President Trump Signs HR 244 – The Continuing Spending Resolution – Into Law…

Earlier today President Donald Trump signed HR244 into law.  The provisional spending bill that funds government through September 30th, the end of fiscal year 2017.

There has been a great deal of anxiety amid punditry about the spending outline itself, and the spending priorities as determined by both houses of congress.  Some of the criticism is warranted, most is not.

The basic principle the entire professional political class seem to overlook is the reasoning for the CR itself.  Congress has been unable to fulfill its budgetary obligation since 2007.

In fact, the last federal budget (fiscal year ’08) was signed into law in September of 2007.  By the conclusion of this CR it will have been an entire decade without a federal budget.

Perspective: ♦ Over half of all elected federal politicians have never held elected office in any year with a federal budget in place.  ♦ Almost two-thirds of Republicans in congress have never known a federal budget for a single day in office.

THAT FACT should be the target of the ire from all Americans, particularly conservatives.  However, hypocritically, it is not.

For some reason ankle-biters, antagonists, and crony constitutional punditry amid the various CONservative outlets, choose instead to focus their criticism toward the first president in our lifetime to actually deliver on conservative policy, conservative values and expressed policy objectives/outcomes that benefit all common sense Americans.

A pox belongs on the hypocritical houses, columns, shows, radio broadcasts and panel segments of current critics who watched it all unfold.  My cold anger does not provide room for me to give any f**ks toward such inane and disingenuously hypocritical positions.  Sorry for cussing, but sheeesh.

In short, stuff it – there’s actual work to be done.

Having said that, My President rightly qualifies his signature today and delivers congressional notification of how the 2,000 page omnibus spending bill will be interpreted:

Today I have signed into law H.R. 244, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, which authorizes appropriations that fund the operation of the Federal Government through September 30, 2017.

Certain provisions of this bill (e.g., Division C, sections 8049, 8058, 8077, 8081, and 8116; Division J, under the heading “Contribution for International Peacekeeping Activities”) would, in certain circumstances, unconstitutionally limit my ability to modify the command and control of military personnel and materiel or unconstitutionally vest final decision-making authority in my military advisers.  Further, Division B, section 527; Division C, section 8101; and Division F, section 517 each restrict the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to the United States; Division C, section 8103 restricts the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to foreign countries and does not include an exception for when a court might order the release of a detainee to certain countries.  I will treat these, and similar provisions, consistently with my constitutional authority as Commander in Chief.

Certain provisions (e.g., Division C, sections 8040, 8075, 8114, 9005, 9011, 9014, and under the headings “Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide,” “Afghanistan Security Forces Fund,” “Counter-ISIL Train and Equip Fund,” and “Joint Improvised Threat Defeat Fund”) require advance notice to the Congress before the President may direct certain military actions or provide certain forms of military assistance.  In approving this bill, I wish to reiterate the longstanding understanding of the executive branch that these types of provisions encompass only military actions for which providing advance notice is feasible and consistent with my constitutional authority and duty as Commander in Chief to protect national security.

Numerous provisions could, in certain circumstances, interfere with the exercise of my constitutional authorities to negotiate international agreements (e.g., Division B, sections 509, 519, 530; Division J, sections 7010(c), 7013(a), 7025(c), 7029, 7031(e)(2), 7037, 7042, 7043, 7044, 7045, 7048, 7060, 7070, and 7071), to receive ambassadors (e.g., Division J, section 7031(c)), and to recognize foreign governments (e.g., Division J, section 7070(b)(2)(A)).  My Administration will treat each of these provisions consistently with my constitutional authorities in the area of foreign relations.

Division E, section 622 prohibits the use of funds to pay the salaries and expenses for several advisory positions in the White House.  The President has well-established authority to supervise and oversee the executive branch and to obtain advice in furtherance of this supervisory authority.  The President also has the prerogative to obtain advice that will assist him in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities, not only from executive branch officials and employees outside the White House, but also from advisers within it.  Legislation that significantly impedes my ability to supervise or obtain the views of appropriate senior advisers violates the separation of powers by undermining my ability to exercise my constitutional responsibilities, including to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.  My Administration will, therefore, construe section 622 consistently with these Presidential prerogatives.

