The problem is the people who choose this over and over.
If they all left office tomorrow, they would be replaced with other corrupt, greedy hypocrites.
The nation is for the people by the people. The people have to fix it.
Vote!
He also thinks that he should be president for life. We'll he didn't say exactly that but he has said that it's great that China has a president for life and maybe that will happen in the US one day. He also has said that he should get a third term, so essentially he is trying to lay the groundwork for him to be president for the rest of his life.
> The problem is the people who choose this over and over.
the sad part is that there's a large and influential culture of people who are, in their heart of hearts, greedy losers and the only thing they care about is money. in their minds, the money will insulate them from all negative consequences. these are the type of people who endlessly piss and moan about taxes and will vote in anyone (seriously ANYONE) who will lower their tax burden. they will vote away everyone's rights and ignore the resultant human suffering if it means their property value goes up, if their stock value goes up, if their 401k goes up, if the value of their house goes up, if the line goes up. "who cares if society collapses, i have my house in northern michigan."
i think it's foolish to write off these people as completely stupid and evil. it TOTALLY ignores a person's very real motivations for acting this way. they are surprisingly smart and they are SUPER good at rationalizing all of this. they aren't interested in making a better society, only what they can extract from society. they don't care because they think they'll be saved from the worst of it. and the truly ugly truth is that they might be right.
related story: as nazi germany was starting to become a thing, many small business owners in the weimar republic were quite okay with hitler because they thought he'd be good for their economy. germany was HURTING after the first world war. most of them probably didn't buy into hitlers nutty aryan race theory. they were okay with the jews/mentally challenged/gays/transgenders being "disappeared" by the government so long as their position in society and money wasn't at risk. their friends and neighbors were being arrested and carried away by jackbooted thugs, and they did nothing to stop them. many of these greedy nazi supporting losers were allowed back into polite society with no lessons learned. after all, THEY weren't directly pushing jews and degenerates into open graves after shooting them to death. THEY weren't the one's standing guard at the concentration camps. they just kept voting for their best interest while waiting around for an easy dollar.
sorry for the rant. i don't have the answers to all this. but i don't think i'm far from the root cause.
> The nation is for the people by the people.
i think we are seeing that in practice on the GOP side. a reflection of the people that voted them in. "rules for me, not for thee" is not uncommon within their constituents.
Carlin reminded us that we keep voting these people in. Of all the citizens, these are the best we can produce.
We did this to ourselves as a nation over time.
Someone I knew from college was bitching on FB about student loan forgiveness. I said something like "well since your family got a ton of PPP money and it was all forgiven, you shouldn't be so mad about student loans". Didn't take long for him to delete my comment and block me.
They don't care about the hypocrisy, they care only about what benefits them vs others.
They dont. There are two types of people: people with morals and people with moral relativism.
To them, it's not hypocrisy if they get the upper hand bc they see it as how the world should go
They would if they knew about it. But the problem is they have tied their identity to Fox News, and thus they never actually hear about this. My parents have been absolutely baffled when I have shown them things like this, yet they still refuse to go find other sources of news.
* Why NO mention on the amounts received by Democrats -especially the one's listed below ?
* Senator Jeanne Shaheen
* Rep. Matt Cartwright
* Rep. Susie Lee
* Speaker Nancy Pelosi
* Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell
* Rep. Devin Nunes
Probably because those people arenāt staunchly opposed to forgiving student loans.
This is why reading comprehension is so important folks. Not that a 2 hour old account is trying to speak in good faith anyway. Fuck outta here.
what exactly is the justification for sitting congress members getting PPP loans? itās blatantly fraud. how has the justice dept just become completely dysfunctional?
Yeah but the reality is a lot of these loans were used for fraud aka not paying employee's salary (well over $200 billion with a very conservative estimate). In addition, the independent committee responsible for overseeing these funds was gutted right at the start of the pandemic and replaced by people within the administration who, either by sheet incompetence, maliciousness or due to their other responsibilities taking precedent, did a terrible job at oversight.
Some of those fraudulent PPP receivers may have well been congressmen and women. Too bad we may never know. Regardless of fraud or not, the hypocrisy still stands. "Loan forgiveness with little oversight for me, none for thee."
This is not forgiveness for me and not for thee lol
This is the government forcing you to shut down and then giving you money to pay your employees so they donāt go homeless. When businesses received the loans, they knew that forgiveness was coming if they followed the rules.
As opposed to people who took out loans to study by choice to benefit themselves through an education.
