Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They DO have the money. They have $6b which can expressly be used for funding SNAP. Unless the Trump administration unlawfully stole the money for something else, which wouldn't surprise me.

No they don’t. Judge McConnell, in his order, admits they don’t have 6 billion. If they did, McConnell would not have ordered the administration to pay for SNAP benefits by finding money from other allocated funds (which is blatantly unconstitutional). This is damning. We need to investigate where the Snap reserves went, if there were any.

Did the historically corrupt Biden administration gift them away? Because people are going to starve because of this level of corruption.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They DO have the money. They have $6b which can expressly be used for funding SNAP. Unless the Trump administration unlawfully stole the money for something else, which wouldn't surprise me.

It’s for emergencies. And Senator Schumer’s primary challenge does not qualify as a national emergency.

Emergencies like people are about to starve? Does that count as an emergency?

Then why is Chuck starving these poor people?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They DO have the money. They have $6b which can expressly be used for funding SNAP. Unless the Trump administration unlawfully stole the money for something else, which wouldn't surprise me.

It’s for emergencies. And Senator Schumer’s primary challenge does not qualify as a national emergency.

Trump already said he will. Check your updated talking points.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They DO have the money. They have $6b which can expressly be used for funding SNAP. Unless the Trump administration unlawfully stole the money for something else, which wouldn't surprise me.

It’s for emergencies. And Senator Schumer’s primary challenge does not qualify as a national emergency.

Emergencies like people are about to starve? Does that count as an emergency?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They DO have the money. They have $6b which can expressly be used for funding SNAP. Unless the Trump administration unlawfully stole the money for something else, which wouldn't surprise me.

It’s for emergencies. And Senator Schumer’s primary challenge does not qualify as a national emergency.

Anonymous wrote:

They DO have the money. They have $6b which can expressly be used for funding SNAP. Unless the Trump administration unlawfully stole the money for something else, which wouldn't surprise me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
SNAP isn't Obamacare. One is food, the other is health care.

There are emergency funds already allocated AND appropriated to be used if SNAP funding was interrupted -- so why isn't Trump releasing the SNAP (that's food, son) funds, as ordered by a federal judge?

And both are covered under the CR. Dems don't want to agree to it, so suffer.

Nope. ACA subsidies are not covered under the CR. They expire in current law. The CR does not touch them. Dems want Rs to add them to the CR.

On the other hand, Congress appropriated $3 bn each for a contingency fund for SNAP in 2024 and again in 2025. That’s why the admin has nearly $6 bn legally available right now for SNAP (a small portion has been used for something else.).

Do you have proof that $6B in contingency funds were already appropriated?

DP - it was in the FY 2024 and FY 2025 appropriations bills with $3b each, for a total of $6b, good through September 30, 2026. This all came out in a court case, where the judge ruled that the Trump administration was incorrect and that they can in fact legally use the contingency fund to continue SNAP. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/01/us/politics/trump-food-stamp-payments.html

Anyone claiming "Dems stopped it" or "it's because of the shutdown" or "they don't have the money" or "they have some money but can't legally use it" is wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
SNAP isn't Obamacare. One is food, the other is health care.

There are emergency funds already allocated AND appropriated to be used if SNAP funding was interrupted -- so why isn't Trump releasing the SNAP (that's food, son) funds, as ordered by a federal judge?

And both are covered under the CR. Dems don't want to agree to it, so suffer.

No, the GOP unilaterally cut SNAP benefits and are letting ACA funding expire. The Dems do not agree to that which is why they don't agree with the CR. And, with recissions, the Executive branch is ignoring the laws already in place and the Dems don't agree with that, either.

The dems want 1.5T ADDITIONAL spending on Obamacare to keep it going. You aren't getting it in a CR.

But you are ok with

1) people not having health coverage
2) 40B to argentina
3) 20+ billion to farmers
4) increased prices because of tariffs
5) less federal income because of unfunded tax cuts
6) further consolidation of wealth and control to an oligarch class

You are getting mad at the little people, more than half of whom are Trump voters, instead of the people in control, who are raping our treasury for everything it is worth.

+1000%

It's astounding that some of the posters on this thread want to go through a struggling single mom's shopping cart like it was a forensic homicide site yet they don't want to audit billionaires.

I guess they envision themselves as "temporarily embarrassed billionaires" themselves, ignoring the fact that we are in a K-shaped economy, where only the richest are getting richer and everyone else is getting poorer.

It’s a silly distraction to waste our time and to blame the victims.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
SNAP isn't Obamacare. One is food, the other is health care.

There are emergency funds already allocated AND appropriated to be used if SNAP funding was interrupted -- so why isn't Trump releasing the SNAP (that's food, son) funds, as ordered by a federal judge?

And both are covered under the CR. Dems don't want to agree to it, so suffer.

No, the GOP unilaterally cut SNAP benefits and are letting ACA funding expire. The Dems do not agree to that which is why they don't agree with the CR. And, with recissions, the Executive branch is ignoring the laws already in place and the Dems don't agree with that, either.

The dems want 1.5T ADDITIONAL spending on Obamacare to keep it going. You aren't getting it in a CR.