Division B, section 537 provides that the Department of Justice may not use any funds to prevent implementation of medical marijuana laws by various States and territories.  I will treat this provision consistently with my constitutional responsibility to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

Several provisions (e.g., Division C, section 10006(b); Division D, section 401; Division J, section 7041(b)(3); Division N, sections 310, 311, 402, 502(d), and 503) mandate or regulate the submission of certain executive branch information to the Congress.  I will treat these provisions in a manner consistent with my constitutional authority to withhold information that could impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative processes of the executive branch, or the performance of my constitutional duties.  In particular, Division E, section 713(1) and (2) prohibits the use of appropriations to pay the salary of any Federal officer or employee who interferes with or prohibits certain official communications between Federal employees and Members of Congress or who takes adverse action against an officer or employee because of such communications.  I will construe these provisions not to apply to any circumstances that would detract from my authority to supervise, control, and correct employees’ communications with the Congress related to their official duties, including in cases where such communications would be unlawful or could reveal confidential information protected by executive privilege.

Division C, section 8009 prohibits the use of funds to initiate a special access program unless the congressional defense committees receive 30 days’ advance notice.  The President’s authority to classify and control access to information bearing on the national security flows from the Constitution and does not depend upon a legislative grant of authority.  Although I expect to be able to provide the advance notice contemplated by section 8009 in most situations as a matter of comity, situations may arise in which I must act promptly while protecting certain extraordinarily sensitive national security information.  In these situations, I will treat these sections in a manner consistent with my constitutional authorities, including as Commander in Chief.

Several provisions (e.g., Division C, section 8134; Division J, section 7063; and Division K, section 418) prohibit the use of funds to deny an Inspector General access to agency records or documents.  I will construe these, and similar provisions, consistently with my authority to control the dissemination of information protected by executive privilege.

Several provisions prohibit the use of funds to recommend legislation to the Congress (e.g., Division A, section 716; Division C, sections 8005, 8014, 8070(a)(2), 8076; and Division H, section 210), or require recommendations of legislation to the Congress (e.g., Division C, section 8012(b), 8035(b); Division F, section 532; Division G, sections 101, 102, and a proviso under the heading “Administrative Provisions—Forest Service”; Division N, sections 605(c) and 610).  Because the Constitution gives the President the authority to recommend “such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient” (Article II, section 3), my Administration will continue to treat these, and similar provisions, as advisory and non-binding.

Numerous provisions authorize congressional committees to veto a particular use of appropriated funds (e.g., Division C, section 8058), or condition the authority of officers to spend or reallocate funds on the approval of congressional committees (e.g., Division A, sections 702, 706, and 717; Division D, sections 101(a) and 201(a); Division G, sections 403 and 409; Division K, sections 188, 222, 405 and 406).  These are impermissible forms of congressional aggrandizement in the execution of the laws other than by enactment of statutes.  My Administration will notify the relevant committees before taking the specified actions and will accord the recommendations of such committees all appropriate and serious consideration, but it will not treat spending decisions as dependent on the approval of congressional committees.

My Administration shall treat provisions that allocate benefits on the basis of race, ethnicity, and gender (e.g., Division B, under the heading “Minority Business Development”; Division C, sections 8016, 8021, 8038, and 8042; Division H, under the headings “Departmental Management Salaries and Expenses,” “School Improvement Programs,” and “Historically Black College and University Capital Financing Program Account”; Division K, under the heading “Native American Housing Block Grants”; and Division K, section 213) in a manner consistent with the requirement to afford equal protection of the laws under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment.


Allow me to clarify for the annoying gnats with an apt methaphor.

President Trump arrived at the White House as it was burning down from the prior 15 years of inherently corrupt, and in many cases absent, fiscal policy.

The national debt doubled in one single administration as hoards of special interests raided the national treasury.  Congress did squat to prevent the theft; and in many cases a solid argument can be made that they actually participated in the raiding.

Simultaneous to this arrival, the most dangerous nuclear military threat since the Cuban missile crisis was laid directly at the feet of the incoming administration, North Korea.

Through the prior four administrations (Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Obama, Obama) no concrete policy to stop the nuclear threat from growing was at the forefront of national security policy.

However, worse than not doing anything to stop it, the prior administrations’ did nothing to prepare the nation for the possibility of the worst case scenario: their inability to stop it.

The reality of this landscape is what President Trump addressed upon arrival.

With this North Korea crisis stark and looming, the first priority of President Trump has been to immediately build-up a military force so that we at least have a preventative option in the event diplomacy fails, and a worst case scenario evidences itself.

