The First 100 Days of Trump

[BDKJMU]

Summation of Trump's 1st 11 full days:

Exec orders signed:
Minimizing the Economic Burden of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Pending Repeal
To minimize Obamacare's economic burden. It authorized federal agencies to "waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation" of any part of the law that fiscally burdened states or cost money for individuals, health care providers and a host of others.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ection-and
Expediting Environmental Reviews and Approvals for High Priority Infrastructure Projects
To streamline and expedite environmental reviews and approvals for infrastructure projects.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ovals-high
Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States
Calls for the hiring of an additional 10,000 ICE officers, lays out policies on deportations, instructs the attorney general's office and the secretary of homeland security to withhold grant money from sanctuary cities.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ior-united
Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements
Calls for border security improvements & building of border wall.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... provements
Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States
Exec order on temp refugee ban and immigration ban from the 7 countries.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ted-states
Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Employees
Imposes 5 year lobbying ban on executive branch employees, same as Clinton and Obama.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... appointees
Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs.
For FY 2017, when an agency proposes a new regulation, it shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed.For FY 2018 & beyond the cost of new regs have to be offset with savings from repealed regs.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ontrolling

Memorandums Issued:
Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies
Asked the heads of executive departments and agencies to not send new regulations to the Office of the Federal Register, to withdraw regulations already sent but not published, and to delay the effective date for regulations published but not yet in effect. The regulatory freeze, allowing for emergency situation exceptions, would be in place until a Trump department or agency appointee reviewed and approved the regulation.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... d-agencies
Presidential Memorandum Regarding the Mexico City Policy
Reinstated Mexico City Policy instituted during Ronald Reagan’s presidency that prevents foreign non-governmental organizations from receiving U.S. government funds if they perform or promote abortions.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ity-policy
Presidential Memorandum Regarding Withdrawal of the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations and Agreement
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ns-pacific
Presidential Memorandum Regarding the Hiring Freeze
Ordered a federal hiring freeze of civilian employees (allows exemptions for national security & public safety).
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ing-freeze
Presidential Memorandum Regarding Construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... s-pipeline
Presidential Memorandum Regarding Construction of American Pipelines
Called for the construction of American pipelines to be done with US made steel.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... -pipelines
Presidential Memorandum Regarding Construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline
To allow TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P. to re-submit its application for a presidential permit to build and operate the Keystone XL Pipeline.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... l-pipeline
Streamlining Permitting and Reducing Regulatory Burdens for Domestic Manufacturing
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... regulatory
Rebuilding the U.S. Armed Forces
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... med-forces
Plan to Defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria
Calls for Joint Chiefs & Nat Security Advisors to submit within 30 days a plan to defeat ISIS.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... state-iraq
Presidential Memorandum Organization of the National Security Council and the Homeland Security Council
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ouncil-and

Also in in his 1st 11 days:
-Signed paperwork formalizing his Cabinet nominations.
-Signed into law a bill passed by Congress providing an exception to the legal requirement of seven years between military active duty and service as secretary of defense. The waiver allowed Gen. James Mattis, who retired from the Marine Corps in 2013, to serve as secretary of defense, following Senate confirmation.
-Met with union leaders at the White House.
-Addressed GOP leaders in Philly
-Met with Teresa May in Philly
-Phone calls with Merkel & Putin
-Visited the CIA HQ.
-Went to the Pentagon for the swearing-in of Gen. James Mattis as defense secretary and to sign executive actions.
-Called for major investigation into voter fraud.
-Sat for an interview with ABC News’ David Muir at the White House.
-Fired a recalcitrant acting Attorney General.
-Named a SCOTUS nominee

MOST IMPORTANT: drove liberals batshit crazy...

[BDKJMU]

"GOP changes rules to push through nominees after Dem boycott

Senate Republicans pushed through a pair of President Trump’s Cabinet nominees Wednesday, upending standard committee rules to circumvent a Democratic boycott.

The Senate Finance Committee advanced a pair of Trump’s nominees with only Republican members present — Steven Mnuchin to head the Treasury Department, and Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) as secretary of Health and Human Services.

By unanimous consent, the Republicans gathered in the hearing room agreed to change the committee’s standing rules, which normally require at least one member of each party to be in attendance for committee work to proceed........

....Republicans made the unusual move after Democrats refused to attend a vote on the nominees for two days running, arguing the pair had made misleading statements to lawmakers that needed to be rectified.

The nominees now head to the Senate floor, as partisan tensions over filling out Trump’s White House continued to intensify....."
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3173 ... em-boycott

Good. The intransigent, crybaby, donks shouldn't be able to stonewall nominees from receiving an up or down vote..

[Skjellyfetti]

The intransigent, crybaby, donks shouldn't be able to stonewall nominees from receiving an up or down vote..

I agree. But, at least I'm consistent.

