Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USDA has billions in contingency funds. It has been used to cover SNAP during previous shutdowns. But the Republicans chose to weaponize it instead.

A judge ordered them to pay up from the contingency fund.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10/31/us/trump-news?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20251031&instance_id=165552&nl=breaking-news®i_id=72743657&segment_id=209721&user_id=26869c7395f1f5cdbf02703f998a7bbe

And based on reporting, the administration’s attorneys do not believe that the government can tap into those contingency funds. Trump has been very clear that he will distribute the funds so long as he legally can, and is requesting additional guidance from the courts on how to legally distribute the funds.

It’s a breath of fresh air to have a president who actually considers the legality of his actions, unlike Biden who kept trying to forgive student loans for the wealthy elite, and a president who is fighting so hard to get food stamps to those in need despite the democrats’ treasonous actions leading to the prolonged closure of the government.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/31/snap-hearing-massachusetts-state-lawsuit-trump

You know we have a whole coequal branch of government, composed of presidentially appointed individuals who have the authority to interpret the law and issue binding orders right???

Which is why Trump is asking said branch how to distribute the funds legally.

We are in a situation where a liberal activist judge ordered Trump to do something his attorneys believe is explicitly illegal, and Trump needs to know how they are supposed to do so.

It’s like if you went to court because your neighbor’s fence crosses your property line, and the judge tells you that you can just murder your neighbor.

Did you not watch the schoolhouse rock video in grade school? Trump's attorneys are not the ones who determine legality, the judiciary is.

Which is why he is going to the courts and asking for their guidance. Again, Trump is fighting like hell, in a reality where getting that answer will likely require the government to spend millions on consultation going all the way up to the Supreme Court due to the clearly biased and compromised lower courts, to get deserving Americans their food stamps. Meanwhile, the democrats are sitting there and have voted 19 times specifically to starve our wonderful American patriots.

Why was this not a "battle against the gods" when emergency SNAP-allocated funds were released during previous interruptions in SNAP provision?

WHy can't Trump figure this out, when other presidents could? What is he missing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USDA has billions in contingency funds. It has been used to cover SNAP during previous shutdowns. But the Republicans chose to weaponize it instead.

A judge ordered them to pay up from the contingency fund.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10/31/us/trump-news?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20251031&instance_id=165552&nl=breaking-news®i_id=72743657&segment_id=209721&user_id=26869c7395f1f5cdbf02703f998a7bbe

And based on reporting, the administration’s attorneys do not believe that the government can tap into those contingency funds. Trump has been very clear that he will distribute the funds so long as he legally can, and is requesting additional guidance from the courts on how to legally distribute the funds.

It’s a breath of fresh air to have a president who actually considers the legality of his actions, unlike Biden who kept trying to forgive student loans for the wealthy elite, and a president who is fighting so hard to get food stamps to those in need despite the democrats’ treasonous actions leading to the prolonged closure of the government.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/31/snap-hearing-massachusetts-state-lawsuit-trump

You know we have a whole coequal branch of government, composed of presidentially appointed individuals who have the authority to interpret the law and issue binding orders right???

Which is why Trump is asking said branch how to distribute the funds legally.

We are in a situation where a liberal activist judge ordered Trump to do something his attorneys believe is explicitly illegal, and Trump needs to know how they are supposed to do so.

It’s like if you went to court because your neighbor’s fence crosses your property line, and the judge tells you that you can just murder your neighbor.

Did you not watch the schoolhouse rock video in grade school? Trump's attorneys are not the ones who determine legality, the judiciary is.

Which is why he is going to the courts and asking for their guidance. Again, Trump is fighting like hell, in a reality where getting that answer will likely require the government to spend millions on consultation going all the way up to the Supreme Court due to the clearly biased and compromised lower courts, to get deserving Americans their food stamps. Meanwhile, the democrats are sitting there and have voted 19 times specifically to starve our wonderful American patriots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pro SNAP and funding SNAP through the shutdown. But I feel like the media, even “mainstream” media portrays the recipients in such an unflattering light or the stories don’t even make sense. I’m honestly surprised a lot of these people agree to be interviewed.