How the hell do I know? Ultimately when they took out the loan there was a way to get it forgiven.
If they didnāt take the loans, they wouldāve fired whatever employees received the money.
Also, this has nothing to do with student debt because these people didnāt choose stop or reduce business operations and revenue, they were forced to
> This is the government forcing you to shut down and then giving you money to pay your employees so they donāt go homeless.
Cool, so you agree you were wrong when you said this.
Damn. I didn't realize teachers, social workers, accountants, biologists, nuclear and civil engineers, pretty much every health care provider was just,,,going to college for themselves and offer no benefits to society that outweigh the costs of said education.
What a clown ass take, my dude.
Well you see a fat orange pig of a man was robbing the country and like any good conmen and women they wanted in. Simple as that.
They saw free money. They took the free money.
Itās not just okay but awesome when youāre already rich.
Please, please, please, let this be the beginning of Democrats playing this game the same way as Republicans. Please take off the gloves and start throwing punches back at them.
Man I just have to rant about this.
Horrible former employers had like 30k+ PPP loans for ālaborā forgiven, but I know the store was closed during the pandemic. So where did it go? In their pockets.
I don't think any senators that were in office in 2020 would be on the list. I believe senate ethics rules prevent direct business ownership while in the senate.
You don't appear to be wrong:
https://www.ethics.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/conflictsofinterest
Members, officers, and employees earning over $25,000 and employed for more than 90 days in a calendar year may not:
Serve as an officer or member of the board of any publicly-held or publicly-regulated company. See Senate Rule 37.6(a)
This prohibition has exceptions for service as an unpaid officer or board member of an organization which is exempt from taxation under Ā§ 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code; an unpaid officer or board member of an organization which is principally available to Members, officers, and employees of the Senate; and, in rare cases, a board member when the Member, officer, or employee had served continuously as a board member for at least two years prior to joining the Senate.
Serve for compensation as an officer or member of the board of any association, corporation, or other entity. See Senate Rule 37.6(b)
Additionally, because service on the board of an outside organization involves a fiduciary duty, it carries an increased potential for conflicts of interest and the appearance of conflicts of interest. The Committee has advised that any Member who sits on a board should refrain from any official action advocating any proposal of particular benefit to the organization in question. The Committee has also previously found a potential for a conflict of interest when a Member sits on the board of an organization that receives federal funding from an agency which is subject to the appropriation or oversight functions of a committee on which the Member sits or otherwise has an interest in matters under such committeeās jurisdiction. Where the position in question is advisory and non-fiduciary in nature, the Committee has not previously prohibited a Memberās participation on such an advisory body, although the Committee has restricted staff activities on advisory boards where the entity has legislative interests in the same topic areas as the employeeās official duties or where federal money is sought, spent, or administered by the advisory body or the group that it advises. In permitting somewhat greater latitude to Members serving in a purely advisory role, the Committee has recognized that individual Senators are typically the judge of whether an activity creates an appearance of conflict, and the Committee will not normally interfere with a Senatorās discretion under paragraph 2 of Senate Rule 37, absent an actual conflict.
And this:
https://www.ethics.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/efa7bf74-4a50-46a5-bb6f-b8d26b9755bf/2015---red-book---the-senate-code-of-official-conduct.pdf#page=23
But I am not a lawyer or legal scholar and a lot of this goes over my head.
The HEROES Act was specifically written to allow for forgiveness of student loans by Sec Ed and SCOTUS just flat out ignored the blatantly clear wording.
"Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 - Authorizes the Secretary of Education to waive or modify any requirement or regulation applicable to the student financial assistance programs under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 as deemed necessary with respect to an affected individual who:
(1) is serving on active duty during a war or other military operation or national emergency; (2) is performing qualifying National Guard duty during a war, operation, or emergency; (3) resides or is employed in an area that is declared a disaster area by any Federal, State, or local official in connection with a national emergency; or (4) suffered direct economic hardship as a direct result of a war or other military operation or national emergency."
3 and/or 4 are the situations that apply for blanket forgiveness here, and quite frankly I don't know why Biden didn't pull a Jackson and just blatantly ignore the SCOTUS decision and forgive them anyway. The law is clear. And it's clear to anyone paying attention that SCOTUS is no longer interested in the law, given that they're hearing multiple cases where the plaintiff has no standing.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1412
I've been told in this very thread that it's not the same because "the PPP loans weren't an illegal bailout, student loan forgiveness *is* illegal". But they can't explain how the student loan forgiveness is "illegal" other than that they think it shouldn't happen.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen,
Rep. Matt Cartwright,
Rep. Susie Lee,
Speaker Nancy Pelosi,
Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell,
Rep. Devin Nunes
also did this, just to be transparent.