But you are ok with

1) people not having health coverage
2) 40B to argentina
3) 20+ billion to farmers
4) increased prices because of tariffs
5) less federal income because of unfunded tax cuts
6) further consolidation of wealth and control to an oligarch class

You are getting mad at the little people, more than half of whom are Trump voters, instead of the people in control, who are raping our treasury for everything it is worth.

+1

The general sentiment among smart people is Trump and 95% of our Congress members need to be tossed out on their sorry, corrupt arses.

The general consensus on DCUM is half the country should work to pay for the other half.

This has already been repeatedly debunked. The majority of SNAP recipients ARE working.

Yes, and Kamala was looking for the root causes of migration.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
SNAP isn't Obamacare. One is food, the other is health care.

There are emergency funds already allocated AND appropriated to be used if SNAP funding was interrupted -- so why isn't Trump releasing the SNAP (that's food, son) funds, as ordered by a federal judge?

And both are covered under the CR. Dems don't want to agree to it, so suffer.

No, the GOP unilaterally cut SNAP benefits and are letting ACA funding expire. The Dems do not agree to that which is why they don't agree with the CR. And, with recissions, the Executive branch is ignoring the laws already in place and the Dems don't agree with that, either.

The dems want 1.5T ADDITIONAL spending on Obamacare to keep it going. You aren't getting it in a CR.

But you are ok with

1) people not having health coverage
2) 40B to argentina
3) 20+ billion to farmers
4) increased prices because of tariffs
5) less federal income because of unfunded tax cuts
6) further consolidation of wealth and control to an oligarch class

You are getting mad at the little people, more than half of whom are Trump voters, instead of the people in control, who are raping our treasury for everything it is worth.

+1000%

It's astounding that some of the posters on this thread want to go through a struggling single mom's shopping cart like it was a forensic homicide site yet they don't want to audit billionaires.

I guess they envision themselves as "temporarily embarrassed billionaires" themselves, ignoring the fact that we are in a K-shaped economy, where only the richest are getting richer and everyone else is getting poorer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
SNAP isn't Obamacare. One is food, the other is health care.

There are emergency funds already allocated AND appropriated to be used if SNAP funding was interrupted -- so why isn't Trump releasing the SNAP (that's food, son) funds, as ordered by a federal judge?

And both are covered under the CR. Dems don't want to agree to it, so suffer.

No, the GOP unilaterally cut SNAP benefits and are letting ACA funding expire. The Dems do not agree to that which is why they don't agree with the CR. And, with recissions, the Executive branch is ignoring the laws already in place and the Dems don't agree with that, either.

The dems want 1.5T ADDITIONAL spending on Obamacare to keep it going. You aren't getting it in a CR.

But you are ok with

1) people not having health coverage
2) 40B to argentina
3) 20+ billion to farmers
4) increased prices because of tariffs
5) less federal income because of unfunded tax cuts
6) further consolidation of wealth and control to an oligarch class

You are getting mad at the little people, more than half of whom are Trump voters, instead of the people in control, who are raping our treasury for everything it is worth.

+1

The general sentiment among smart people is Trump and 95% of our Congress members need to be tossed out on their sorry, corrupt arses.

Those same geniuses believed Mayorkas when he said the border was closed & believed Dems when they said Joe was super smart, so…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
SNAP isn't Obamacare. One is food, the other is health care.

There are emergency funds already allocated AND appropriated to be used if SNAP funding was interrupted -- so why isn't Trump releasing the SNAP (that's food, son) funds, as ordered by a federal judge?

And both are covered under the CR. Dems don't want to agree to it, so suffer.

No, the GOP unilaterally cut SNAP benefits and are letting ACA funding expire. The Dems do not agree to that which is why they don't agree with the CR. And, with recissions, the Executive branch is ignoring the laws already in place and the Dems don't agree with that, either.

The dems want 1.5T ADDITIONAL spending on Obamacare to keep it going. You aren't getting it in a CR.

But you are ok with

1) people not having health coverage
2) 40B to argentina
3) 20+ billion to farmers
4) increased prices because of tariffs
5) less federal income because of unfunded tax cuts
6) further consolidation of wealth and control to an oligarch class

You are getting mad at the little people, more than half of whom are Trump voters, instead of the people in control, who are raping our treasury for everything it is worth.

+1

The general sentiment among smart people is Trump and 95% of our Congress members need to be tossed out on their sorry, corrupt arses.

The general consensus on DCUM is half the country should work to pay for the other half.

This has already been repeatedly debunked. The majority of SNAP recipients ARE working.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
SNAP isn't Obamacare. One is food, the other is health care.

There are emergency funds already allocated AND appropriated to be used if SNAP funding was interrupted -- so why isn't Trump releasing the SNAP (that's food, son) funds, as ordered by a federal judge?

And both are covered under the CR. Dems don't want to agree to it, so suffer.

Nope. ACA subsidies are not covered under the CR. They expire in current law. The CR does not touch them. Dems want Rs to add them to the CR.

On the other hand, Congress appropriated $3 bn each for a contingency fund for SNAP in 2024 and again in 2025. That’s why the admin has nearly $6 bn legally available right now for SNAP (a small portion has been used for something else.).

Do you have proof that $6B in contingency funds were already appropriated?