“ Buck, in Mississippi, is pregnant and expecting her ninth child in February. She and her husband both work — Buck is part-time at McDonald’s — and rely on SNAP funds to feed their kids.”

“Corbett was driven out of the workforce by debilitating back and joint pain, likely exacerbated by his job as a forklift driver. His 5-year-old son has nonverbal autism and requires constant care. His wife, Emily, recently lost her part-time job at a gas station, he said, leaving the family without their only source of income.”

https://apple.news/AXKSGDMnVQsG6wmlXz-VF5Q

You know what makes for fewer children who can't be cared for? Easy, cheap access to birth control. You know what's been cut, dismantled, and reduced through recent GOP policies? You got it.

Yeah. That’s why she’s having a 9th kid. Because she can’t find out how to get free birth control or doesn’t know how babies are made.

If you want to have a real, marked effect on the problem, you provide the answer that actually works overall.

I don't believe you really care about this at all. You just enjoy punching down.

You honestly think she’d had a 9th if she couldn’t feed the previous 8? We pay her to feed them all, and we’ll pay to feed this one too. We make it easy. Why is it all of a sudden a crisis how to feed her kids? Oh because we’ve been doing it for her since they were born.

If you provide cheap and easy access to reliable birth control, the number of children born goes down. That was true in Colorado during the early studies, and it is true thereafter.

And yet this Republican administration has been making moves that close free health clinics, close rural hospitals, and limit or end access to Planned Parenthood. Why is that?

Maybe because people can avoid pregnancy if they want to by buying their own birth control or by exercising some self-restraint, instead of expecting the government to moderate their procreative urges for them or by only using free or low-cost birth control instead of making it their own personal priority even if it costs a little more?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pro SNAP and funding SNAP through the shutdown. But I feel like the media, even “mainstream” media portrays the recipients in such an unflattering light or the stories don’t even make sense. I’m honestly surprised a lot of these people agree to be interviewed.

“ Buck, in Mississippi, is pregnant and expecting her ninth child in February. She and her husband both work — Buck is part-time at McDonald’s — and rely on SNAP funds to feed their kids.”

“Corbett was driven out of the workforce by debilitating back and joint pain, likely exacerbated by his job as a forklift driver. His 5-year-old son has nonverbal autism and requires constant care. His wife, Emily, recently lost her part-time job at a gas station, he said, leaving the family without their only source of income.”

https://apple.news/AXKSGDMnVQsG6wmlXz-VF5Q

You know what makes for fewer children who can't be cared for? Easy, cheap access to birth control. You know what's been cut, dismantled, and reduced through recent GOP policies? You got it.

Yeah. That’s why she’s having a 9th kid. Because she can’t find out how to get free birth control or doesn’t know how babies are made.

If you want to have a real, marked effect on the problem, you provide the answer that actually works overall.

I don't believe you really care about this at all. You just enjoy punching down.

You honestly think she’d had a 9th if she couldn’t feed the previous 8? We pay her to feed them all, and we’ll pay to feed this one too. We make it easy. Why is it all of a sudden a crisis how to feed her kids? Oh because we’ve been doing it for her since they were born.

If you provide cheap and easy access to reliable birth control, the number of children born goes down. That was true in Colorado during the early studies, and it is true thereafter.

And yet this Republican administration has been making moves that close free health clinics, close rural hospitals, and limit or end access to Planned Parenthood. Why is that?

Maybe because people can avoid pregnancy if they want to by buying their own birth control or by exercising some self-restraint, instead of expecting the government to moderate their procreative urges for them or by only using free or low-cost birth control instead of making it their own personal priority even if it costs a little more?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pro SNAP and funding SNAP through the shutdown. But I feel like the media, even “mainstream” media portrays the recipients in such an unflattering light or the stories don’t even make sense. I’m honestly surprised a lot of these people agree to be interviewed.

“ Buck, in Mississippi, is pregnant and expecting her ninth child in February. She and her husband both work — Buck is part-time at McDonald’s — and rely on SNAP funds to feed their kids.”