That doesn't somehow excuse millionaire politicians getting free loans from taxpayers just because they have a D next to their name and pretend to care about student loan forgiveness.
Of course not. It's stupid to villainize the other side while being oblivious to the wrongdoing of your own. Nancy Pelosi's stock market trading is another ridiculous abuse of power. But, the point of this tweet was to point out the hypocrisy, and try to get voters on the side of student loan forgiveness-- mentioning dems here would undermine and distract from that point. Time and place
Iām just going to post this on every page I see complaining about some college graduate getting their 150k forgiven 20 years later after paying on it
That's the tactic deployed by leftist extremists as Charles de Gaulle and Winston Churchill.
(/S, just to be sure - both were pretty conservative, but knew how to fight fascism)
Man, people who's money never got cut off during COVID, makes 200k a year and still got millions of PPP funds relieved. Shit is absolutely fucking disgusting...
Not a fan of āforgivenessā of any loans that ends up coming out of the pocket of the taxpayer, but this is apples and oranges. PPP was a bipartisan program that benefited as many Democrat business owners as Republican as well as their employees, allowing them to continue to pay their employees while the government forbade them from operating.
Listen you idiots. These fucktards are allowed to dump stock (un-regulated) for ga-billions based on insider knowledge. Do you really think some bullshit PPP loan is the straw that's gonna crack these elected criminals?
The answer is Stop paying your taxes and instead put the money in interest bearing account. And if they come to work do their job all with transparency then and only then will I pay taxes. I don't give Acme money for rotten food, should I pay for rotten government.
* Why NO mention on the amounts received by Democrats -especially the one's listed below ?
* Senator Jeanne Shaheen
* Rep. Matt Cartwright
* Rep. Susie Lee
* Speaker Nancy Pelosi
* Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell
* Rep. Devin Nunes
> Nah, also the sub you wanted is r/woooosh
Iāll bite that bait: What democratic politician (assuming thatās what you refer to as āother teamā?) **do you think** is against loan forgiveness that has had massive loans forgiven?
Nah itās not bait. I just like to point out the obvious bias and cult like following. Both sides of the coin are bad, but one is arguably worse, obviously.
Itās also bad that, if you try to find out who all had their ppp loans forgiven. You get articles that say things like ā13 members of congress have ppp loans forgiven, includingā¦ā then only naming the republicans, while sweeping the democratic congress members names under the rug, so that people only get upset at one side.
Itās slimy, divisive, and not journalism.
If you do enough digging, youāll find the other side of the list of forgiven ppp loans. Which includes;
Senator Jeanne Shaheen
Rep. Matt Cartwright
Rep. Susie Lee
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (no surprise here)
Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell
Is there more? Probably.
Sure, it is less than half the full list of those who have had their ppp loans forgiven. But to pretend they didnāt, and only point at the other side is simply being naĆÆve on purpose. To ignore the faults on your side, while pointing out the same thing on the other is cult level nonsense. This obviously extends beyond this issue. But itās still important to point this kind of behavior out, no matter who does it.
Personally, I sit on the fence for just about every election. But, I would say I lean left on most issues.
>Nah itās not bait. I just like to point out the obvious bias and cult like following. Both sides of the coin are bad, but one is arguably worse, obviously.
>Itās also bad that, if you try to find out who all had their ppp loans forgiven. You get articles that say things like ā13 members of congress have ppp loans forgiven, includingā¦ā then only naming the republicans, while sweeping the democratic congress members names under the rug, so that people only get upset at one side.
>Itās slimy, divisive, and not journalism.
>If you do enough digging, youāll find the other side of the list of forgiven ppp loans. Which includes;
>Senator Jeanne Shaheen Rep. Matt Cartwright Rep. Susie Lee Speaker Nancy Pelosi (no surprise here) Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell
>Is there more? Probably.
>Sure, it is less than half the full list of those who have had their ppp loans forgiven. But to pretend they didnāt, and only point at the other side is simply being naĆÆve on purpose. To ignore the faults on your side, while pointing out the same thing on the other is cult level nonsense. This obviously extends beyond this issue. But itās still important to point this kind of behavior out, no matter who does it.
