Home | About | Donate

'One More Reason to Refuse to Give Defense Department $733 Billion' as Pentagon Shifts Funds to Trump Border Wall

'One More Reason to Refuse to Give Defense Department $733 Billion' as Pentagon Shifts Funds to Trump Border Wall

Jake Johnson, staff writer

In a move Rep. Pramila Jayapal decried as yet another reason to "refuse to give the Defense Department $733 billion" in funding, the Pentagon on Friday reportedly approved a plan to divert $1.5 billion from its endless war budget to help pay for the construction of 80 miles of wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

"Obviously they don't need" the funds, tweeted Jayapal, "because they keep diverting billions, without congressional authorization, to Trump's vanity wall."

Where is congress? I thought he swore to uphold the constitution not violate it.

2 Likes

Democrats, Please! You now have the rationale to chop a large chunk out of the Pentagon budget. Do not waste this opportunity.

3 Likes

Misplaced hope it would seem. Democrats serve the Republicans, not the people. The pentagon was supposed to be sending in a accounting of all their spending as required by law for decades now. They never did without penalty until last year. When their accounting was finally received, it could not account for 21 Trillion dollars. Congress did nothing.

8 Likes

…because the possibility of tomain tacos must be prevented at ALL costs…

Pentagonians including Trump are as traitorous to the US as Guidó is to Venezuela.

Cowardly congress and US military traitors are milking US citizens as they help destroy life.

They’re all fired! Make a new modern government.

2 Likes

Watch the Democrats fall in line behind their leadership.

If only, no one ever voted for them again.

4 Likes

Not to mention septic salsa.

If he gets away with this the Pentagon Budget will become Calilgula’s personal slush fund.

1 Like

I am so happy Jayapal is leading on this issue. She’s great. The president is spending money for purposes that congress did not permit. It’s time to use the power of the purse against him. I like her idea and hopefully the Trumpist courts don’t stand in the way.

2 Likes

Yea, IF Pelosi has the guts, and sense of her constitutional duty, to act in appropriate ways. I’m not holding my breath, but I’d really like to be proven wrong.

1 Like

Can’t account for it because it was never on the ‘books’. The $733,000,000,000 official warmonger budget is for public consumption. Numerous agencies (some unknown) money launder billions more into the war machine…including the treasury department. It is farther hidden under ‘National Security’.

.1% percent oligarch and plutocrat wet dream … trillions that are untraceable.

1 Like

I don’t have the antipathy for Pelosi others have, given the diversity of the caucus she has to corral, but she really has missed the moment when it comes to Trump. It’s not that hard to say the House is working through committees, and nothing’s off the table when asked about impeachment, etc. But she’s gone out of her way to say Trump is doing unconstitutional things, while basically putting her hands up saying “huh” at the same time. It’s become untenable, while looking disorganized and foolish. Luckily Nadler and Cummings seem to see what’s happening.

Jayapal is totally doing the right thing here. I hope the progressive caucus takes a strong stand. The president is redirecting money illegally. No more “huh.”

1 Like

Is the nation secure? Has any nation in history ever had anything close to this kind of budget. How many of those nations with national security budgets a minuscule fraction of the size of ours were less secure than ours now is, all of them? Every single nation in Europe is more secure than us, and yet the whole European Union, together, has a national security budget that is microscopic compared to our own. Could it be that when tens of Trillions of taxpayer dollars are hidden from view that you could do whatever you wanted with the money, anything at all - give away a hundred billion to a friend for example, or buy yourself a massive yacht collection for another example? Any justification for this is grand larceny on a scale unimaginable, a single trillion is a thousand billion, this is TWENTY ONE MILLION, MILLION DOLLARS OF OUR MONEY! That’s 21 million, one million dollar bills. 21 million of them. And that’s just the money we know they are stealing. congress, by the way, has no problem with this at all.

