The Biden administration is notorious for self-cannibalizing.
One of the better illustrations of this comes in a passage from a story in today’s morning newspaper about reactions to the president’s stroke-of-the-pen edict forgiving up to $10,000 of federal student loans for people making less than $125,000 and up to $20,000 for students who received Pell Grants.
“The changes announced (this week) will likely cost more than double the amount saved through the recently passed Inflation Reduction Act, completely eliminating any disinflationary benefit from the bill,” the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget wrote. “The proposed loan changes also do nothing to reduce the amount of borrowing moving forward, setting up a future administration to be called on to cancel debt again.”
Increasing inflation?
While the cancellation will put more money in people’s pockets and increase spending, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget wrote in February that canceling student debt would boost personal consumption and would increase inflation.
Ah yes, a future administration will be called on to again cancel student loan debt. As Ronald Reagan said, “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth!” No matter how self-destructive.
4TH ST8 
Let’s see…so the “party for the common man” plans to tax blue collar workers in order to give money to college graduates, who will, on average, make more money over their lifetime. And here I thought only Republicans advocated policies redistributing income from poorer to richer.
They know what they are doing. They just needed to buy a few more votes.
Rincon I don’t believe the democrats are proposing to tax blue collar workers to give money to anyone. Did I miss something?
This has not been a particularly unsettling week for me and others who disagree with our President and his policies.
He was to be the “healer” of a divided Nation. Instead he (or whoever is acting in his stead) have been systematic dividers.
My President has labeled me and millions of other citizens as Semi-Fascists. His words disappoint me. I have a record of honorable service and have always stood strongly against abuse by anyone I don’t like for my President to cancel me.
I was further disappointed by President and I felt anger towards his announcement that HE was going to forgive Student Loans . I, like Speaker Pelosi, do not believe he has the power to do so. I rather suspect that he knows that the issue will be tied up in the Courts until well beyond the Mid Term elections and that the discussion in the media will not be about his disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, the growing specter that his son and family were engaged in criminal enterprises, the disaster on he southern border, the growing ascendancy of Communist China, rampant inflation and the real chance that we could be drawn into a conflict in the Ukraine or over Taiwan.
To forgive student debt in during inflation is wrong and it is doubly wrong for all taxpayers to be forced to shoulder the debt of hose who voluntarily incurred the debt and promised to pay the debt without even a requirement that they do one minute of public service in exchange. It is said that the goodly portion of student debt is for graduate degrees, precisely those who will theoretically be in the higher income brackets as a result of their degrees.
Laws and language seem to mean little these days.
As to language, I \\I am not sure what a “semi-fascist” might be. Seems to me to undertake without Congressional approval a forgiveness of debt is a bit authoritarian and dictatorial. How are you semi anything? Can you be semi pregnant or a semi Nevadan? All I know is that to call millions of Americans semi-fascists is not fair and down right nasty.
Laws don’t matter. The policy of our government is to disobey any law that they feel that does not suit their purposes, and then cancel anyone who disagrees. This President is purposely failing to enforce the laws on immigration. This Department of Justice has had some very real problems and so I point this out with some trepidation. Canceling seems to be the latest political option these days. So I am sure that there are those who read this that will trot out the usual labels and probably not even give me the courtesy of being called a “Semi” misogynist, racist, xenophobe etc.
One final thougt. As someone who struggled to pay back the student loan that I had to take in order to finish my last year of college and as someone who sometimes borrowed money to make sure our children had help to go to school, and as someone who has family members who chose not to go to college but rather chose to enter trades and occupations, where is the fairness to us? I find this unilateral debt forgiveness for student loans offensive, particularly in this time of inflation and an ever growing deficit that has already burdened our grand children.
If someone in government really wanted to solve a problem they would look at entire educational system and in particular take a look at the bloated college tuition fees that are charged and ask why it should be so high. Unrestricted government student loans may not be the solution but rather the problem.
Given the nature of politicians We should have foreseen this day when, for entirely political purposes, a politician uses the student loan program for strictly political purposes. According to some estimates, the forgiveness program could amount to a trillion dollars. The handwriting was on the wall when the college loan program was changed to make it an entirely government program. Once government controls the money, mischief usually follows.
In fairness, the Republicans have often been just as guilty . Politicians cannot resist the urge to pay other peoples money out to their constituencies. As the scorpion said to the frog before he stung him o death, “it’s in my nature”.
So now should I change my advice to my grandchildren and tell them to fake out maximum student loans and don’t bother their parents or we grandparents because (a) with our IRAs and 401ks taking a beating these days, we aren’t doing so good and inflation for us who are on fixed incomes is a real killer. Besides, we need to save our money to buy an electric car because there won’t be any new gas cars or gas stations. Biden is on record of aiming to eliminate all carbon fuels.
Should I tell my grandchildren they should plan for a future entirely different from the past. In this new world, their choices will be few. In this new world there is no shame nor penalty for not paying loans and it is quite probable that if they default on their loans or house paments, some politician in the future will grant them amnesty.