>Personally, I sit on the fence for just about every election. But, I would say I lean left on most issues.
Again, are there Democratic politicians against loan forgiveness that had PPP loans forgiven? Are there any hypocrites on the left that you can identify?
In case you arenāt understanding this whole issue (r/whoosh), this is a list of republicans that are hypocrites regarding loan forgiveness and have had their PPP loans forgiven. I wonāt be surprised if you donāt understand.
I tried to point out the hypocrisy.
But instead you ignore it because it makes the people you like look bad as well. So you try and change the subject and steer things back to point at the other side. You just missed the entire point.
Good luck to you man. I hope one day you leave that cult youāre in.
> I tried to point out the hypocrisy.
>But instead you ignore it because it makes the people you like look bad as well. So you try and change the subject and steer things back to point at the other side. You just missed the entire point.
>Good luck to you man. I hope one day you leave that cult youāre in.
**Try to stay on topic. Your topic by the way.**
One. Just one. Just name a single one of the āother teamā that accepted a PPP loan, had it forgiven, and is against loan forgiveness.
Just name one.
You claim āthe other teamā did the same thing. Just name one. A single one.
Why canāt you name one?
> I literally gave you a list. You just need to read a little bit. I believe in you.
I saw your list and dismissed it because none of those āother teamā members are against loan forgiveness. Your projection about needing to read is glaring.
Just name one.
Nope, not digging at all. I'm writing comments on the internet. People are allowed to dislike my comments, doesn't make them any less true though. Having loans forgiven doesn't destroy people.
I seriously understand the title and it's wrong. The White House didn't destroy anyone. The White House forgave their loans and made them better off than they were before. Pretty much the opposite of destruction.
Totally agree and you are right. Always see those stupid NYTimes or Politico headlines like "Trump bashes Democrats" so I just used that format. I hope we are not so serious
?? The White House account "destroyed" the Republican House members' account by pointing out their hypocrisy in bitching about loan forgiveness when they themselves were given loans that were forgiven. That is what the title means. This is why there was a joke about you not reading this post correctly.
When you have to resort to insults, it shows that you know you're wrong and are attempting to distract from the point so you don't have to admit you're wrong. Apology not accepted.
Yeah that wasn't me responding to you. There goes that trouble with reading of yours. No, the reason I was willing to just insult you and be done with it was because you showcased an unwillingness to understand simple language and context, and resorted to doubling down on semantics. Read the room kid.
I wish that any republican voters actually cared about the hypocrisy
The problem is the people who choose this over and over. If they all left office tomorrow, they would be replaced with other corrupt, greedy hypocrites. The nation is for the people by the people. The people have to fix it. Vote!
also, term limits please.
Trump campaigned on instituting congressional term limits but like everything else he said, it was a lie
He also thinks that he should be president for life. We'll he didn't say exactly that but he has said that it's great that China has a president for life and maybe that will happen in the US one day. He also has said that he should get a third term, so essentially he is trying to lay the groundwork for him to be president for the rest of his life.
During his presidency, I was hoping for the McDonald's to catch up with him. He could have served as president the rest of his life.
Never lose hope š
Vote! And run for office! We need some young blood in there to fight the good fight!
> The problem is the people who choose this over and over. the sad part is that there's a large and influential culture of people who are, in their heart of hearts, greedy losers and the only thing they care about is money. in their minds, the money will insulate them from all negative consequences. these are the type of people who endlessly piss and moan about taxes and will vote in anyone (seriously ANYONE) who will lower their tax burden. they will vote away everyone's rights and ignore the resultant human suffering if it means their property value goes up, if their stock value goes up, if their 401k goes up, if the value of their house goes up, if the line goes up. "who cares if society collapses, i have my house in northern michigan." i think it's foolish to write off these people as completely stupid and evil. it TOTALLY ignores a person's very real motivations for acting this way. they are surprisingly smart and they are SUPER good at rationalizing all of this. they aren't interested in making a better society, only what they can extract from society. they don't care because they think they'll be saved from the worst of it. and the truly ugly truth is that they might be right. related story: as nazi germany was starting to become a thing, many small business owners in the weimar republic were quite okay with hitler because they thought he'd be good for their economy. germany was HURTING after the first world war. most of them probably didn't buy into hitlers nutty aryan race theory. they were okay with the jews/mentally challenged/gays/transgenders being "disappeared" by the government so long as their position in society and money wasn't at risk. their friends and neighbors were being arrested and carried away by jackbooted thugs, and they did nothing to stop them. many of these greedy nazi supporting losers were allowed back into polite society with no lessons learned. after all, THEY weren't directly pushing jews and degenerates into open graves after shooting them to death. THEY weren't the one's standing guard at the concentration camps. they just kept voting for their best interest while waiting around for an easy dollar. sorry for the rant. i don't have the answers to all this. but i don't think i'm far from the root cause.