As a direct and real consequence, the military spending WAS/IS the top short-term budgetary priority for a long-term survival need.   President Trump let everyone know  national security via the military investment need was priority number one; because the reality is: the threat from North Korea is national security issue number one.

That urgent financial objective, to fund the restoration of a strong military, was met.

The rest, all other priorities, can and will be addressed in an actual budget for fiscal year 2018 that has been put forth by President Trump.

And, I’m sure, our president will go to the mattresses if needed to fight for the next level priorities to complete the policy objectives of his administration.

Remember these words: “either we have a country or we don’t”…

….Everything else, as important as each “else” might be, is details.

This entry was posted in Budget, Election 2016, Legislation, media bias, Military, Patriotism, President Trump, Terrorist Attacks, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

372 Responses to President Trump Signs HR 244 – The Continuing Spending Resolution – Into Law…

  1. NJF says:

    Great article SD.

    Another perspective.

    The other issue about the CR, is it buys him time. I think he is going to have to reveal the thievery that has been happening, and that’s going to take some time. People aren’t going to just accept something like that unless they’re spoon fed.


    Liked by 5 people

    • It’s going to take some time to put fear into the congress-critters, so they will be reasonable when it comes time for a real budget. Putting a horse’s head into their beds, for instance . . .

      Liked by 3 people

      • ladypenquin says:

        I like to think that Jeff Sessions is working on finding all the skeletons the Congress critters have hidden – won’t be too hard since we have honest men and women in Trump’s administration, and they will do their jobs right.

        Then watch the hammer fall. That’s why they didn’t want him in the WH – they’re afraid of what Presidents get to find out…

        Liked by 2 people

      • CaptainNonno says:

        Just need to make a couple of examples.

        Liked by 1 person

        • setup2100 says:

          He can make examples of anyone with 2 terms or more if he wants to. That is how you negotiate in DC. They all have skeletons from boyfriends, girlfriends, teens, dope you name it DC Criters will do it. BUT will he. Hell he still thinks RYAN and Preibus are his friends. Funny guy and his son in law in bed with Soros for a small 1 Billion loan. Think SOROS has any influence.???


    • Donald says:

      A great reform president, much like a gifted physician, will work to keep the body politic (or patient) stable, even as he actively destabilizes it. Regarding Trump, just recall: there’s not a single thing this president does that is not purposeful, deliberative and effective, even in some of these micro-steps, and micro-succeses. For example, during the primaries, did you think Trump was wasting his time in Iowa in a losing cause that had earlier given Santorum and even Obama victories in their races, and where Dems had won in recent general elections? Not at all! He won the general in Iowa going away. He knew what he was doing! Did you think–Newt Gingrich notwithstanding– that Donald Trump was wrong to criticize the Mexican-American federal judge in the Trump University litigation, by claiming that the judge’s ethnic origin would result in bias against candidate Trump because of his border wall proposal? Not at all! It was one of his best moments, as he presented the world a beautiful bit of irony in the current political climate where every peace officer that harmed a black suspect was smeared as racist for nothing more than his whiteness. Trump forced the Left to eat their own words about ‘color and discrimination!’ They actually had to say a person’s race should not, in and of itself, presume bias. Welcome to the world, libs!!
      Doubters and naysayers: enjoy your jitters or sweet envy! Donald Trump will be offered a 3rd term (” I assure you we have the votes, Mr. President!” ), but he will wisely turn it down.

      Liked by 1 person

    • SafeSpace says:

      We have three point five certain years left. Someone tell Paul Ryan, Smidge McConnell, and the wingtip crowd on K Street to please get out of our way a bit more quickly.


  2. El Torito says:

    “Keep in mind Trump voters represent only 27% of this countries eligible voters.”

    Spaulj67, could you please provide some backup of this figure? I just can’t reconcile that Trump could win the G.E. with that low a number. Thanks.

    Liked by 1 person

    • mimbler says:

      That number would come from dividing the people who vote for trump into the total number of “eligible” voters. Of the people that actually did vote he got 46.4 percent,
      (recall that there were some third party people soaking up a few votes),

      Liked by 1 person

  3. golsono says:

    And you are comparing CTH content to which alternative source ? From my African perspective, having spent years gleaning what truth is Out There on the WWWeb, including (not limited to) Cnn, Huffpo, Rtoday, Ljazeera, Tablet, Gatestone, Wnd, Canadafreepress, BB, AT, Gellar, Fox, Zerohedge, I Could go on & on… I have yet to encounter a site more accomodating to Serious Discussion. ~ BTW, I also enjoy ~ A better forum for exchange please Dumbo ?


