Friday PM ~ thefrontpagecover

~ Featuring ~
Trump Tightens Food-Stamp
Work Requirements
Political Editors  
Impeachment Is Slowly Destroying 
Democrats’ 2020 Political Hopes 
By Mollie Hemingway
{ } ~ Democratic efforts to impeach President Donald Trump were supposed to help them politically in 2020. In moments of unguarded honesty, a few Democrats admitted as much publicly... saying the quiet part loud and the loud part quiet. It’s a great example of how this particular impeachment push keeps backfiring on Democrats. They claim, without evidence, that Trump was trying to get Ukraine to meddle in the 2020 election by asking for their cooperation in investigating Ukrainian efforts to meddle in the 2016 election. And they claim that this is such a dire threat that Trump must be removed from office and disqualified from running in 2020. Yet their own impeachment effort is about retaliation for 2016 and the hope that they can politically damage Trump heading into the 2020 election. Speaker of the House liar-Nancy Pelosi announced Thursday that she would like articles of impeachment drafted, a foregone conclusion ever since Democrats won the House in 2018. Some members, such as Rep. scumbag-Al Green had joined the media in calling for Trump’s impeachment since before he was even inaugurated. The precise reasons keep changing earlier this year, nearly 100 Democrats voted to impeach Trump for the high crime of criticizing Democratic lawmakers worthless-Ilhan Omar and commie-Alexandria Ocasio Cortez on Twitter, but the fervor to retaliate against Trump for beating scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton 2016 remains unchanged. The theory behind the 2020 impeachment push is that Trump will be so damaged by the relentless onslaught of negative discussion about him that it will make voters elect someone else. And who knows? That might happen. In practice, however, this particular impeachment push is becoming something of a worst-case political scenario for Democrats...  
White House: scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff 
Has Wrong OMB Number
By Philip Wegmann
{ } ~ Who called Rudy Giuliani from the White House, and who took his calls in the administration? Those question have been buzzing around the White House after phone logs were released Wednesday... detailing how President Trump’s personal lawyer back-channeled diplomacy to Ukraine. But the phone calls, a presidential spokesperson told RealClearPolitics, were not coming from inside the Office of Management and Budget: “No one from OMB has talked to Giuliani.” The House Intelligence Committee says otherwise. In a voluminous report, the Democrat-led committee that took the lead in impeachment alleged in graphic detail how Giuliani worked with the administration to freeze $391 million in foreign aid to Ukraine to pressure the government of that country into publicly committing to opening an investigation into loose lips liar-Joe Biden’s family. The report details phone calls and texts dating from last spring and summer, including a nearly 13-minute call on April 24 from an “OMB Phone Number.” It is part of the evidence that Intelligence Committee Chairman scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff relied on to build his case for impeachment. “This is not about Ukraine. This is about our democracy, this is about our security,” scumbag/liar-Schiff said during a press conference after releasing the committee’s impeachment report. “Americans should care deeply about whether the president of the United States is betraying their trust in him.” Senior administration officials reply that no one is betraying any trust. They tell RCP that scumbag/liar-Schiff must have the wrong number. For his part, Giuliani has said publicly that he never placed a call to OMB, the agency responsible for how the White House spends money appropriated by Congress. “I don’t remember calling OMB and not about military aid never knew anything about it,” the lawyer texted Dana Bash of CNN after publicly tweeting that call logs were inconclusive. “The mere fact I had numerous calls with the White House does not establish any specific topic,” he wrote. “Remember, I’m the president’s attorney.” Apparently scumbag/liar-Schiff and his staff believe the 395 prefix that showed up on the phone records subpoenaed by House Democrats from AT&T and Verizon belongs only to phones in the OMB offices, something that Republican sources say isn’t accurate...   