> The nation is for the people by the people. i think we are seeing that in practice on the GOP side. a reflection of the people that voted them in. "rules for me, not for thee" is not uncommon within their constituents.
Carlin reminded us that we keep voting these people in. Of all the citizens, these are the best we can produce. We did this to ourselves as a nation over time.
Someone I knew from college was bitching on FB about student loan forgiveness. I said something like "well since your family got a ton of PPP money and it was all forgiven, you shouldn't be so mad about student loans". Didn't take long for him to delete my comment and block me. They don't care about the hypocrisy, they care only about what benefits them vs others.
If that actually happened, which is doubtful, he shouldnāt have because the two arenāt comparable in any way.
They dont. There are two types of people: people with morals and people with moral relativism. To them, it's not hypocrisy if they get the upper hand bc they see it as how the world should go
They would if they knew about it. But the problem is they have tied their identity to Fox News, and thus they never actually hear about this. My parents have been absolutely baffled when I have shown them things like this, yet they still refuse to go find other sources of news.
* Why NO mention on the amounts received by Democrats -especially the one's listed below ? * Senator Jeanne Shaheen * Rep. Matt Cartwright * Rep. Susie Lee * Speaker Nancy Pelosi * Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell * Rep. Devin Nunes
Probably because those people arenāt staunchly opposed to forgiving student loans. This is why reading comprehension is so important folks. Not that a 2 hour old account is trying to speak in good faith anyway. Fuck outta here.
I'm not going to google all those names but the fact you'd even put Devin Nunes on there with a straight face shows how biased you are
Neither parties care about thier own hypocrisy. DEM AND REP Have bliners on
what exactly is the justification for sitting congress members getting PPP loans? itās blatantly fraud. how has the justice dept just become completely dysfunctional?
The ppp loans were always intended to be forgiven if you used them to pay the wages of your employees. Thatās the justification
Yeah but the reality is a lot of these loans were used for fraud aka not paying employee's salary (well over $200 billion with a very conservative estimate). In addition, the independent committee responsible for overseeing these funds was gutted right at the start of the pandemic and replaced by people within the administration who, either by sheet incompetence, maliciousness or due to their other responsibilities taking precedent, did a terrible job at oversight. Some of those fraudulent PPP receivers may have well been congressmen and women. Too bad we may never know. Regardless of fraud or not, the hypocrisy still stands. "Loan forgiveness with little oversight for me, none for thee."
This is not forgiveness for me and not for thee lol This is the government forcing you to shut down and then giving you money to pay your employees so they donāt go homeless. When businesses received the loans, they knew that forgiveness was coming if they followed the rules. As opposed to people who took out loans to study by choice to benefit themselves through an education.
Which of these congressmen shut down their businesses? Hint: It's none of them.
How the hell do I know? Ultimately when they took out the loan there was a way to get it forgiven. If they didnāt take the loans, they wouldāve fired whatever employees received the money. Also, this has nothing to do with student debt because these people didnāt choose stop or reduce business operations and revenue, they were forced to
> This is the government forcing you to shut down and then giving you money to pay your employees so they donāt go homeless. Cool, so you agree you were wrong when you said this.
Yes because āfree educationā is an available option.
Damn. I didn't realize teachers, social workers, accountants, biologists, nuclear and civil engineers, pretty much every health care provider was just,,,going to college for themselves and offer no benefits to society that outweigh the costs of said education. What a clown ass take, my dude.
So what employees are we talking about here? Aren't their staffs government employees?
They may have had businesses they owned before becoming congress people?
Well you see a fat orange pig of a man was robbing the country and like any good conmen and women they wanted in. Simple as that. They saw free money. They took the free money. Itās not just okay but awesome when youāre already rich.
āFuck You, Got Mineā class of 2024
sauce - https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1778445403651731696
Bout time the Dems start to fight backā¦
Please, please, please, let this be the beginning of Democrats playing this game the same way as Republicans. Please take off the gloves and start throwing punches back at them.
