RUSH: I mentioned President Trump’s four-minute video last night from the White House, and how awesome and classically outsider, master class in communication it was. We have 40 seconds of it here that I can share with you to give you an idea of what I’m talking about.
THE PRESIDENT: Congress found plenty of money for foreign countries, lobbies, and special interests, while sending the bare minimum to the American people who need it. I’m asking Congress to amend this bill and increase the ridiculously low $600 to $2,000, or $4,000 for a couple. I’m also asking Congress to immediately get rid of the wasteful and unnecessary items from this legislation and to send me a suitable bill, or else the next administration will have to deliver a COVID relief package, and maybe that administration will be me and we will get it done.
RUSH: Whooooa. He had to tack that on at the end as though he still may have something up his sleeve. So Trump slammed the so-called COVID relief bill because of all the pork in it. We went through yesterday how much money is in this thing, and it’s actually over $2 trillion because the $900 billion gets added to $1.4 trillion to keep the government up and running, and so the American people get $600 each.
Trump said no way. We gotta up that to $2,000 or $4,000 for a couple. And guess what? Pelosi and the Democrats are welcoming the change! Pelosi, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and even Crazy Bernie are cheering Trump’s call for a $2,000 payment instead of $600. Now, why do you think that is? Now, before you answer, there’s a couple of possibilities of this.
RUSH: Now, politically speaking, Trump goes out and does a four-minute video from the White House, saying (summarize), “To hell with this: $600 for the average American,” while listing all of the pork, all the money going to all these countries for crazy things: $15 million to repair a patrol boat in Sri Lanka and other ridiculous things.
So Pelosi immediately comes out and agrees with Trump. “We need to have $2,000 or $4,000 per couple rather than this measly $600.” Why would she do that? Why would she not come out and criticize Trump for this? Because politically, he crushed her. I guarantee you that I don’t think Pelosi or any other Democrat had the slightest idea that Trump would react this way.
They still don’t know how outsiders think. They still don’t know who Trump really is. They’re not interested in finding out. Trump did what no other Republican managed to do, and he did it brilliantly in four minutes. He showed America who and what Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat colleagues are: Selfish, entitled, uncaring, elitist. Remember who Pelosi is.
Pelosi is the woman we saw standing in front of a $25,000 refrigerator eating gourmet ice cream during the middle of the pandemic, while Biden says the darkest days are ahead of us, while millions of Americans stood in food bank lines because their jobs were shut down because their governors and mayors were shutting them down because of the China virus.
So now there are a number of things that the various supporters of the president are suggesting that he do. Some say he should veto this bill as he threatened to do last night. He did not say he was gonna veto it. He held out the possibility. There’s also the possibility of a pocket veto. Now, the pocket veto is pretty much what it sounds like, and it is a way that the president could prevent this idiocy of a bill from becoming law.
Pocket vetoes don’t happen very much. Congress has to be in the proper parliamentary posture for it to be in play. But that parliamentary posture could very well be existing right now. We could be in those circumstances right now. Under Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, the president has 10 days (Sundays excluded) to either sign or veto a bill after it has been passed by Congress.
Now, you’ve gotta remember that because of the massive nature of the combo bill, the $900 billion of COVID relief and the $1.4 trillion appropriations bill to keep the government open, the bill has not even been enrolled yet, meaning it has not even been sent to the president. So the 10-day countdown hasn’t begun. Now, here’s where the pocket veto comes into play.
The latest the current congressional session can end is 11:59 a.m. on January 3rd. That’s the drop-dead time for the 116th Congress, this current Congress. That’s when it ends. A president can in effect veto a bill by keeping it in his pocket, by not signing it. He doesn’t have to write “veto” on it. He puts it in his pocket, figuratively speaking, and it just dies there if it comes too close to the end of the congressional adjournment.
Congress must adjourn without a return date specified no later than 11:59 p.m. ET January 3rd. Other words, Congress would have to get the president the bill by today to prevent a pocket veto. If he doesn’t get the bill by today, the president could run out the clock on the current congressional session, which would effectively block any potential override attempt. See, you can override a pocket veto.