Jim Jordan Makes SHOCK Discovery 
Alerts President Trump
by Martin Walsh
{ } ~ Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan made a shocking discovery this week and alerted President Donald Trump. During an interview on Fox News with host Tucker Carlson... Jordan issued a direct message to the president and shared explosive news that Democrats won’t like one bit. Jordan pointed out this obvious: Democrats “never back up and apologize,” and that they will keep making up scandals or whatever else they can to “bring down” the president. In this case, Jordan said Democrats have gone from false accusations about Trump and Russia to another witch-hunt: Ukraine and impeachment. His discovery is also terrifying: Democrats will stop at nothing to remove the duly elected president for no reason other than the fact that they dislike him. He went on to single out House Intelligence Committee Chairman scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff for leading the latest witch hunt. “Remember, he told us that there was going to be collusion,” said Jordan. “And then when it didn’t happen, what did he do? He moved on to this whole Ukraine story that we’ve now been living through for the past two months.” “You’re just not going to get that from them,” he said. “They just double down and keep pushing on. And, frankly, that’s the same we hear from — see from the Democrat Party. I mean, that’s the same thing we see from scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff.  they’re wrong. They just keep pressing forward. And it’s driven by something Speaker Pelosi said two weeks ago on a Sunday show,” he continued. Jordan ultimately wants everyone to remember one thing: Democrats are out to overturn Trump’s 2016 election victory. Jordan concluded: “When she called the president of the United States, President Trump, when she called him an impostor, that is the problem because they — they have never accepted the fact that 63 million Americans voted to make Donald Trump president of the United States in an Electoral College landslide. They have never accepted that fact, and they’re out to get him. And it just goes from one thing to the other, and they never apologize when they’re wrong.”  
Reports downplaying Horowitz, Durham
reports on Russia probe are
'multiple hearsay,' 'unreliable'
By Victor Garcia 
{ } ~ Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett dismissed reports downplaying Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz's forthcoming report on potential FBI and DOJ surveillance abuses... against the Trump campaign in 2016, calling them "hearsay." "Well, it's the reports are based on leaked information from people who didn't read the Horowitz report, but were told about it from people, other people who were briefed on it who didn't read the report," Jarrett said on "The Story with Martha MacCallum" Thursday. "So we're talking about multiple hearsay. It's unreliable."The Washington Post reported Thursday that both Horowitz's report and a separate investigation into the origins of the FBI's Russia investigation by Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham "are not endorsing Trump’s chief conspiracy theory: that the probe of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election was an unfounded witch hunt." Jarrett advised viewers to hold off on drawing conclusions until Horowitz's report is released Monday. "The question is, was it Trump campaign surveillance intentional, which would be criminal, potentially, or was it reckless and sloppy errors and omissions and systemic failures?" Jarrett said, adding:  "There can be an agreement, a conspiracy, or there can be actions of like-minded people who have the same goal in the end, which is to harm Donald Trump."
Why Are Democrats Pushing 
a Trillion Dollar Tax Cut?
By James C. Capretta
{ } ~ House Democratic sponsorship of a bill repealing the “Cadillac” tax — the levy on high-cost insurance plans enacted in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) — is discrediting the party’s claim of being above craven and irresponsible tax-cutting... At enactment in 2010, the tax was supposed to go into effect in 2018, but it has been delayed twice by Congress and is now scheduled to take in 2022 — a full eight years after implementation of the ACA’s major benefit expansions. The tax requires employers sponsoring high-premium insurance plans to pay an additional 40 percent penalty on costs above specified dollar thresholds. Separate limits apply to individual and family coverage. On July 17th, the House passed H.R. 748, the repeal bill, by a vote of 419 to 6, with only three Democrats and two Republicans voting in opposition Justin Amash, an independent who left the Republican party, also voted against it. There is bipartisan interest in the Senate in passing repeal too. The push to get rid of the Cadillac tax is short-sighted for both parties, but particularly for the Democrats. The tax was instrumental to the successful enactment of the ACA, as it allowed the scumbag/liar-nObama administration and the congressional authors of the law to argue they were passing a fiscally responsible bill. It was also one of the very few serious cost-control provisions in legislation that otherwise was focused on expanding Medicaid and providing subsidies for enrollment in private health insurance. Abandoning the Cadillac tax along with the Independent Payment Advisory Board and the CLASS Act confirms what many critics said at the time of enactment, which is that the law’s entitlement spending commitments would prove to be irreversible while the promised offsets and cost-cutting were illusory or politically vulnerable. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) believes the Cadillac tax will have both direct and indirect effects on federal revenue if Congress allows it to take effect. Some employers would be unable to avoid crossing the thresholds and will therefore pay the penalty. Others will cut their health costs and stay under the premium limits. When employers cut their health benefits, CBO expects the government will still receive more tax revenue because firms, to remain attractive to workers, will need to shift what they were planning to spend on health coverage into cash compensation. Unlike health benefits, wages are subject to both payroll and income taxation. In its estimate of H.R. 748, CBO projects that Cadillac tax repeal would reduce federal revenue by $200 billion over the period 2019 to 2029, with more than half of the lost revenue occurring in 2027 to 2029. Over the period 2025 to 2029, the annual tax cut would grow in size at an average annual rate of 18.7 percent...   