  4. mireilleg says:

    So if I get it correctly our President signed the budget that congress put on his desk, he made some deals to prevent the shut down. But before signing it he turned around and declares all the section where the constitution gives him sole arbitrage. Well done! I think he played this really well.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. golsono says:

    Oops, WP seems to have placed my response to dumbo in a different thread ?


  6. Joe says:

    The budget battle will have to be fought someday, but not now. It will take until October to get the administration into place and Trump firmly in the saddle. Judges, including Kennedy’s replacement, need to be confirmed. Tax reform, healthcare and anything else that requires collegiality and fraternal chumship (well fed swamp critters) need to be finished.


    • Steven says:

      And there is the recent confirmation of the last secretary. It will take time for Trump Administration to sort out the messes that are departments and agencies, to put right people in right positions, and to go after the criminals who ran many of the governmental programs. By then, Trump will be in a better position to get what he wants from the Congressional Joksters.


    • SafeSpace says:

      That leaves us just a tad over three certain years. But for comparison, look at Reagan’s first term. It took nearly one full year to enact his tax reform package, and Ronald was also rowing upstream against his own party and its wingtip allies on K Street.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. WeThePeople2016 says:

    Maybe it is just me, but I was not as upset about this CR as some others were, probably because it is just that, a CR. I also knew that it was the last of Obama’s stronghold on the budget. Further, I have faith and trust in Trump that he did the best he could do with the hand that he was dealt. BTW, Rush Limbaugh knew better. He knew exactly what he was doing when he took the opportunity to jump on Trump the day the CR deal was revealed. I tuned in to hear if he would support Trump. Not a chance. Instead, Rush took the opportunity to push the narrative that Trump and the GOP folded and that Trump didn’t keep his promises. Rush knew darn well that this was a CR and that Trump’s hands were tied. He wanted, IMHO, to make Trump look bad. This is his typical passive/aggressive so-called support of Trump. Coulter is another one, but don’t get me started on her.

    Then, here comes Mick Mulvaney to kick the naysayers and the Fake Media in the teeth with the real truth as to what transpired with this deal. Sundance outlines that Trump squeezed every last drop out of the CR that he could get that was a positive for the American people. That does not surprise me. I don’t know why his so-called supporters doubted him.

    Liked by 1 person

    • R-C says:

      In my opinion, Rush Limbaugh has proven himself beyond worthless; a man whose day has long since passed behind him. I’ll never tune in again. Not to him, nor Levin, nor Savage–none of them will get my attention.

      I STAND WITH TRUMP to save our republic, and I won’t stand for the likes of self-promoting gas-bags in the nattering media class who are working against us every step of the way. I have zero time or patience for that.

      Liked by 3 people

      • singingsoul says:

        Michael Savage is worthless also. He is passive aggressive and jerks his listeners around with one day I am POTUS friend the next tearing him down.
        I do not like to be manipulated by these people and that is what they do to conservatives and P Trump loyalists. I am done with all of them maybe that is why appreciate Sundance he is consistent and is not selling books.


      • SafeSpace says:

        For the past couple of years, the only radio host worth your eartime has been Sean Hannity.


    • US says:

      I too listened in on Rush Limbaugh the day of his anti-Trump tirade on the continuing resolution. He is the proverbial ungrateful snake, for that same day Vicepresident Pence came on the program to kiss his ring. During the primaries Limbaugh came out against Trump and for Cruz every single Election Day. And don’t get me started on Mark Levin, Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, Hugh Hewitt, Rich Lowry, Dr. Krauthammer, Bill Kristol and Jonah Goldberg. Limbaugh is one with them. We will have to support Trump ourselves. Sundance is a breath of fresh air, thank you for doing this for our Nation.


      • setup2100 says:

        Have to realize that they all support each other one way or another. That is the un written law with the talking heads. RUSH always quote or sound clips from CNN. They get more attention from the talking heads including Hannity than they get viewers at CNN. That is the way the Talking heads and radio hosts operate. If they would just ignor CNN no one would know they exist. Rumor their is a new conservative network coming in 12 -18 months to give FOX a run since they moved lefts when the kids took over. We will see.