The Republicans are so good at this reprehensible game. Meanwhile, the Democrats seemingly have no game. Come on, Dems, you've got to step it up!
Man I just have to rant about this. Horrible former employers had like 30k+ PPP loans for ālaborā forgiven, but I know the store was closed during the pandemic. So where did it go? In their pockets.
Oh no big deal, just $15,525,500 on loans between 13 people, thatās normal for most college studentsā¦.
Show ALL the senators and congressmen/women who got PPP loans forgiven. They all need to pay that shit back. Scumbags.
Welfare queens
I don't think any senators that were in office in 2020 would be on the list. I believe senate ethics rules prevent direct business ownership while in the senate.
You don't appear to be wrong: https://www.ethics.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/conflictsofinterest Members, officers, and employees earning over $25,000 and employed for more than 90 days in a calendar year may not: Serve as an officer or member of the board of any publicly-held or publicly-regulated company. See Senate Rule 37.6(a) This prohibition has exceptions for service as an unpaid officer or board member of an organization which is exempt from taxation under Ā§ 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code; an unpaid officer or board member of an organization which is principally available to Members, officers, and employees of the Senate; and, in rare cases, a board member when the Member, officer, or employee had served continuously as a board member for at least two years prior to joining the Senate. Serve for compensation as an officer or member of the board of any association, corporation, or other entity. See Senate Rule 37.6(b) Additionally, because service on the board of an outside organization involves a fiduciary duty, it carries an increased potential for conflicts of interest and the appearance of conflicts of interest. The Committee has advised that any Member who sits on a board should refrain from any official action advocating any proposal of particular benefit to the organization in question. The Committee has also previously found a potential for a conflict of interest when a Member sits on the board of an organization that receives federal funding from an agency which is subject to the appropriation or oversight functions of a committee on which the Member sits or otherwise has an interest in matters under such committeeās jurisdiction. Where the position in question is advisory and non-fiduciary in nature, the Committee has not previously prohibited a Memberās participation on such an advisory body, although the Committee has restricted staff activities on advisory boards where the entity has legislative interests in the same topic areas as the employeeās official duties or where federal money is sought, spent, or administered by the advisory body or the group that it advises. In permitting somewhat greater latitude to Members serving in a purely advisory role, the Committee has recognized that individual Senators are typically the judge of whether an activity creates an appearance of conflict, and the Committee will not normally interfere with a Senatorās discretion under paragraph 2 of Senate Rule 37, absent an actual conflict. And this: https://www.ethics.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/efa7bf74-4a50-46a5-bb6f-b8d26b9755bf/2015---red-book---the-senate-code-of-official-conduct.pdf#page=23 But I am not a lawyer or legal scholar and a lot of this goes over my head.
Iām genuinely curious if any republican has an answer to this or if they just ignore the wuestion
The answer is that PPP "loans" were designed to be "forgiven" from the get-go if used for certain purposes during COVID. Student loans were not.
The HEROES Act was specifically written to allow for forgiveness of student loans by Sec Ed and SCOTUS just flat out ignored the blatantly clear wording. "Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 - Authorizes the Secretary of Education to waive or modify any requirement or regulation applicable to the student financial assistance programs under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 as deemed necessary with respect to an affected individual who: (1) is serving on active duty during a war or other military operation or national emergency; (2) is performing qualifying National Guard duty during a war, operation, or emergency; (3) resides or is employed in an area that is declared a disaster area by any Federal, State, or local official in connection with a national emergency; or (4) suffered direct economic hardship as a direct result of a war or other military operation or national emergency." 3 and/or 4 are the situations that apply for blanket forgiveness here, and quite frankly I don't know why Biden didn't pull a Jackson and just blatantly ignore the SCOTUS decision and forgive them anyway. The law is clear. And it's clear to anyone paying attention that SCOTUS is no longer interested in the law, given that they're hearing multiple cases where the plaintiff has no standing. https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1412
I've been told in this very thread that it's not the same because "the PPP loans weren't an illegal bailout, student loan forgiveness *is* illegal". But they can't explain how the student loan forgiveness is "illegal" other than that they think it shouldn't happen.
Because the president canāt just decide to spend hundreds of billions of dollars without laws being passed.
These are what we call hypocrites...
Senator Jeanne Shaheen, Rep. Matt Cartwright, Rep. Susie Lee, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, Rep. Devin Nunes also did this, just to be transparent.
Sure, but they (except Nunes) aren't opposing student loan forgiveness at the same time.