“Corbett was driven out of the workforce by debilitating back and joint pain, likely exacerbated by his job as a forklift driver. His 5-year-old son has nonverbal autism and requires constant care. His wife, Emily, recently lost her part-time job at a gas station, he said, leaving the family without their only source of income.”

https://apple.news/AXKSGDMnVQsG6wmlXz-VF5Q

You know what makes for fewer children who can't be cared for? Easy, cheap access to birth control. You know what's been cut, dismantled, and reduced through recent GOP policies? You got it.

Yeah. That’s why she’s having a 9th kid. Because she can’t find out how to get free birth control or doesn’t know how babies are made.

If you want to have a real, marked effect on the problem, you provide the answer that actually works overall.

I don't believe you really care about this at all. You just enjoy punching down.

You honestly think she’d had a 9th if she couldn’t feed the previous 8? We pay her to feed them all, and we’ll pay to feed this one too. We make it easy. Why is it all of a sudden a crisis how to feed her kids? Oh because we’ve been doing it for her since they were born.

If you provide cheap and easy access to reliable birth control, the number of children born goes down. That was true in Colorado during the early studies, and it is true thereafter.

And yet this Republican administration has been making moves that close free health clinics, close rural hospitals, and limit or end access to Planned Parenthood. Why is that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pro SNAP and funding SNAP through the shutdown. But I feel like the media, even “mainstream” media portrays the recipients in such an unflattering light or the stories don’t even make sense. I’m honestly surprised a lot of these people agree to be interviewed.

“ Buck, in Mississippi, is pregnant and expecting her ninth child in February. She and her husband both work — Buck is part-time at McDonald’s — and rely on SNAP funds to feed their kids.”

“Corbett was driven out of the workforce by debilitating back and joint pain, likely exacerbated by his job as a forklift driver. His 5-year-old son has nonverbal autism and requires constant care. His wife, Emily, recently lost her part-time job at a gas station, he said, leaving the family without their only source of income.”

https://apple.news/AXKSGDMnVQsG6wmlXz-VF5Q

You know what makes for fewer children who can't be cared for? Easy, cheap access to birth control. You know what's been cut, dismantled, and reduced through recent GOP policies? You got it.

Yeah. That’s why she’s having a 9th kid. Because she can’t find out how to get free birth control or doesn’t know how babies are made.

If you want to have a real, marked effect on the problem, you provide the answer that actually works overall.

I don't believe you really care about this at all. You just enjoy punching down.

You honestly think she’d had a 9th if she couldn’t feed the previous 8? We pay her to feed them all, and we’ll pay to feed this one too. We make it easy. Why is it all of a sudden a crisis how to feed her kids? Oh because we’ve been doing it for her since they were born.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am pro SNAP and funding SNAP through the shutdown. But I feel like the media, even “mainstream” media portrays the recipients in such an unflattering light or the stories don’t even make sense. I’m honestly surprised a lot of these people agree to be interviewed.

“ Buck, in Mississippi, is pregnant and expecting her ninth child in February. She and her husband both work — Buck is part-time at McDonald’s — and rely on SNAP funds to feed their kids.”

“Corbett was driven out of the workforce by debilitating back and joint pain, likely exacerbated by his job as a forklift driver. His 5-year-old son has nonverbal autism and requires constant care. His wife, Emily, recently lost her part-time job at a gas station, he said, leaving the family without their only source of income.”

https://apple.news/AXKSGDMnVQsG6wmlXz-VF5Q

You know what makes for fewer children who can't be cared for? Easy, cheap access to birth control. You know what's been cut, dismantled, and reduced through recent GOP policies? You got it.

Yeah. That’s why she’s having a 9th kid. Because she can’t find out how to get free birth control or doesn’t know how babies are made.

If you want to have a real, marked effect on the problem, you provide the answer that actually works overall.

I don't believe you really care about this at all. You just enjoy punching down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USDA has billions in contingency funds. It has been used to cover SNAP during previous shutdowns. But the Republicans chose to weaponize it instead.

A judge ordered them to pay up from the contingency fund.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10/31/us/trump-news?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20251031&instance_id=165552&nl=breaking-news®i_id=72743657&segment_id=209721&user_id=26869c7395f1f5cdbf02703f998a7bbe

And based on reporting, the administration’s attorneys do not believe that the government can tap into those contingency funds. Trump has been very clear that he will distribute the funds so long as he legally can, and is requesting additional guidance from the courts on how to legally distribute the funds.