      • saintoil says:

        So optimistic here, just got a crap sandwich shoved down our throats? People were expecting maybe one or two campaign promises to be met in the budget deal. Totally understandable frustration. So I DON’T understand the optimism. The opposition is euphoric, what does that mean??? No one is going to jail, no better relations with Russia, no wall, NOTHING. Ok, he’s going to start draining the swamp in 5 months. Dems were just embolden with the omnibus CR in which they got everything they wanted. Please explain to me some indications that Trump is going to start hardlining issues? When is looseing going to stop being called winning.


    • will says:

      Please explain to me why Trumps hands were tied? Why was there a vote if it was all pre ordained. Why was there elections in previous congress is making the rules. Squeezed every last drop? Not one drop for his number one promise…..a wall.


  8. 6x47 says:

    Wow, what a great statement by President Trump! We know from reading it that 1) HE READ THE BILL. 2) He understands the Constitution and the law. Most important 3) I love it how he told the Congressional Democrats that their “triumphs” amount to un-Constitutional “aggrandizement” and they can take their legislative overreach and stick it where the sun don’t shine. Insofar as he complies at all it is merely out of “comity” and not out of compulsion .

    It is clear that President Trump is picking his fights. He did not engage in the general melee over this CR, limiting his involvement to fighting for his narrowly focused objectives.

    The battle for the other changes (collectively “defunding the Left”) was a matter for the GOP Congressional leadership which has no stomach for a fight. Furthermore I’ve seen reports that the White House asked Congressional Republicans to defer the fight and keep their powder dry for the 2018 budget.


    • SafeSpace says:

      6X47, if your last paragraph is correct, that is wizard strategy — what one might expect from the DealMeister.


  9. Sean Supsky says:

    I’m proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free and proud to have our President, Donald J. Trump, fighting for me.

    Line by line, every word, jot and tittle, examined, not to be overlooked.
    For far too long, congress has taken our votes, our taxes, our blood, sweat and tears, to throw it all in our faces until we’re broke.

    Yet now, a new light has dawned.
    Like the sun peeking over the mountains, dark valleys brightened.
    Wielding a shield, bright in the light
    Swinging down the hammer with ferocious might.

    Come ye all, enemies of mine.
    Your arrows and blades I shant fear
    Your black hearts of wickedness I will tear
    From the congressional swine


  10. joshua says:

    Levin, Savage, and Rush need to go join Bill O’Reilly…..playing both ends against the middle just to make money bloviating on the air via media to folks HOPING to hear conservative encouragement is pathetic. Savage and Levin have become raving lunitics like happened to Glenn Beck. Rush is just a deaf druggie with no importance at all other than to a bunch of networks carrying his audio show.


  11. navysquid says:

    I thought I’d share something that I heard from our local conservative hosts yesterday on the radio (960 The Patriot) out here in Phoenix who happened to be part of the few media that was hosted by the White House approx two weeks ago. These would be some of the smaller media outlets that may not always have access to the WH Briefings and so they were invited from all around the country to meet with the PDJT Team.

    Our host Chris Buskirk said that they were in one of the WH “war planning” rooms and on the white board they had written down in two columns all the things that PE Trump had promised the American people that HE personally could do to fix the country. In another column they had items that would REQUIRE Congress. In the first two columns almost everything was checked off and the last column NOTHING was checked off!! He said that will always be forever burned into his mind of who “our representatives” are there for…

    This shows you, as Sundance has pointed out in earlier articles, that Congress (UniParty) is not there to advance PDJT agenda. OUR job is to elect in 2018 and 2020 candidates that are there to assist Pres Trump in checking off items in column three.

    Liked by 5 people

    • nimrodman says:

      Very telling.
      Thanks, Navy.


    • setup2100 says:

      SD is right on the UNIPARTY and he also indicated that some point TRUMP is going to confront the UNIPARTY head on. He can start with RYAN, McCONNELL and PREIBUS and when he does if he takes a few out then others will cave. It has to be some public names not some congressman from eastern Arkansas or some place that no one ever heard of.


    • The next column we’ll probably see in a few months will be the list of names of people to support so as to primary UniParty non-cooperators.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sean Supsky says:

      Congress has been against the health and well being of our nation since the early part of the twentieth century. The body has been infested with the progressive liberal agenda since that time.

