Trump Says He’ll Shut Down The Government

JM Ashby
Written by JM Ashby

Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell met with Trump at the White House last week where, according to lawmakers who spoke to Politico, Trump tentatively agreed not to force a government shutdown by demanding money for his fantasy border wall.

The GOP leaders reportedly presented Trump with a plan to avoid a shutdown that includes them somehow managing to miraculously complete the appropriations process in about three weeks.

The Senate majority leader and House speaker laid out to Trump that they will prioritize less controversial bills before this fall's Sept. 30 funding deadline. McConnell (R-Ky.) and Ryan (R-Wis.) hope to fund the majority of the government through the appropriations bill process by the end of September, and leave a brutal fight over border wall funding until later in the year.

Congressional Republicans haven't completed the appropriation process a single time since gaining total control of Congress in 2015 so you'll have to forgive me if I don't even entertain the idea that they'll complete the appropriations process in September.

House Republicans are only scheduled to be in session for 19 days between September and November and fiscal 2019 begins on October 1st.

In any event, Trump spent most of the weekend rage-tweeting and that included a threat to shut down the government over border wall funding.

It's not Democrats that Trump needs to worry about. Republicans have repeatedly proven themselves incapable of passing their own bills and it was Republican leaders he spoke to at the White House last week where he agreed not to pick a fight over this, not Democratic leaders.

I don't necessarily believe Trump is actually willing to veto the continuing resolution to fund the federal government that we know Congress will eventually pass ahead of the fiscal deadline.

Trump has had plenty of opportunities in the past to shut down the government, and it did in fact briefly shut down twice earlier this year, but Trump never vetoed anything. Congressional Republicans did it all on their own.

  • waspuppet

    Republicans hold both houses of Congress and the White House and Trump has said he wants to shut down the government. And if/when it does shut down, our liberal media will have long explanations about how both sides are to blame for it.

  • muselet

    I’m not the only one to notice that Donald Trump tweeted that he would be willing—that leaves a lot of wiggle room—to “shut down”—when he misuses quotation marks like that, it means either something or nothing, depending on his mood—the government.

    In other words, Trump was irritated and rage-tweeted some gibberish to make himself feel better. Wait a day or two and he’ll claim he never tweeted any such thing.


  • katanahamon

    Shut it down until 2020, unless impeachment happens sooner.

  • Nefercat

    He’ll shut it down if he thinks it will shut down the Mueller investigation.

    • Scopedog

      Narrator: It’s won’t, actually. But then again, Trump wasn’t that smart.

      • Nefercat

        I probably should have put “thinks” in quotes.

  • katanahamon

    This is all so ludicrous. The right wing went so far as to not only micro criticize every word and action of President Obama, they tried to delegitimize his existence with the birther conspiracy. Now, we have a guy sitting in the White House (well, probably golfing at his own property somewhere) who was already videoed bragging about sexual assault now talking about bribing a woman to stay silent about an illicit affair. Why..isn’t..every..Democrat..introducing..articles..of..impeachment???
    I don’t care if it won’t fly, it needs to be said that we don’t tolerate a scumbag as president, especially given the right wing’s persecution of President Obama. (And why doesn’t President Obama’s name ever come up on the search suggestions? Isn’t that weird?) So..all I can say is that I’m not going to be satisfied until the handcuffs go on Rump and they perp walk him out of the White House. Then, jail time, and lots of it.

    • ninjaf

      They aren’t introducing them because half of the US population is apathetic in this whole scenario. Politically, it’s not a winning thing to do and will only help to energize MAGAts. Liberals and progressives are already fired up, so why give your opponent any fuel for their fire?

      • katanahamon

        Yeah, but..letting egregious crimes and hypocrisy stand simply isn’t right. The longer we say nothing, it implies approval, or at least acceptance.

        • ninjaf

          I don’t think there is anyone who thinks Democrats won’t impeach if the Mueller investigation provides a backstop. No need to campaign on that; it’s already baked into the polls. Instead, concentrate on giving voters something on which to hang their pocketbooks and getting people to the polls who are normally not mid-term voters. Prove that there is no need to keep doing stories on “What Makes a Trump Voter Tick” because they are a minority of the electorate and do not speak for the majority.

    • Scopedog

      There are one or two Democrats who have introduced Articles of Impeachment, to be hones.

      But as Ninja pointed out, half of the population is apathetic. Also, it would be better to do this 1) when we take control of the House in the November elections (and hopefully make gains in the Senate) and 2) when Mueller delivers his report (most likely a preliminary report) that can show that yes, Trump and company did conspire with the Russians to interfere with the election.

      Besides, the GOP have already turned impeachment from the serious act that it is into a fucking joke. The AOI against Nixon were needed and came after the WH tapes were released. The AOI against Bill Clinton were utter bullshit, more of a haphazard and very unpopular way for the GOP to nullify the results of the 1996 election (plus they had nothing to do with Whitewater). And just recently the GOP Freedom Caucus in the House–a group filled with corrupt SOBs like Jim Jordan–pulled the whole AOI against Rosenstein for the simple reason that Rosenstein was doing his job and protecting Mueller.

      When we get concrete evidence via a report, then let’s talk impeachment. Doing that before is, well, a fool’s gambit.