We do not need to expand Social Security
by Andrew G. Biggs
{ } ~ Few issues better illustrate the leftward shift of American economic policy than Social Security... In the late 1990s, moderate Democrats such as Senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan and John Breaux proposed fixing Social Security’s finances through a combination of tax increases and benefit cuts, including lower cost-of-living adjustments and an increased retirement age. Republicans favored fixing the Social Security deficit using benefit cuts alone. Today, President Trump’s no-cuts position is to the left of those Democrats. And even the most moderate Democratic candidate for president, former vice president loose lips liar-Joe Biden, speaking at an AARP Iowa forum in July, insisted that “we should be increasing, not decreasing, Social Security.” In reality, expanding Social Security is a multi-trillion-dollar solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. The shift in sentiment on Social Security reflects a shift in priorities. In the 1990s, policymakers largely saw Social Security as a budgetary challenge, with rising retirement costs pushing up taxes or squeezing out other government programs. Today, Americans are increasingly concerned that Social Security will fail to provide income stability for retirees. Seventy-five percent of Americans agree that the nation faces a “retirement crisis,” according to a National Institute for Retirement Security survey. Politicians have responded to these fears, with President Trump pledging to maintain full Social Security benefits despite the program’s looming insolvency. Progressives such as Senators Elizabeth dinky/liar-Warren and commie-Bernie Sanders promise benefit increases to rich and poor alike, financed by dramatically higher taxes on high earners. Almost no one is asking whether these fears of a retirement crisis are justified and whether expanding Social Security benefits outweighs all the other competing uses for federal dollars. But new data from three trusted government agencies say that the answer to both questions is almost certainly no. While Social Security requires changes to ensure solvency and to better protect against poverty in old age, Americans’ retirement incomes and retirement savings have never been stronger. Last summer, the Congressional Budget Office released new data based on IRS tax returns that provide a more accurate view of changing household incomes. From 1979 through 2016, the salaries of working-age households grew by 39 percent above inflation. But over that same period, incomes for households whose members are 65 and older grew by 90 percent, over twice as fast. Over the past three decades, seniors have gone from being a disproportionately poor segment of the population to a rich one. By itself, this undercuts the case for across-the-board Social Security benefit increases. But working-age Americans aren’t saving enough for retirement, right? Not according to the Federal Reserve’s new Distributional Financial Accounts, which calculate households’ total retirement savings including both money saved in retirement accounts and any benefits owed from a traditional pension. Across all age groups, retirement savings have at least doubled relative to the salaries those savings must replace once Americans retire. Among households age 55 to 69, retirement savings grew from 232 percent of annual earnings in 1989 to 471 percent in 2016. For households age 40 to 54, pension entitlements rose from 88 percent to 212 percent of average annual earnings, and from 30 percent to 80 percent of earnings for households aged 40 and under...
Trump Tightens Food-StampWork Requirements
Political Editors:  On Wednesday, the Trump administration announced a rule change to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — a.k.a. food stamps — that will go into effect on April 1, 2020. The new rule is intended to prevent able-bodied adults from abusing the federal food-stamp program. The administration estimates that the change will affect roughly 1.1 million people, and save taxpayers $12.8 billion over the next decade, while at the same time encouraging more people to find jobs during a time of historically low unemployment and seven million unfilled jobs.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue explained, “This rule lays the groundwork for the expectation that able-bodied Americans reenter the workforce where there are currently more job openings than people to fill them.” The USDA rule applies to adults ages 18 to 49 who are able-bodied without any dependents, limiting their SNAP benefits to three months, unless they are working or training for at least 20 hours a week. This rule does not change; what does change is the flexibility states have to grant SNAP waivers.

The new rule will limit the ability of states to use loopholes to get around the SNAP requirements. Previously, states were allowed to grant waivers to the SNAP rule in areas that were experiencing unemployment rates 20% higher than the national rate. Furthermore, states were given flexibility by the USDA in granting SNAP waivers. The Wall Street Journal reports, “The new rule requires the unemployment rate to be 6% or higher for states to issue such waivers. The rule also curbs the amount of discretionary exemptions from federal work requirements that states can issue.”

“Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government,” said our Constitution’s author, James Madison. The absolute bare minimum the Trump administration can do to work toward that ideal is to require able-bodied adults without dependents to look for jobs instead of handouts.   ~The Patriot Post  

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center