Open link in next tab
US Congress avoids government shutdown in last-minute deal
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976
Lawmakers pass a bill to keep the government funded for 45 days, but with no aid for Ukraine.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976
Lawmakers pass a bill to keep the government funded for 45 days, but with no aid for Ukraine.
By 45 days from now, the cult leader may actually be in prison if he keeps doing things like handling firearms while under federal indictment.
Just handling it isn't a problem. Trying to BUY one and entering false data on the ATF form would be. Accepting a gun from someone who did a straw purchase would also be a problem.
I heard Harry Litman explain the super technical legal details about this.
Technically, the law says that Trump is not allowed to receive a firearm which has ever crossed state lines (i.e., was not manufactured in and never left the state). I assume that "state line" thing is necessary for this to be a federal law.
While your two examples (buy/lie or accept from a straw purchaser) would also be illegal, the act he is photographed in may be technically illegal. "Receive" raises the real question. The law doesn't say "purchase." It doesn't say "take ownership of." It says "receive."
Holding it in a store isn't the same as taking posession of it.
https://thelawdictionary.org/receive/
"To acquire or get something. Someone can receive an item such as a letter or a gift or can receive something non-tangible such as a word of encouragement or praise."
He didn't acquire or get the gun, he held it for a photo op.
There is no amount of shenanigans that will land him in jail before trial, and maybe even after. Dude was charged with trying to overthrow the government, and he got released on bail.
The POS Republicans also made sure this bill included a full defunding of any support for Ukraine, because all conservatives are worthless trash.
I believe it's no new funding, not suspension of existing funding, but I could be wrong about that.
Basically the same thing, since past funding (not really funding per se, since it's not real money for the most part, just military weapons and vehicles we already had) was already given to them.
"Congress on Saturday passed a short-term funding bill to avoid a government shutdown mere hours before the deadline and after lawmakers dropped additional support for Ukraine from the bill.
The White House in August asked Congress for an additional $24 billion in additional military and economic aid to Ukraine. But even in the Senate, where Ukraine enjoys broad bipartisan support, appropriators scaled that back to $6 billion.
That amount included $1.5 billion in replenishment funds to backfill U.S. stocks and another $1.5 billion for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which allows the Pentagon to place contracts for defense manufacturers to build weapons systems for Kyiv over the longer-term.
But even an extra $6 billion for Ukraine proved to be too high a bar for McCarthy. While a strong, bipartisan majority of the House still supports Ukraine aid, roughly half the House Republican caucus now opposes it.
House Republican leaders had to strip a separate $300 million in Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative funding from the defense spending bill on Thursday in order to pass that legislation largely along party lines. The House then voted 311-117 to send that $300 million in Ukraine funding separately to the Senate. Dozens more Republicans who had previously voted to preserve that funding in July reversed course and voted against it on Thursday."
Kicking the can down the road so we can go through this again in November is not a last-minute deal, it's an emergency measure.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
But in a dramatic turnaround on Saturday afternoon, House Republicans scrambled to pass a temporary funding measure that would keep the government open for 45 more days and make no major concessions on spending levels.
However, with a majority of lawmakers keen to avert a shutdown, one of the faction's key demands - no more US funding for Ukraine's defence against its invasion by Russia - is reflected in the bill.
Speaker Kevin McCarthy had been extremely reluctant to rely on Democratic votes to pass the House's bill until the last minute, given this would anger these hard-line conservative members of his party.
They - and Republicans who also support more Ukraine money - will keep pressing for more funding, but officials in President Joe Biden's administration have warned that, in the short term, there could be disruption to the Ukrainian war effort.
As House Democrats complained that they were unable to read Republicans' latest offer before voting on it, one - Jamaal Bowman of New York - appeared to have pulled a fire alarm in one building to buy more time.
His counterpart, Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, argued his party had bailed out Republicans following "a complete and total surrender to right-wing extremists who throughout the year have tried to hijack the Congress".
The original article contains 797 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 73%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Wasn't this the deal that they refused to let anyone read before voting on it?
If so, it might be even worse than the shutdown would have been for all we know about the fascist party 🤬
Haven’t they done it for the past 5 years or so? I think I heard it the other day. It’s always postponing with no end in sight.