If the president doesn’t sign it in 10 days, Congress has to come back, and that would be the killer here. Pelosi would have to call Congress back from their vacations over Christmas to deal with this. The president would have to send it back to Capitol Hill with a veto. If he didn’t do that in 10 days, then the bill would automatically become law.
Now, the president didn’t outright threaten a veto. It’s unclear that the president’s demands could even pass the House and the Senate. But, nevertheless, it’s something that a lot of people are recommending simply to… Some people want to inconvenience the Congress, force them to come off their Christmas break to deal with this.
Remember, as I’ve been pointing out, attached to the COVID bill is a $1.4 trillion spending package to fund the government through September 30th next year. If the president vetoes the COVID bill and the $1.4 trillion spending package or if he fails to sign it by December 28, there’s a government shutdown. We still have that to deal with, and the Democrats love when that’s on the table.
So, all of this, as Chad Pergram at Fox News writes, has the potential to get really, really interesting, and there’s any number of ways for the president to deal with this. But last night was classic. Here you have Congress passing one of these typical bailout bills, $600 for the average American. Six hundred dollars is nothing. As one member of Congress said, it won’t even pay 25%…
It was Tulsi Gabbard. This wouldn’t pay 25% of the average rent in my state of Hawaii. So Trump vetoes it and says nothing less than $2,000 — now, possible veto. He rips it, says 600 bucks not nearly enough. We need $2,000 per individual, $4,000 for a couple. In doing this, here’s Donald Trump, the outgoing president, sending a message to the American people who he is.
That even after having been allegedly rejected by the American people, he is still looking out for them, he is still representing them. He is still putting them first. I mean, it would be easy for an outgoing president to say, “I don’t give a damn. I don’t give a damn — 600 bucks, 600 schmucks, whatever I’m gonna do — I’m outta here.” But, no, the president made a point, recorded a four-minute video.
It was a master class in communications and did something that I don’t think there’s another Republican on Capitol Hill in the House or Senate who would have done this. But Donald Trump did. He criticized Congress for giving coronavirus relief payments to family members of illegal aliens. They’re gonna get up to $1,800 each, folks, while you get $600.
Trump also pointed out that the bill failed to provide aid to restaurants and small businesses, and that’s another thing we’re gonna get to today.
RUSH: Here is John in Jamestown, North Carolina, as we start on the phones. I’m glad you called, sir. Hi.
CALLER: How are you doing, Rush?
RUSH: Fine, sir.
CALLER: First off, it is a total honor to speak with you, sir. I’ve listened for 30 years, and this is the best Christmas present I could have ever asked for, so thank you so much. I wanted to hit on a couple points. It’s interesting that Nancy Pelosi said months back that $1,200 was “crumbs,” but now $600 is pretty good. It drives me nuts that we see this level of hypocrisy and we don’t stop it.
It just continues. It just keeps getting worse. I mean, Trump was spot-on in his four-minute speech yesterday, and I hope — whether it be a pocket veto or a flat-on veto — that something is done to shoot this down, because it’s obscene. I mean, you know, $700 million to the Sudan, $10 million to Pakistan, $1.3 billion to Egypt? It’s crazy. It’s crazy, Rush.
RUSH: No, it’s… Well, it is. But the thing is, as I said yesterday, “Welcome to the way things used to be.” This is exactly why we elected Trump, to end this kind of thing, and he did. He ended it. We stopped giving away money, particularly to nations that do not support us. We turned it around. We said to them… Trump turned it around.
We said to these nations, “It’s you who owe us,” after a fashion. But this is… That’s why I made the point yesterday that this is the way it used to be. How quickly, how quickly the establishment reasserted itself with this bill. This is the way it’s always been. This is the way it’s going to be again, and here comes Trump — while still president — stopping it somehow, threatening a pocket veto, threatening a straight-up veto.
You know, here’s the thing. After Trump called on Congress to increase the payments from $600 to $2,000, Pelosi tweeted she agrees with him. Oh, yeah! But then she had to lie and blame Trump for the $600 figure in the first place. Pelosi tweeted last night, “Republicans repeatedly refused to say what amount the President wanted for direct checks. … Democrats are ready to bring this to the Floor this week by unanimous consent. Let’s do it!”