It’s a breath of fresh air to have a president who actually considers the legality of his actions, unlike Biden who kept trying to forgive student loans for the wealthy elite, and a president who is fighting so hard to get food stamps to those in need despite the democrats’ treasonous actions leading to the prolonged closure of the government.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/31/snap-hearing-massachusetts-state-lawsuit-trump

You know we have a whole coequal branch of government, composed of presidentially appointed individuals who have the authority to interpret the law and issue binding orders right???

Which is why Trump is asking said branch how to distribute the funds legally.

We are in a situation where a liberal activist judge ordered Trump to do something his attorneys believe is explicitly illegal, and Trump needs to know how they are supposed to do so.

It’s like if you went to court because your neighbor’s fence crosses your property line, and the judge tells you that you can just murder your neighbor.

Did you not watch the schoolhouse rock video in grade school? Trump's attorneys are not the ones who determine legality, the judiciary is.

Which is why he is going to the courts and asking for their guidance. Again, Trump is fighting like hell, in a reality where getting that answer will likely require the government to spend millions on consultation going all the way up to the Supreme Court due to the clearly biased and compromised lower courts, to get deserving Americans their food stamps. Meanwhile, the democrats are sitting there and have voted 19 times specifically to starve our wonderful American patriots.

Why was this not a "battle against the gods" when emergency SNAP-allocated funds were released during previous interruptions in SNAP provision?

WHy can't Trump figure this out, when other presidents could? What is he missing?

Because the previous shutdowns, while also caused by democrats, had a democrat president in the White House who cared more about optics then following the laws established by our elected members of the legislature.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USDA has billions in contingency funds. It has been used to cover SNAP during previous shutdowns. But the Republicans chose to weaponize it instead.

A judge ordered them to pay up from the contingency fund.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10/31/us/trump-news?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20251031&instance_id=165552&nl=breaking-news®i_id=72743657&segment_id=209721&user_id=26869c7395f1f5cdbf02703f998a7bbe

And based on reporting, the administration’s attorneys do not believe that the government can tap into those contingency funds. Trump has been very clear that he will distribute the funds so long as he legally can, and is requesting additional guidance from the courts on how to legally distribute the funds.

It’s a breath of fresh air to have a president who actually considers the legality of his actions, unlike Biden who kept trying to forgive student loans for the wealthy elite, and a president who is fighting so hard to get food stamps to those in need despite the democrats’ treasonous actions leading to the prolonged closure of the government.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/31/snap-hearing-massachusetts-state-lawsuit-trump

You know we have a whole coequal branch of government, composed of presidentially appointed individuals who have the authority to interpret the law and issue binding orders right???

Which is why Trump is asking said branch how to distribute the funds legally.

We are in a situation where a liberal activist judge ordered Trump to do something his attorneys believe is explicitly illegal, and Trump needs to know how they are supposed to do so.

It’s like if you went to court because your neighbor’s fence crosses your property line, and the judge tells you that you can just murder your neighbor.

Did you not watch the schoolhouse rock video in grade school? Trump's attorneys are not the ones who determine legality, the judiciary is.

Which is why he is going to the courts and asking for their guidance. Again, Trump is fighting like hell, in a reality where getting that answer will likely require the government to spend millions on consultation going all the way up to the Supreme Court due to the clearly biased and compromised lower courts, to get deserving Americans their food stamps. Meanwhile, the democrats are sitting there and have voted 19 times specifically to starve our wonderful American patriots.

Why was this not a "battle against the gods" when emergency SNAP-allocated funds were released during previous interruptions in SNAP provision?

WHy can't Trump figure this out, when other presidents could? What is he missing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USDA has billions in contingency funds. It has been used to cover SNAP during previous shutdowns. But the Republicans chose to weaponize it instead.

A judge ordered them to pay up from the contingency fund.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10/31/us/trump-news?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20251031&instance_id=165552&nl=breaking-news®i_id=72743657&segment_id=209721&user_id=26869c7395f1f5cdbf02703f998a7bbe

And based on reporting, the administration’s attorneys do not believe that the government can tap into those contingency funds. Trump has been very clear that he will distribute the funds so long as he legally can, and is requesting additional guidance from the courts on how to legally distribute the funds.