And finally, should I tell them not to go into any trade or occupation but rather go into government where they will be secure. Generally they will not be held accountable, cannot be fired and have great retirement programs.
Bill makes a good point about Biden calling Republicans semi-fascists behaving like a dictator. “Seems to me to undertake without Congressional approval a forgiveness of debt is a bit authoritarian and dictatorial.” Also, he’s ignoring immigration law, as Bill notes.
Biden acted pursuant to the law described here. According to most people, even in the prior administration, the plague was certainly a national emergency which affected financial assistance program requirements (student loans were suspending by the prior administration as a result) so whatever else might be said, whether Biden acted pursuant to the law or not is hardly reasonably debatable.
“The terms of the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students (HEROES) Act of 2003 allows the secretary of education “to waive or modify … financial assistance program requirements … affected by a war, other military operation, or national emergency.”
Anon: You might be right that the Democrats aren’t going to make blue collar workers pay for college loans. They’ll just borrow the money, Republican style. Nobody pays! Well, except maybe your children.
Bill: Your words about Biden are mostly well taken, but I do wish someone here would acknowledge the elephant in the room. Republicans rant about Hunter and chant, “lock her up” about Hillary, but conveniently ignore our former President who waited three hours to call off his minions on January 6 without offering even a sliver of an explanation. As for the FBI raid, I have to ask what would happen if an CIA officer took home boxes of classified info, gave back half when caught, and claimed he had returned it all. If the government found yet more boxes of classified documents, would we expect them to turn the other cheek?
Also, while Republican minions claim that the dozens of witnesses to Trump’s behavior on January 6 were lying, I haven’t heard of any who have come forward to testify on his behalf. Rather, Trump exercises every effort to prevent their testimony. It’s one thing to say he shouldn’t be convicted, but to say he’s suitable to be elected? Wow!
BTW, I forgot to ask, does everyone here except Anon and myself think that a leader who pleads the 5th is still perfectly electable? CTTOI, why didn’t Bill Clinton think of that?
Well, I’m going to wait and see what might be the truth about January 6 and am unwilling to base a decision on the faux star chamber Hollywood production being choreographed for media showing. I keep looking for a crime here. Where is it? Can you write a brief description of what act or omission of Trump relating to January 6, constitutes a crime? Give me a citation to a specific law and specific facts if you willl.
I’m always amazed that people would come to places like this and ask others to identify that laws that Trump has broken when the sources for that information exist and all that’s required is a simple search.
Its almost as if folks don’t want to know but would rather imply that there are no crimes that Trump committed. And I’m limiting this to just the ones he committed in the last several weeks lest this post go on forever.
And on these occasions its nice that someone from the right has listed these crimes and why it is that Trump is likely to be indicted for them, lest someone suggest that this is yet another witch hunt to get poor old Donald Trump.
Why Donald Trump will soon be indicted
By Andrew P. Napolitano – – Wednesday, August 31, 2022
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/aug/31/why-donald-trump-will-soon-be-indicted/
I’m sorry that I am not as good a researcher as some of my detractors so hielp us out with some citations as to the alleged crimes of Donald Trump. Please give us specifics not just a polemic. Try and provide the who, what, why and when aspects and the law that was violated.
I thought that’s what I did above I suggest clicking on the link, or googling the story headline and finding it yourself Bill.
That is if you’re interested.
As long as you didn’t claim that Hillary committed a crime, then at least you’re consistent. If you did, then you’re fooling yourself. Hillary’s Email adventure pales compared to what we already know about Trump. That being said, I can’t imagine that any low level CIA grunt could escape prison if he brought dozens to hundreds of classified documents home, kept them long after leaving his employment, and then lied to authorities that he had given all of them back when he had only given back half or so. But Trump? Oh well, Republicans all figure he deserves a free pass because….um, because….tell me, have they (or you) ever explained that belief?
Was a “crime” committed? I’ll leave that to the lawyers, but he clearly is not suitable for office. I also note that no one has anything to say about Trump’s worst misadventure – waiting 3 hours before finally calling off his supporters on January 6th. My greatest concern is that he doesn’t even think he owes the people an explanation. And Republicans agree!
The issue of whether Hillary committed a crime by her e-mail circumvention has never been decided. We only have James Comey’s rather unusual press conference where he said when asked if Clinton broke the law, that: ” in his judgment there was not enough evidence to “establish beyond a reasonable doubt” that Clinton broke the law intentionally and therefore, he, as FBI director, fdeclined to charge her with any crimes. According to Comey, he declined to charge her not that she had not in fact committed a crime. In other words, he swept it under the rug. We can go into he other issues involved with Clinton’s private e-mail server but that has nothing to do with my question as to what specific crimes has President Trump committed. There may be such crimes but I have yet to see what they are.
Anon, I overlooked the Washington Times piece. My apologies but I don’t read as well and as thoroughly as I once did which explains my too often typos. I was thinking in terms of the January 6 hearings and not this latest foray to keep Trump on the defensive. To clean up the record it a bit more, I’m not sure whether Comey gave the “not enough evidence” excuse at a news conference or in testimony before Congress, or both. Comey also apparently leaked confidential information but he DOJ declined to prosecute. Sound familiar? Double standard. I listened to my Unifying President;s unifying speech tonight and and am moving closer to the MAGAs.
