Not even.

2+2=(3,4,5) is just recognizing imprecision in the original measurement.

The “budget” not matching appropriations is “I’m only going to spend 100 on lotto tickets this month, and save 50” and then buying 150 in lotto and putting the 10 you ‘won’ in savings.

It’s not the math ending up. It’s just recognizing that budgets are nonsense if the actual spending is a wholly separate act of Congress.

As said elsewhere: 30 days or else what?

Trump will withhold the federal dollars Congress appropriated to NY that he already wants to withhold? Projects that would be DOA in a hard-right Congress might be even deader?

Hochul will get another empty threat from the fed DOT?

I assure you that anyone who ever put on a town hall debate, including the League of Women voters and definitely the TV networks, screened the questions and reserved the right to exclude anyone they chose to.

No debate or political event since well before Nixon/Kennedy has been “open to everyone”.

“town hall” is a style of event. Back when there were meaningful debates during presidential campaigns, it used to be a regular choice.

I guarantee you that they were closed events, with attendees chosen legally-arbitrarily by whatever TV network was hosting the event.

So long as he takes questions from those in attendance, it’s a town hall. Even if no cameras are allowed.

So, what rule do you think makes “congressional town halls” work differently than any other campaign activity?

So, how does it work? Does your state have a law requiring congressional “town halls” to be open to the public?

Unless the town hall is paid for with taxpayer dollars or held on government property, it’s a citizen who happens to be in Congress having a private event with their political supporters.

Same as a political party convention or fundraiser dinner,.AFAIK.

(And, depending on state law, even a function on government property may be legally private.)

That Democrats didn’t respond to the “death tax” rebranding by saying “ok, let’s just make the estate tax smaller but annual” is a great example of how we got to this absurd chapter of America.

I think this is the case that found “profound agreement” over the actual issue that was appealed – if the courts should let some appellate divisions require an additional burden when a white/cis/het/xian/guy says they were the victim of discrimination.

The civil rights laws are supposed to protect them, too.

The Republican party chose not to impeach him when he sent a mob to stop a pro forma session.

The Federalist supreme Court declared him immune for prosecution for whatever shit he does in the white house, and exempt from punishment for what he does outside it.

Fucker didn’t declare himself above the law. He just finally realized what his traitorous party has been saying for years.

The Democrats are a minority in both chambers of Congress. The Republicans should be able to pass a simple spending plan on a party line vote, and if they can’t then their dysfunction is not and should never be treated as the Democrats’ fault

Do you think those morons know that the US military reconfigured itself to be an all-volunter professional force after the Vietnam debacle, and that drafting the unemployed would only be arming them?

No, the executive CANNOT arbitrarily convict anyone. In fact, the whole grand/petite jury system exists specifically because we assume that the administration might be a petty tyrannical jerk.

The key feature of American federalism isn’t the polite myth that is “rule of law”. No country is,since the laws are all dependent on people to carry them out. Instead,it’s “separation of power”.

Trump is going to do terrible and shameful things, as Biden did terrible and shameful things, but the ultimate check on his would-be tyranny will be the greed and pride of the Republicans in Congress and on the court.