It’s a breath of fresh air to have a president who actually considers the legality of his actions, unlike Biden who kept trying to forgive student loans for the wealthy elite, and a president who is fighting so hard to get food stamps to those in need despite the democrats’ treasonous actions leading to the prolonged closure of the government.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/31/snap-hearing-massachusetts-state-lawsuit-trump

hey can you have him check into the legality of that no-warrant no-ID masked guys pulling US citizens into unmarked vans thing, there

That is on Biden’s inhumane and treasonous policy of letting illegal immigrants enter and remain in our country.

We would not have this situation if Biden had closed our borders and made sure that illegal immigrants knew there were actual consequences for their invasion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USDA has billions in contingency funds. It has been used to cover SNAP during previous shutdowns. But the Republicans chose to weaponize it instead.

A judge ordered them to pay up from the contingency fund.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10/31/us/trump-news?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20251031&instance_id=165552&nl=breaking-news®i_id=72743657&segment_id=209721&user_id=26869c7395f1f5cdbf02703f998a7bbe

And based on reporting, the administration’s attorneys do not believe that the government can tap into those contingency funds. Trump has been very clear that he will distribute the funds so long as he legally can, and is requesting additional guidance from the courts on how to legally distribute the funds.

It’s a breath of fresh air to have a president who actually considers the legality of his actions, unlike Biden who kept trying to forgive student loans for the wealthy elite, and a president who is fighting so hard to get food stamps to those in need despite the democrats’ treasonous actions leading to the prolonged closure of the government.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/31/snap-hearing-massachusetts-state-lawsuit-trump

You know we have a whole coequal branch of government, composed of presidentially appointed individuals who have the authority to interpret the law and issue binding orders right???

Which is why Trump is asking said branch how to distribute the funds legally.

We are in a situation where a liberal activist judge ordered Trump to do something his attorneys believe is explicitly illegal, and Trump needs to know how they are supposed to do so.

It’s like if you went to court because your neighbor’s fence crosses your property line, and the judge tells you that you can just murder your neighbor.

Did you not watch the schoolhouse rock video in grade school? Trump's attorneys are not the ones who determine legality, the judiciary is.

Which is why he is going to the courts and asking for their guidance. Again, Trump is fighting like hell, in a reality where getting that answer will likely require the government to spend millions on consultation going all the way up to the Supreme Court due to the clearly biased and compromised lower courts, to get deserving Americans their food stamps. Meanwhile, the democrats are sitting there and have voted 19 times specifically to starve our wonderful American patriots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USDA has billions in contingency funds. It has been used to cover SNAP during previous shutdowns. But the Republicans chose to weaponize it instead.

A judge ordered them to pay up from the contingency fund.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/10/31/us/trump-news?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20251031&instance_id=165552&nl=breaking-news®i_id=72743657&segment_id=209721&user_id=26869c7395f1f5cdbf02703f998a7bbe

And based on reporting, the administration’s attorneys do not believe that the government can tap into those contingency funds. Trump has been very clear that he will distribute the funds so long as he legally can, and is requesting additional guidance from the courts on how to legally distribute the funds.

It’s a breath of fresh air to have a president who actually considers the legality of his actions, unlike Biden who kept trying to forgive student loans for the wealthy elite, and a president who is fighting so hard to get food stamps to those in need despite the democrats’ treasonous actions leading to the prolonged closure of the government.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/31/snap-hearing-massachusetts-state-lawsuit-trump

You know we have a whole coequal branch of government, composed of presidentially appointed individuals who have the authority to interpret the law and issue binding orders right???

Which is why Trump is asking said branch how to distribute the funds legally.

We are in a situation where a liberal activist judge ordered Trump to do something his attorneys believe is explicitly illegal, and Trump needs to know how they are supposed to do so.

It’s like if you went to court because your neighbor’s fence crosses your property line, and the judge tells you that you can just murder your neighbor.

Did you not watch the schoolhouse rock video in grade school? Trump's attorneys are not the ones who determine legality, the judiciary is.