32 Comments
User's avatar
Robot Bender's avatar

Johnson already backed away from his promise, the little weasel.

Expand full comment
James Coyle's avatar

This was a Senate thing. I don't think Li'l Mikey made any promises. It will be interesting to see what happens concerning the Epstein business after he swears Rep. Grijalva in. My guess is that they will revote the discharge petition and it will fail (but I'm not sure of the procedure). And yes, he's a little weasel, even if that's unfair to weasels.

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

I heard on Jon Stewart's show today that Johnson might be waiting for a Tennessee Republican to be sworn in at the same time - balancing out Grijalva!

Jon had two Democratic House members on the show - it was interesting!

Expand full comment
James Coyle's avatar

That’s interesting. I hadn’t heard that, but it makes sense. Why else would Li’l Mikey have agreed to swear in Rep. Grijalva? The new Tennessee rep would presumably be a MAGAt, which would throw the numbers off for discharge.

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

Yeah - but I havent heard or read anything about it anywhere else. I just figured those two Dem. Reps would know - they were members (NY & PA) of the Veterans caucus - had something to say about Scott Perry & Jan. 6th!

Expand full comment
Pasqual Allen's avatar

Great stuff. I think with Snap air traffic controllers and the things going on in the country there was pressure to get something done. And I think Democrats were thinking about people who weren’t getting food and eating. Yes they did give a lot back. But there were people who weren’t eating. It is so tough and difficult. I don’t think republicans should take a victory lap or democrats. It should’ve never got to this point.

Expand full comment
Xplisset's avatar

Do you think it’s more than likely to happen again Pasqual? Republicans now see that all they have to do to get their way is cause chaos for 40 days. This time it’s the ACA. Next time it could be our social security.

Expand full comment
Pasqual Allen's avatar

Absolutely. And I definitely see that. They will use other things for political blackmail. I really think the Democrats used this as we are saving everyone from starving and getting things going potentially using this as saying we are the party of the people. I’m not sure they realized the people that wanted them to hold out. A lot of us were ready to go as long as it took. I think this was a political opportunity at the same time allowing people to get what they need. Make no mistake though yes Republicans will use more as leverage.

Expand full comment
Donna Maurillo's avatar

Yes, you and I can hold out. We have savings, full pantries, jobs, and other advantages. The lowest-income families and seniors don't have that luxury. We can send them to food banks... but did we all contribute food? Money? Time? If so, how much?

Expand full comment
Pasqual Allen's avatar

Yes exactly why they had to come to a deal. I think it was for the poorer people who just weren’t getting food and what they needed so tough to keep holding out cause you can’t make everybody happy. But at this point there was a plea to get something done. You just hope that we wouldn’t just give all that we gave.

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

Make extortion contemptible again.

Expand full comment
Francis/Clare's avatar

But communities were pitching in to help with food.

Expand full comment
Vickie Berry's avatar

But a lot of people of color are afraid to go out even to food banks. So there’s that too.

Food banks are trying to keep up with the demand but are running out of food.

We all need to pitch in and/or volunteer at our local food banks. We need to take food to our neighbors and friends who are afraid and are hiding in their homes.

Expand full comment
Francis/Clare's avatar

It's all enraging. We've been taken over by aliens. The Confederacy was and is truly evil.

Expand full comment
Donna Maurillo's avatar

I wrote a similar substack today... but without all the details and deep analysis. Xplisset carries the ball again! https://substack.com/home/post/p-178532139

Expand full comment
James Coyle's avatar

They caved, X. It's not even a question anymore. And the so-called protections for Federal employees are only good until 30 January. So Vought can RIF anyone he wants to after that date. The back pay for furloughed employees was going to happen anyway.

Expand full comment
Xplisset's avatar

Ok. Why do you think they thought they had to do this especially with all those wins last eek in the elections?

Expand full comment
J L Graham's avatar

As well or poorly as I might understand this move, I think that if nothing else the timing was poor. The court battle was still on play, and the administration's positions untenable. Irrespective of what comes next, we cannot afford to let our collective memory fade that the regime went to court to BLOCK aid for vulnerable millions and Against what the Constitution calls the general welfare. There is a valid moral dilemma when a gunman vows to harm hostages if their demands are not fulfilled. It's a complicated choice, which negotiators often attempt to nuance. What is not so complicated is the well earned contempt of the public for the hostage takers.

Trump somehow finds money for his every whim (and I expect when the bill for it all finally comes it, it will be devastating). He has not made efforts to buffer the harmful effects of the shutdown, he has made every effort to worsen them. Nixon's crimes, to serious enough, pale by comparison. This is sociopathic, and I think that that is an issue we dare not let drop. THAT, in the end, is likely the most consequential take-away from this shutdown. Who, when all is said and done, gives a damn about the fate of living, breathing people, individually and as a society? Now and in a probable future? Trump has lavish private parties while the the nation, and the world, is suffering.

