time ago, the exact same people who wound up as NeverTrump told me that we couldn't have a crazyperson from the Freedom Caucus as Speaker of the House. First, it was imperative that we keep John Boehner, the Irreplaceable Man. Then, they all squealed with delight as liberal squish Paul Ryan agreed to take the job.

At every turn they slammed their hands on to their high-chairs when it was suggested an actual conservative be elected to be Speaker of the House.

I can't help noticing that those who pose as Super-Duper TruCons are always actually fighting to keep power in the hands of moderates or liberals.

posted by Ace of Spades at 12:13 PM

| Access Comments