Interesting choice of words there Bill “latest foray to keep Trump on the defensive”.
I’d say that if Trump hadn’t first stolen documents, that he knew didn’t belong to him, and then retained them after numerous, legally unnecessary efforts, to get him to return them, to having his lawyers lie on his behalf about whether they were all returned or not, to finally daring the DOJ to do something to stop him from breaking the law, then perhaps this latest “foray” would have been avoided.
Having said that, and since you now appear to at least be aware that the Washington Times legal columnist, a former judge and regular commentator on conservative media wrote an article detailing the crimes Trump committed, along with the specific actions he took that establish the foundation of those crimes, any comment about them?
Of course I will comment. I am fresh off of listening to one of he most divisive political Presidential speeches in my memory and am disappointed that it was a staged attack against half of the voters in the United States, using my beloved Marine comrades as background props.
To be specific with my comment.
An Op-Ed does not an indictment make.
An indictment is not proof of guilt.
Until a court of competent jurisdiction finds a defendant guilty, our Constitution, (you know the one Biden invoked tonight) presumes that that person is innocent.
As to the Op-Ed that you cite, as I recall, the first impeachment of Trump was set up by a Russian Dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign which was then leaked to the media and became the basis for the Mueller prob.
I won’t go into some of the intervening shenanigans but one of the more recent media events was the labeling of Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation and then there was the revelation a few days ago that Facebook was warned away from the Biden laptop story and then the White House confirmed that Facebook was coordinating censorship with the White House.
See:The White House Just Confirmed Facebook Works as a … – Townhall
townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2021/07/15/…
The White House Just Confirmed Facebook Works as a Government Censorship Tool Katie Pavlich @KatiePavlich Source: AP Photo/Nick Wass Speaking to reporters at the White House Thursday afternoon,…
But, I hope that answers your question.
B.
You asked for specific laws Trump broke and the conduct that formed the basis and the article addresses both of those things.
Like most folks on the right I suppose, it can never be enough.
I wonder Bill, whether based on the conduct described therein, along with the offense charged, whether a conviction will be enough to satisfy you that Trump committed a crime.
Only id if it were in the Washington D. C. District Court or the Washington D.C. Federal Court where it is virtually impossible for a Conservative to get an unbiased jury. But rwally, what may or may not satisfy me is not really an issue.
Then correct me if I’m misunderstand you here but there are more limits to what would satisfy you regarding Trump’s guilt or innocence of the charges identified by Judge Napolitano than “merely” a conviction by a jury?
Certainly I would apply the same standard to Donald A. Truump or you. I am right now withholding judgment on the many accusations of sexual assault against Judge Napolitano which is in the civil accusation, which for the jury to find against him, a preponderance of the evidence rather than by evidence BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
I made an error in a previous post. I meant to say that I would accept the verdict of a duly constituted jury with perhaps he exception of a jury impaneled in the District of Columbia .
And the last post by anonymous was actually me, but my failing eyesight and less than nimble figures forgot to fill in all the stuff. What I was trying to say is that I would distrust verdicts from the District of Columbia Courts that found against any Republican or Conservative.
Wow. I sit out for a while and an interesting exchange happens. I was wondering what ever happened to Andy Napolitano ’cause I haven’t seen him on Fox for some time now. With his sexual harassment allegations, he should get a show at CNN, right? Good call using him for your legal “get Trump” allegation, petey! (or is it patrick? I can never seem to remember!)
Rin-man! Thought you were smarter than that! Of course, TDS has broken many a former liberal now turned leftist into incoherent fantasy dwellers. You and anny seem to have forgotten (or maybe you never came to terms) that the Donald is our 45th President and NOT a random CIA puke (or a former Clinton Berger-lawyer) taking classified docs home in his underwear! And Mar-A-Largo is guarded by the Secret Service (I think THEY have a rather high security clearance) so that all might make that corrupt weasel Garland think twice before following Judge Andy’s advice.
But what do I know?
And Bill, I just finished listening to Brandon’s insulting political hit job in Philly (didn’t you LOVE that blood red backlighting and the 2 Marines with the white gloves in the background? WOW! Mussolini would be proud!)
To accuse MAGA Republicans of desiring tyranny, white supremacy, semi-fascism or neo-nazism, after proposing to take the money from one group of Americans BY FORCE (87,000 new IRS agents gotta have SOMETHING to do, don’t they?) and use it to buy votes in the upcoming election (can’t run on Democrat accomplishments, can they) is the very definition of “gaslighting”. Or Joe being Joe.
Well done, Brandon! FJB!!
And for all of those poor souls that might have forgotten, MAGA stands for Make America Great Again! (Because we really aren’t interested in the NWO! We’re Americans!) Go figure??
[…] When the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing Aug The Biden administration is notorious for self-cannibalizing. […]
Thanks for the “Hat” blog, Tom! Local fella, huh?