True, but lets call it what it is: AN AGGRESSIVE, OFFENSE DEPARTMENT! Obviously, the $733 billion offensive war budget, has nothing to do with keeping the average American safe and everything to do with keeping Amerikan Fascism safe. That is why I say we live in a military dictatorship because Congress has committed treason by being nothing but sycophants for the military.

I see Pelosi as a 3rd way corporate sponsor. Her ‘pragmatic incrementalism’ is a stopgap between the 1% and the rest of us and it usually does NOT favor the rest of us. We’ve seen that movie and I have no patience for that any more.

That’s another problem and one (I think) created to help the slide to the right. The ‘tent’ so big that ‘leadership’ can do, or not do what ever it wants and claim that they can’t come to agreement (when it’s in favor of the 99%), or, take another step to the right and say Well that’s what the ‘group’ wants when its really what their corporate puppet-masters want, not the rest of us. When a republican finally gives up on their party and says I’m going to be a Democrat now, they don’t have to sign on to any programs on the left, they can bring all of their right wing crap along with them. This is why there isn’t much of a platform from the non-progressive candidates other than vote for us we’re not them. What we do get is watered down. Example: 70% of Americans - both parties- support Medicare for All. The dem ‘leadership’ and the 3rd way, Blue-Dog Corporate crowd does not. They want to water it down for their donors. This is the result of the Democratic ‘leadership’ - in the 80’s - abandoning the working class in favor of the 1%.

Here’s one just posted on HuffPo

America’s Next Too-Big-To-Fail Bank

Democrats helped create this monster.

We can’t survive two Corporate Parties and noting on the Left

2 Likes

If this isn’t stopped our House of Representatives might as well disband pack-up and go home they will be obsolete…

It won’t happen. Even a proposed 5% per year would have a very difficult time passing either house.

The Medicare-for-All polls show uncomfortable things too:

It’s the difference between the name, Medicare, and the details underneath it. Medicare is popular, which is one reason why progressives call iterations of single payer Medicare-for-All, not single payer. However, details matter, and getting into them shows popularity is not as solid as we would like to believe. This has long been a problem in our country, it polls well in name or concept, but not in detail. People have loss aversion, fear new taxes, and it’s not just the Democratic leadership’s problem.

The good news is progress is being made, the bad news is it may take some time.

“Morning Consult” ? Brought to you by Deloitte? aka Arthur Anderson.
Please.

Another corporate BS factory?

Key People in Morning Consult Holdings, Inc.:
Michael Ramlet
Evan Judge
Craig Shelburne

Geez hated to go there but found this at DU:

Morning Consult is owned by Republican Michael Ramlet
Regarding a poll that has no track record whatsoever (Morning Consult), here is information about its CEO, Michael Ramlet, from his bio:

Michael Ramlet is a domestic policy and economic expert. He leads Purple Policy, a consulting practice that advises government affairs, business strategy, and financial services clients on the economic impact of political and policy changes. In addition, Ramlet is the founder and editor of The Morning Consult, a daily healthcare industry and public policy briefing that is subscribed to by over 2400 policymakers and executives. He has also served as an outside adviser to the nation’s Republican Governors. Prior to joining Purple, Michael was a policy director at the American Action Forum. In this role, Ramlet regularly contributed to Congressional testimony, published over 45 policy papers, and ran point for more than 100 economists in filing Supreme Court amicus briefs on the economics of the Affordable Care Act. His work has been cited in The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News, and the New York Times.

> Evan Judge is a Partner with MRA Associates. In this role, he provides investment and wealth management advice to high net worth families, individuals, institutions, and foundations. He also serves as a member of MRA Associates’ Management Committee
*> *
> Prior to joining MRA Associates in 2013, Evan was a Relationship Manager with GenSpring Family Offices where he worked with high net worth clients and families. In that role, he provided portfolio management, cash flow planning and estate planning advice for individuals, families, partnerships, and foundations. He is a CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™ professional and a CFA® Charterholder

Sounds like a Corporate propaganda BS machine to me.

3 Likes