      Now that is not to say that every single one of them are like that, but the past and present give the proof of the interference they produce. Most notable it stems from a few areas.


      The are some politicians that are greedy to line their pockets, to lift up themselves and their own so they are bought off. They have a selfish spark within their systems that only allows their impetus to be about the power they can wield, the monies or favors they can collect.


      There are others that like the feeling of power they get when they can control what goes on, who gets what, how they can make their constituents dance to their tune. They use any means necessary to get and keep this power and control. They are little dictators in their own right and care not for others.


      Then you have other politicians that seem to genuinely care for the people they are supposed to be representing, yet when they get to their positions of power, they are quickly brought under heel. Either by expulsion from the ranks or by threats to them and theirs. Either way, they start to toe the line or they get out.

      There can be much more said about the above scenarios, but this is but a small synopsis.

      What we do finally have is a President that is not beholden to anyone. He works like crazy to fulfill his promises and to bring back an America that he knew and loved in his younger days. A time when trust and honor were part of the fabric of the people.

      Just the fact that he has accomplished as much as he has in the time that he has been in office, that he does what he says he will do and that he has an America First policy.

      Well, we couldn’t have asked for a better person at this time. The light being shone upon the corruption in the legislative body, they desire to NOT want our President to succeed and the nastiness that they show in obstructing him and us.

      I shant grumble and complain about the slowness of things not being in regards to campaign promises, for I realize that it is not President Trump that has let us down, but rather our enemies in congress. For that is what they are, when they drag their feet, revile and depress our President and us.

      Is he perfect? By no means, and to expect perfection from a mere human is absolutely stupid. What we have though is far better than we have had in the past century except maybe the possibility of one or two.

      End of rant.


  12. CaptainNonno says:

    Were these issues added without his knowledge? Do we know by whom?


  13. jmclever says:

    I love Trump’s statement on the sections of the bill that were troublesome.

    First, it puts lawmakers on notice that our guy actually reads the bill that he signs and that nothing will get by him.

    Second, it almost could be construed as the genesis of the line item veto.

    I also love how SD gave President Trump the formal title of My President.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Sundance, I’m compelled to fact check a key assertion of not only this article, but also one that you’ve often cited when referencing the ongoing lack of an actual federal budget.

    According to the House Budget Committee ( ), the democrat-controlled Senate passed the House-approved budget on April 29th, 2009, for FY ’09-’10. This date was confirmed by PolitiFact in September of 2012 ( ). I haven’t been able to track down precisely when President Obama actually signed this budget into law, but since my research indicates that the CR-in-lieu-of-budget shenanigans didn’t start until September of 2010, I figure it a safe assumption that BHO did, in fact, sign the bill.

    Thus, my question is, Sundance: What’s your source data for September of 2007 as the last time that a federal budget was signed into law?


    • Apologies, if necessary, for the avatar confusion. I typed my initial response in on my phone, during a break at work, and accidentally typed in my other e-mail address (the one not keyed to my gravatar).


    • kevinrexheine says:

      Let’s try this again: Apologies, if necessary, for the avatar confusion. I typed my initial response in on my phone, during a break at work, and accidentally typed in my other e-mail address (the one not keyed to my gravatar).


  15. mitrom says:

    Is it common for Presidents to write their interpretation of carrying out the spending bill? And does Congress normally try to put in caveats and limitations like this or are the Dems and RINOs trying to play games with Trump?


  16. mitrom – I heard a snippet on the radio this morning that referenced Presidents attaching letters or commentaries to the budgets or other laws they sign, but had no idea why that was being stated. Now I do. However, I do believe it is not uncommon for Presidents to do this.


  17. John M says:

    That perspective paragraph is scary stuff. Most elected officials probably think the exception – the lack of a budget – is the norm.


  18. leroyjhunt says:

    There are others that like the feeling of power they get when they can control what goes on, who gets what, how they can make their constituents dance to their tune.


  19. amaranto es says:

    I shant grumble and complain about the slowness of things not being in regards to campaign promises, for I realize that it is not President Trump that has let us down, but rather our enemies in congress.


  20. .
    What we do finally have is a President that is not beholden to anyone.


  21. gumersindo says:

    What we do finally have is a President that is not beholden to anyone.


  22. .
    Just the fact that he has realized as much as he has in the clock time that he has been in spot, that he does what he says he will do and that he has an America First insurance.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s