But Trump had offered a COVID relief deal a couple months ago that was twice as large. This is what you… You people probably know it. Trump offered and wanted a $1.8 trillion COVID relief bill, not $900 billion. He wanted $1.8 trillion. He wanted double the amount to go to the American people, and Pelosi and the Democrats said, “Ain’t no way, buddy!
“Not before the election. We’re not giving you this. We’re not gonna let anything happen to show the American people you’re looking out for ’em.” So Pelosi refused, didn’t want any part of it, and now she’s claiming that all of this is Trump’s fault, because Trump wouldn’t specify the amount of direct payment that he wanted. Pelosi turned it down.
She didn’t want to do anything that might help Trump get reelected, and now she’s more than eager to sign on to $2,000, because she is lying and making it look like the reason she didn’t support this amount before the election is that Trump wouldn’t specify it and Congress couldn’t work it out. That’s not it. They weren’t gonna pass anything that would be beneficial to Trump before the election — and, by the way, that’s Politics 101.
I’m not suggesting she should have. But when they’re out there talking about how much they love the American people and how they’re looking out for the American people, the American people are madder than hell? It’s like, “The Democrats are looking out for the little guy. Democrats are making sure the little guy doesn’t get squashed and stomped on.” It’s BS. The Democrats are not looking out for the little guy.
They haven’t been looking out for the little guy since vested, moneyed interests led by Big Tech became the bankrollers of the Democrat Party. I mean, it had to be frustrating as hell. Here’s the president trying to do everything he can to help people through this, ’cause he’s dealing with a bunch of blue state governors that are keeping their states locked down, which is preventing an all-out American economic recovery.
It’s being done, he knows, to harm him politically. He knows these Democrats are engaging in policy matters that are designed to harm the country, that are designed to retard the rate of growth of the U.S. economy so that it will redound negatively to Trump so he’ll be blamed for it, and so that the Democrat nominee would benefit. It was all about presidential elective politics.
Pelosi’s not the only one now cheering this $2,000. Chuck You Schumer, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders.
It’s almost enough to make me think it’s a bad idea.
RUSH: Tom in St. Augustine, Florida, you’re next. Great to have you with us, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Johnny Donovan says it best: “A tradition unlike any other.”
RUSH: Well, I appreciate that. Thank you very much.
CALLER: I did attend your Rush to Excellence Tour in Orlando, and I’ve been with you a very long time. I wanted to ask you, what do you think — or how will the Republicans react with the president going along with AOC and Pelosi? I just read on Politico they’re gonna push back. What are your thoughts?
RUSH: Uh, wait, wait, wait. Wait a minute, now. You want to know how Republicans will react if the president goes along with AOC and Pelosi on what?
CALLER: The $2,000 check for myself and my wife.
RUSH: Uh, Pelosi’s idea was $600. It was Trump… You’re making me wonder if you’re setting me up here.
CALLER: Well, let me rephrase it, then. Trump came out last night and said he wants $2,000. Pelosi came back and said, “Yes, we’re with you.” My question, sir, is: How will the Republicans react to the $2,000?
RUSH: Oh, do you think they will oppose it or support it because it’s wasteful, because it’s government giving money away to people and that shouldn’t happen, or are you worried that they’ll judge it in some other way rather than the comparison to $600 to $2,000?
CALLER: That’s a very good question. I believe Senator Ron Johnson opposed the $1,200. He was very vocal about it in the media, and so I believe the Republicans are gonna oppose it for whatever reason. Especially now that it seems like the president, Pelosi and AOC are on the same train.
RUSH: Interesting perspective. Look, I appreciate the call. Grab sound bite number 7. Rand Paul weighed in on this, in a way, on Fox & Friends this morning. Katie Pavlich, a fill-in co-host, asked him this question: “President Trump last night said he wants $2,000 checks going out to the American people. Is that something the Senate and Congress can do before next week?”
PAUL: I saw the president’s speech. He was unhappy with all the spending to Pakistan and Sudan and all these far-flung places while we aren’t taking care of our own. The problem is, if we were to get more money to Americans, we would add it on top. I hope he vetoes it, but the only way I would vote for any spending — or any additional spending — is if it came out of existing spending. So, I part ways with the president on giving people free money. The cash payments is a ridiculous, terrible, foolish, no-good idea because you’re just putting up money to give to people. Why not do it all the time? Give people a thousand, 10,000. Why not a million? It’s a terrible idea.