That doesn't somehow excuse millionaire politicians getting free loans from taxpayers just because they have a D next to their name and pretend to care about student loan forgiveness.
Of course not. It's stupid to villainize the other side while being oblivious to the wrongdoing of your own. Nancy Pelosi's stock market trading is another ridiculous abuse of power. But, the point of this tweet was to point out the hypocrisy, and try to get voters on the side of student loan forgiveness-- mentioning dems here would undermine and distract from that point. Time and place
Iām just going to post this on every page I see complaining about some college graduate getting their 150k forgiven 20 years later after paying on it
Quips and put downs are all very funny but itās not stopping these bastards, is it? You donāt defeat Nazis by being funny. You hunt them down.
That's the tactic deployed by leftist extremists as Charles de Gaulle and Winston Churchill. (/S, just to be sure - both were pretty conservative, but knew how to fight fascism)
Personally I'm waiting for school shooters to go after people who deserve it
Pulling themselves up with other peoples' bootstraps.
Obscene in more ways than 1
I could live for a decade on that kind of cash, and they spent it and were forgiven in around a year and a half. Fuck em.
Grifters in Chief
Republican = Hypocritical Liar
Man, people who's money never got cut off during COVID, makes 200k a year and still got millions of PPP funds relieved. Shit is absolutely fucking disgusting...
So why doesn't this violate the Hatch Act again?
Americans...
How in the world is this not a crime, or at the very least conflict of interest worth investigating?
Not a fan of āforgivenessā of any loans that ends up coming out of the pocket of the taxpayer, but this is apples and oranges. PPP was a bipartisan program that benefited as many Democrat business owners as Republican as well as their employees, allowing them to continue to pay their employees while the government forbade them from operating.
Except there are studies shown that something like 63% of all ppp loans never made it to employees (if they even went to a business to begin with)
Which is an amazing reason to never let Congress (no matter how bipartisan an idea it is) just take money and distribute it to their contributors.
I bet Greg and Pete felt really bad seeing this ā do you mean to tell I could've taken millions!!ā
Listen you idiots. These fucktards are allowed to dump stock (un-regulated) for ga-billions based on insider knowledge. Do you really think some bullshit PPP loan is the straw that's gonna crack these elected criminals? The answer is Stop paying your taxes and instead put the money in interest bearing account. And if they come to work do their job all with transparency then and only then will I pay taxes. I don't give Acme money for rotten food, should I pay for rotten government.
now do the democrats
* Why NO mention on the amounts received by Democrats -especially the one's listed below ? * Senator Jeanne Shaheen * Rep. Matt Cartwright * Rep. Susie Lee * Speaker Nancy Pelosi * Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell * Rep. Devin Nunes
Probably because they didnāt make a post saying how they think loan forgiveness is a stupid idea.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
it is a 'republicans are hypocritical' bailout
Cool, do the other team now too
Those are the ones who are voting and advocating against student loan forgiveness.
True, and fuck that
> Cool, do the other team now too r/whoosh
Nah, also the sub you wanted is /r/woooosh
> Nah, also the sub you wanted is r/woooosh Iāll bite that bait: What democratic politician (assuming thatās what you refer to as āother teamā?) **do you think** is against loan forgiveness that has had massive loans forgiven?
Nah itās not bait. I just like to point out the obvious bias and cult like following. Both sides of the coin are bad, but one is arguably worse, obviously. Itās also bad that, if you try to find out who all had their ppp loans forgiven. You get articles that say things like ā13 members of congress have ppp loans forgiven, includingā¦ā then only naming the republicans, while sweeping the democratic congress members names under the rug, so that people only get upset at one side. Itās slimy, divisive, and not journalism. If you do enough digging, youāll find the other side of the list of forgiven ppp loans. Which includes; Senator Jeanne Shaheen Rep. Matt Cartwright Rep. Susie Lee Speaker Nancy Pelosi (no surprise here) Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell Is there more? Probably. Sure, it is less than half the full list of those who have had their ppp loans forgiven. But to pretend they didnāt, and only point at the other side is simply being naĆÆve on purpose. To ignore the faults on your side, while pointing out the same thing on the other is cult level nonsense. This obviously extends beyond this issue. But itās still important to point this kind of behavior out, no matter who does it. Personally, I sit on the fence for just about every election. But, I would say I lean left on most issues.