Expand full comment
James Coyle's avatar

Well said, J L (as usual). He doesn’t even try to hide his contempt for life’s “suckers and losers” anymore. He doesn’t even hold rallies. (Maybe his handlers are too alarmed at his evident deterioration to risk his getting off the leash)

Expand full comment
James Coyle's avatar

To serve the immediate needs of their constituents. While sacrificing the long-term needs of their country. (Spoiler alert: I'm a retired Fed, who went through a couple of these shutdowns. And I have a son who's working without pay right now. I was prepared to help him out through the shutdown if he needed it.)

Expand full comment
JustAnAverageDude's avatar

Another strong, well-balanced post. Thank you, X. Also, f#ck the Democratic party.

Expand full comment
Linda Heath's avatar

I had to calm down over my rage of what I felt like a betrayal. I now believe that maybe, just maybe, there was a plan to lure the GOP into a no-win situation in the long run. Lawrene O'Donnell writes: 271 Republicans changed their position to accept the demands of five Democrats. Those five Democrats forced

Republicans, including Donald Trump, to agree to, first of all, they forced Donald Trump, who's been trying to stop funding supplemental nutritional assistance, to increase funding for food stamps. Increase it. That is not nothing. The five Democrats who changed their position managed to not just guarantee funding for almost a year, but they actually got it increased. And no Republican wanted to do that.

I would encourage anyone to listen to his entire YouTube video to get his full perspective.

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

And Lawrence seems to know whereof he speaks, doesnt he?

Expand full comment
Linda Heath's avatar

I have always trusted him. I hope he is right this time too.

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

I just watched the entire video - thank you for recommending it. I dont always watch his show, but he has a lot more experience and background than far too many of the spouters of social media these days. Even the ones I do subscribe to!

Thanks again, Linda

Expand full comment
sasmith@thebaratfoundation.org's avatar

sasmith@thebaratfoundation.org

The Democrats had made gains early but with Snap; air travel dangers; the federal work force being decimated, and Trump & his Republican sycophants willing to let people suffer they had to act.

Senators Durbin, Kaine and their 6 colleagues are profiles in courage and those who are suffering with this shut down are grateful.

″ A democracy with this effort by its people must and can face its problems, that it must show patience, restraint, compassion, as well as wisdom and strength and courage, in the

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

Great explanation! I also listened to Heather Cox Richardson's Utube video from, I think, last night. Both your's and her's make a great deal of sense.

This forces the House to come back to work AND forces Repub. members to actually VOTE no or yes on the ACA subsidies, plus Grijalva will get sworn in.

So, after jumping to conclusions like everyone else(!) I think Kaine & others just might know what they are doing.

Yes Johnson IS a little weasel, but sounds like these Democrats surprised him - which also isnt a bad thing.

It is what it is.

Expand full comment
Xplisset's avatar

This story ain’t over yet and definitely deserves a follow-up piece. Your thought on this begs the question of why only a handful of Senators, most of whom won’t see an election, crossed party lines to end the shutdown? If they know what they are doing why is there so much blow back on them?

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

Well, we will see, wont we? Considering how far too people vote these days - sort of like how Trump makes decisions - the last voice in their ears. These eight Senators were apparently the only ones who could safely (election wise) do this and afford the blowback. There is blowback on any and every decision the Democrats make these days - not so much on Republicans tho, is there? Now THAT is a shame.

And the yammering of social media goes on and on.

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

Seems the House Oversight Committee has more information on Epstein's "business" than msm wants to put forth!

https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/israeli-spy-yoni-koren-stayed-jeffrey-epstein-apartment-ehud-barak

Expand full comment
Xplisset's avatar

The answer as to why mainstream media is not reporting on this is the same reason our founding fathers didn’t get called out on it , publicly at least (and even back then Thomas Jefferson’s shenanigans were the topic of a similar type of write up in a small Virginia newspaper…so publicly there was some exposure) because the initial knee jerk response is to duck and cover. It’s just that simple. These are powerful men and men in positions of power, to include editors and owners of powerful publications, brush it off with a smirk and a dark chuckle as they’re pissing in the urinal together saying “Did you here about that lucky bloke who got the hook up with Epstein?”

Expand full comment
Maggie's avatar

Yup - true! Also makes clear (in case there was any doubt) why these files remained "quiet" through both Democratic and Republican administrations (not a surprise).

Expand full comment