RUSH: So, Rand Paul continuing the logic that he had opined with yesterday. Says, where does this stop? It’s kind of like the minimum wage. If you’re gonna raise the minimum wage from 15 to 20 an hour, why not 25? Why not 30? And, at some point, even advocates say, “Wait. You can’t give that much away.” And what Rand Paul is pointing out is that $600, $2,000, it’s still money we don’t have.
And if you’re gonna start giving money away, then why are there any limits on it? Why not just give everybody a hundred grand and be done with it? And of course we’re now $30 trillion in debt. We don’t have the money that we are giving away now. We haven’t had the money for anything we’re doing starting with the Obama administration, even prior to that.
We haven’t had the money for any of this, and what’s become blatantly obvious is that all of Washington doesn’t care. We’re just doing a budget every week. We don’t have the money. I mean, we technically can’t afford anything that we’re doing. We have a printing press. Now, I’ve heard all of my life that the national debt was eventually going to eat this country alive and destroy the future.
I heard this from my grandparents growing up, and then my parents. They had lived through the Great Depression. They were terribly alarmed at all of this debt. Well, now we’re $30 trillion in debt, and there doesn’t seem to be anybody concerned with it, even the current administration. If you go back earlier this year, we shut down the country ’cause we were facing two million deaths.
We’re told it’d be two million deaths according computer projections from the COVID virus if we don’t shut the country down. So we shut the country down and it became clear that we were gonna have to start bailing people out after two months of the shutdown. We didn’t have the money for that, and we don’t have the money now for any of this. But we’re printing it and we’re spending it, and if somebody’s gonna print it and spend it then do you want to get in on that or not?
Who wants to be the one to raise their hand and say, “Wait a minute! We don’t have any of this money? What are we doing?” People are dying out there. People are starving out there. People are experiencing things they’ve never experienced because we’ve shut down the economy on them. The government has shut down their economy under this silly belief that this is the only way to stop the virus. It isn’t. It isn’t gonna stop the virus.
Shutdowns never have. We’ve never done this. But Trump comes along. There’s a bill. Congress passes a bill. That happened. It contains $600 per American while giving far more money away in toto to all of these other countries. And the American people are getting the tail end. So Trump announces (summarized), “The hell with this! I think every American ought to get $2,000, $4,000 for a couple.”
So, with just the politics of it, just within those confines, yeah. To me, that’s the president winning. It’s not the president agreeing with Pelosi and AOC. It’s them agreeing with him. Now, if your question is does Trump doing something that the Democrat leadership says, “Right on, dude! We’re with you,” does that hurt him? You tell me. The American people are gonna…? What are they gonna say?
“I don’t want 600 bucks, and I don’t want 2,000 bucks. I don’t want anything. I want you people to stop spending this!” Is that what the American people are gonna do? ‘Cause I’ll guarantee you they’re not. You give them a choice of 600 bucks or 2,000; they’re gonna take the 2,000 and they’re gonna be grateful for whoever they think is responsible for it, which in this case would be Trump.
RUSH: Do you think faced with $600, $2,000 or zero, what do you think the American people would choose? And if it was Pelosi that said 600 bucks, then the Democrat Party leadership… Look, folks, it’s the way things were. The one thing you’ve gotta understand about this is you have the Democrats now running things, in their mind. They’re already…
Pelosi’s already acting like… Well, she does run the House, and they’re acting like they’re gonna win the Senate. So here comes this relief bill after the election, and it’s got a measly $600 in it for the American people. All this other money for pork, various countries, just wasteful spending. Trump comes along and says, “The hell with 600 bucks for American people. We’re gonna make it $2,000 and $4,000 for a couple.”
This is the way it was. This is why Trump was elected, and this signifies a return to the way things were. This is what the Democrats want. This is what the establishment wants. This is what it’s going to be, going forward. This is how the government’s gonna operate, and it’s gonna be on steroids. You tell me. You want 600? You want 2,000 or 4,000? You want nothing? You want to tell ’em to pound sand?
You want to tell them to get responsible in their spending?
You tell me.