[Grizalltheway]

"GOP changes rules to push through nominees after Dem boycott

Senate Republicans pushed through a pair of President Trump’s Cabinet nominees Wednesday, upending standard committee rules to circumvent a Democratic boycott.

The Senate Finance Committee advanced a pair of Trump’s nominees with only Republican members present — Steven Mnuchin to head the Treasury Department, and Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) as secretary of Health and Human Services.

By unanimous consent, the Republicans gathered in the hearing room agreed to change the committee’s standing rules, which normally require at least one member of each party to be in attendance for committee work to proceed........

....Republicans made the unusual move after Democrats refused to attend a vote on the nominees for two days running, arguing the pair had made misleading statements to lawmakers that needed to be rectified.

The nominees now head to the Senate floor, as partisan tensions over filling out Trump’s White House continued to intensify....."
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3173 ... em-boycott

Good. The intransigent, crybaby, donks shouldn't be able to stonewall nominees from receiving an up or down vote..

Lol. But you had no problem with the crybaby conks delaying the nomination for an entire year.

[89Hen]

Lol. But you had no problem with the crybaby conks delaying the nomination for an entire year.

Fewest nominees approved for a POTUS at this point since 1933.

[GannonFan]

"GOP changes rules to push through nominees after Dem boycott

Senate Republicans pushed through a pair of President Trump’s Cabinet nominees Wednesday, upending standard committee rules to circumvent a Democratic boycott.

The Senate Finance Committee advanced a pair of Trump’s nominees with only Republican members present — Steven Mnuchin to head the Treasury Department, and Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) as secretary of Health and Human Services.

By unanimous consent, the Republicans gathered in the hearing room agreed to change the committee’s standing rules, which normally require at least one member of each party to be in attendance for committee work to proceed........

....Republicans made the unusual move after Democrats refused to attend a vote on the nominees for two days running, arguing the pair had made misleading statements to lawmakers that needed to be rectified.

The nominees now head to the Senate floor, as partisan tensions over filling out Trump’s White House continued to intensify....."
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3173 ... em-boycott

Good. The intransigent, crybaby, donks shouldn't be able to stonewall nominees from receiving an up or down vote..

Lol. But you had no problem with the crybaby conks delaying the nomination for an entire year.

What nomination got held up for a year?

[GannonFan]

Lol. But you had no problem with the crybaby conks delaying the nomination for an entire year.

Fewest nominees approved for a POTUS at this point since 1933.

It's like they're finally getting their payback for the crap that FDR had to go through.

[BDKJMU]

The new name for the intransigent donks: The 'Boycott Party'. Biggest bunch of fooking crybabies
Democrats boycott Pruitt's EPA confirmation hearing
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/01/politics/ ... index.html

[Grizalltheway]

Lol. But you had no problem with the crybaby conks delaying the nomination for an entire year.

What nomination got held up for a year?

Scalia's replacement. In case you've forgotten, the GOP made it abundantly clear, before his body was even cold, that they weren't going to allow Obama to appoint anyone under any circumstances.

[GannonFan]

What nomination got held up for a year?

Scalia's replacement. In case you've forgotten, the GOP made it abundantly clear, before his body was even cold, that they weren't going to allow Obama to appoint anyone under any circumstances.

Well, technically it was only 10 months from the time they nominated Garland to the time of the end of Obama's term (and less than 8 months from the nomination to the election of Obama's successor). And, unfortunately, Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Biden was the architect of the policy of not even having hearings for a SCOTUS replacement in an election year. Now that the GOP has followed through on Biden's idea, I bet it's established principle going forward (or at least when the opposing party holds the Senate majority as the Dems did when Biden came up with the policy and as the GOP did last year when they put his policy into practice).

Besides, the GOP took a big gamble going with the Biden plan. Garland was fairly moderate, all things being equal. If Hillary had won as expected, there's no guarantee that she wouldn't have skipped over Garland and appointed a more left-leaning justice instead.

[YoUDeeMan]

It is quite a beautiful thing that the Democrats are crying about two maneuvers that Democrats themselves started.

[Baldy]

Scalia's replacement. In case you've forgotten, the GOP made it abundantly clear, before his body was even cold, that they weren't going to allow Obama to appoint anyone under any circumstances.

Well, technically it was only 10 months from the time they nominated Garland to the time of the end of Obama's term (and less than 8 months from the nomination to the election of Obama's successor). And, unfortunately, Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Biden was the architect of the policy of not even having hearings for a SCOTUS replacement in an election year. Now that the GOP has followed through on Biden's idea, I bet it's established principle going forward (or at least when the opposing party holds the Senate majority as the Dems did when Biden came up with the policy and as the GOP did last year when they put his policy into practice).