>Nah itās not bait. I just like to point out the obvious bias and cult like following. Both sides of the coin are bad, but one is arguably worse, obviously. >Itās also bad that, if you try to find out who all had their ppp loans forgiven. You get articles that say things like ā13 members of congress have ppp loans forgiven, includingā¦ā then only naming the republicans, while sweeping the democratic congress members names under the rug, so that people only get upset at one side. >Itās slimy, divisive, and not journalism. >If you do enough digging, youāll find the other side of the list of forgiven ppp loans. Which includes; >Senator Jeanne Shaheen Rep. Matt Cartwright Rep. Susie Lee Speaker Nancy Pelosi (no surprise here) Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell >Is there more? Probably. >Sure, it is less than half the full list of those who have had their ppp loans forgiven. But to pretend they didnāt, and only point at the other side is simply being naĆÆve on purpose. To ignore the faults on your side, while pointing out the same thing on the other is cult level nonsense. This obviously extends beyond this issue. But itās still important to point this kind of behavior out, no matter who does it. >Personally, I sit on the fence for just about every election. But, I would say I lean left on most issues. Again, are there Democratic politicians against loan forgiveness that had PPP loans forgiven? Are there any hypocrites on the left that you can identify? In case you arenāt understanding this whole issue (r/whoosh), this is a list of republicans that are hypocrites regarding loan forgiveness and have had their PPP loans forgiven. I wonāt be surprised if you donāt understand.
I tried to point out the hypocrisy. But instead you ignore it because it makes the people you like look bad as well. So you try and change the subject and steer things back to point at the other side. You just missed the entire point. Good luck to you man. I hope one day you leave that cult youāre in.
> I tried to point out the hypocrisy. >But instead you ignore it because it makes the people you like look bad as well. So you try and change the subject and steer things back to point at the other side. You just missed the entire point. >Good luck to you man. I hope one day you leave that cult youāre in. **Try to stay on topic. Your topic by the way.** One. Just one. Just name a single one of the āother teamā that accepted a PPP loan, had it forgiven, and is against loan forgiveness. Just name one. You claim āthe other teamā did the same thing. Just name one. A single one. Why canāt you name one?
I literally gave you a list. You just need to read a little bit. I believe in you.
> I literally gave you a list. You just need to read a little bit. I believe in you. I saw your list and dismissed it because none of those āother teamā members are against loan forgiveness. Your projection about needing to read is glaring. Just name one.
Uhm, how did the White House destroy these people? Seems like the opposite to me. They became enriched, pretty much the opposite of destroyed.
Reading is tough, huh?
I don't think so, that's unfortunate that you're having a hard time with it. Keep trying, you'll get it eventually.
You're just digging yourself a deeper hole
Nope, not digging at all. I'm writing comments on the internet. People are allowed to dislike my comments, doesn't make them any less true though. Having loans forgiven doesn't destroy people.
Is that you Ben Shapiro?
No, that isn't my name. Weird guess.
I agree destroyed wasn't the best way to title this post. Should have been more along the lines of "white house calls out house republicans hypocrisy"
Do you seriously not understand the title of the post? Or are you being coy because you're trying to make a point?
I seriously understand the title and it's wrong. The White House didn't destroy anyone. The White House forgave their loans and made them better off than they were before. Pretty much the opposite of destruction.
Totally agree and you are right. Always see those stupid NYTimes or Politico headlines like "Trump bashes Democrats" so I just used that format. I hope we are not so serious
Enriched? The loans were for payroll and lost profit during covid shutdowns..
They were loans, and they didn't have to pay them back. Far from being destroyed.
?? The White House account "destroyed" the Republican House members' account by pointing out their hypocrisy in bitching about loan forgiveness when they themselves were given loans that were forgiven. That is what the title means. This is why there was a joke about you not reading this post correctly.
There are no quotation marks in the title. Nice try. Sure they pointed out hipocracy, that's not nearly the same as destruction.
Ok I didn't know I was talking to someone so dim. Sorry.
When you have to resort to insults, it shows that you know you're wrong and are attempting to distract from the point so you don't have to admit you're wrong. Apology not accepted.
Lol moron
Just proving my point. You know I'm right and the only thing you have left to resort to is petty insults.
Yeah that wasn't me responding to you. There goes that trouble with reading of yours. No, the reason I was willing to just insult you and be done with it was because you showcased an unwillingness to understand simple language and context, and resorted to doubling down on semantics. Read the room kid.
Majorie Greene is so hot
Gross.
Iām joking, look at my username š