Besides, the GOP took a big gamble going with the Biden plan. Garland was fairly moderate, all things being equal. If Hillary had won as expected, there's no guarantee that she wouldn't have skipped over Garland and appointed a more left-leaning justice instead.

phpBB [video]

[Ivytalk]

Scalia's replacement. In case you've forgotten, the GOP made it abundantly clear, before his body was even cold, that they weren't going to allow Obama to appoint anyone under any circumstances.

Well, technically it was only 10 months from the time they nominated Garland to the time of the end of Obama's term (and less than 8 months from the nomination to the election of Obama's successor). And, unfortunately, Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Biden was the architect of the policy of not even having hearings for a SCOTUS replacement in an election year. Now that the GOP has followed through on Biden's idea, I bet it's established principle going forward (or at least when the opposing party holds the Senate majority as the Dems did when Biden came up with the policy and as the GOP did last year when they put his policy into practice).

Besides, the GOP took a big gamble going with the Biden plan. Garland was fairly moderate, all things being equal. If Hillary had won as expected, there's no guarantee that she wouldn't have skipped over Garland and appointed a more left-leaning justice instead.

Garland was no centrist. Even the NY Times put him to the left of Breyer and Kagan, virtually tied with Ginsburg, and slightly to the right of the Wise Latina. We're well rid of him.

[JohnStOnge]

Complete embarrassment so far with the exception of a good Supreme Court nominee. Through most of my life I've felt like "who cares what the rest of the world thinks." But right now I feel genuinely embarrassed by being in a country that would elect a looney tune like that.

And BTW i don't think the good Supreme Court nominee has anything to do with Trump per se. I don't think he gives the slightest shit about the Supreme Court. I think he just said what he needed to say during the campaign to get elected and now he's fine with going ahead and picking someone someone else suggested to him.

[kalm]

Well, technically it was only 10 months from the time they nominated Garland to the time of the end of Obama's term (and less than 8 months from the nomination to the election of Obama's successor). And, unfortunately, Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Biden was the architect of the policy of not even having hearings for a SCOTUS replacement in an election year. Now that the GOP has followed through on Biden's idea, I bet it's established principle going forward (or at least when the opposing party holds the Senate majority as the Dems did when Biden came up with the policy and as the GOP did last year when they put his policy into practice).

Besides, the GOP took a big gamble going with the Biden plan. Garland was fairly moderate, all things being equal. If Hillary had won as expected, there's no guarantee that she wouldn't have skipped over Garland and appointed a more left-leaning justice instead.

Garland was no centrist. Even the NY Times put him to the left of Breyer and Kagan, virtually tied with Ginsburg, and slightly to the right of the Wise Latina. We're well rid of him.

Yes...I'm quite certain he would have signaled the demise of the republic.

[GannonFan]

Garland was no centrist. Even the NY Times put him to the left of Breyer and Kagan, virtually tied with Ginsburg, and slightly to the right of the Wise Latina. We're well rid of him.

Yes...I'm quite certain he would have signaled the demise of the republic.

Come on, be original, you're stealing Obama's line. You need to find your own hyperbole.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politi ... story.html

[Baldy]

Complete embarrassment so far with the exception of a good Supreme Court nominee. Through most of my life I've felt like "who cares what the rest of the world thinks." But right now I feel genuinely embarrassed by being in a country that would elect a looney tune like that.

And BTW i don't think the good Supreme Court nominee has anything to do with Trump per se. I don't think he gives the slightest shit about the Supreme Court. I think he just said what he needed to say during the campaign to get elected and now he's fine with going ahead and picking someone someone else suggested to him.

*toon.

Please tell us once again how smart you are.

[kalm]

Yes...I'm quite certain he would have signaled the demise of the republic.

Come on, be original, you're stealing Obama's line. You need to find your own hyperbole.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politi ... story.html

Really? I haven't paid much attention to the big O in years. Thanks for keeping tabs for me.

[Ibanez]

Tax reform. Come on Thumpster! Come on GOP! This 28% tax bracket is a bitch!

[89Hen]

phpBB [video]

[Ibanez]

He'll also force the delay of an Obama-era rule that required retirement advisers to act in their clients' best interests.

What's wrong with that (other than having to legislate ethics?)

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/ ... index.html

[Grizalltheway]

He'll also force the delay of an Obama-era rule that required retirement advisers to act in their clients' best interests.

What's wrong with that (other than having to legislate ethics?)

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/ ... index.html

Next thing you know someone will suggest that lawyers and doctors should act in their clients'/patients' best interests.

[Ivytalk]

What's wrong with that (other than having to legislate ethics?)

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/ ... index.html

Next thing you know someone will suggest that lawyers and doctors should act in their clients'/patients' best interests.

[Ibanez]

What's wrong with that (other than having to legislate ethics?)

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/ ... index.html

Next thing you know someone will suggest that lawyers and doctors should act in their clients'/patients' best interests.

Bastards....

[YoUDeeMan]

phpBB [video]