COULTER: House passed SIX Obamacare repeals when Obama was president! Now NOTHING…


Let’s compare what President Trump has accomplished since the inauguration (with that enormous crowd!) with what congressional Republicans have done.

In the past three weeks, Trump has: staffed the White House, sent a dozen Cabinet nominees to the Senate, browbeat Boeing into cutting its price on a government contract, harangued American CEOs into keeping their plants in the United States, imposed a terrorist travel ban, met with foreign leaders and nominated a Supreme Court justice, among many other things.

(And still our hero finds time to torment the media with his tweets!)

What have congressional Republicans been doing? Scrapbooking?

More than 90 percent of congressional Republicans kept their jobs after the 2016 election, so you can cross “staffing an entire branch of government” off the list. Only the Senate confirms nominees, which they’ve been doing at a snail’s pace, so they’ve got loads of free time — and the House has no excuse at all.

Where’s the Obamacare repeal? Where are the hearings featuring middle-class Americans with no health insurance because it was made illegal by Obamacare?

The House passed six Obamacare repeals when Obama was president and there was no chance of them being signed into law. Back then, Republicans were full of vim and vigor! But the moment Trump became president, the repeals came to a screeching halt.

After the inauguration (gigantic!), House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell put out a plan for repealing Obamacare … in 200 days. They actually gave their legislative agenda this inspiring title: “The Two Hundred Day Plan.”


What was in the last six Obamacare repeals? If we looked, would we find “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy” carefully typed out 1 million times? Seriously, what does Paul Ryan’s day look like?

This is the Silence of the Lambs Congress. They’re utterly silent, emerging from the House gym or their three-hour lunches only to scream to the press about Trump.

To the delight of the media, these frightened little lambs are appalled by nearly everything Trump does. They’ve been especially throaty about Trump’s temporary travel ban from seven terrorist nations — as designated by the Obama administration (and by everybody else who hasn’t been in a deep freeze in a Finnish crevasse for the past decade).

Just like the six Obamacare repeals, a refugee ban was already written and passed by one house of Congress. Then suddenly: the Silence of the Lambs. McConnell and Ryan are hiding under their desks, as Trump is being attacked from every side.

Way, way back, 15 long months ago, congressional Republicans didn’t have a problem with a total ban on Syrian and Iraqi refugees. Not for a mere three months like Trump’s order — but permanently, unless the director of the FBI, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the director of national intelligence personally certified that a particular refugee posed no danger to the U.S.

That bill passed the House with an overwhelming, veto-proof majority, including 47 Democrats. Then it went to the Senate to die.

But when President Trump imposed a comparatively mild three-month ban on immigrants from Syria, Iraq and five other terrorist nations, the same Republicans who had voted for a limitless ban on refugees whiled away their days calling reporters to denounce Trump.

A little more than a year ago, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, bragged in a press release that he had introduced the House’s refugee ban, calling it a bill that would “protect Americans from ISIS.”

But when it came to Trump’s three-month pause, McCaul told the Post that Trump’s order “went too far.”

I guess that ISIS problem just sort of faded away. (Or maybe we should check with Mrs. McCaul, inasmuch as it’s her family money that makes Rep. McCaul one of the richest members of Congress.)

Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa., who voted for the House’s permanent refugee ban, demanded that Trump immediately rescind his travel ban, babbling on about the “many, many nuances of immigration policy” — which he must have learned about on one of his congressional jaunts to a Las Vegas casino.

Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich., said that Trump’s order “overreaches and undermines our constitutional system.” Evidently, he was suddenly struck by the realization that it’s “not lawful to ban immigrants on the basis of nationality,” despite having voted to ban refugees on the basis of nationality just 15 months earlier. (I’m OK with this, provided the Syrians, Somalis and Yemenis are sent to live on Justin’s street after being told about his support for gay marriage.)

Sens. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Ben Sasse, R-Neb., both rushed to The Washington Post with this refreshingly original point: NOT ALL MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS! Why, thank you, senators! Where would the GOP be without you?

The Post also quoted spokesmen — spokesmen! — for Republican Sens. Mike Lee of Utah, Rob Portman of Ohio and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina complaining about not having been briefed on Trump’s order. The senators themselves were far too busy to talk to the press because they were — wait, what were they doing again? Words With Friends? Decoupage?

Since the election, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., has been mostly occupied polishing his anti-Trump quotations to get a pat on the head from an admiring media. He complained about Trump’s order, saying it was “poorly implemented” and that he had to find out about it from reporters. (I wonder why.)

This is the moment we’ve been waiting for our entire lives, but Republicans in Congress refuse to do the people’s will. Their sole, driving obsession is to see Trump fail.

I am not presently calling for these useless, narcissistic, Trump-bashing Republicans to be defeated in their re-election bids, but they’re on my Watch List. To be cleared, they can start by getting off the phone with The Washington Post and passing one of those six Obamacare repeal bills.


Blow to Obamacare Mandate: IRS Won’t Reject Tax Returns That Don’t Answer Health Insurance Question…


By Peter Suderman

How much difference does a single line on a tax form make? For Obamacare’s individual mandate, the answer might be quite a lot.

Following President Donald Trump‘s executive order instructing agencies to provide relief from the health law, the Internal Revenue Service appears to be taking a more lax approach to the coverage requirement.

The health law’s individual mandate requires everyone to either maintain qualifying health coverage or pay a tax penalty, known as a “shared responsibility payment.” The IRS was set to require filers to indicate whether they had maintained coverage in 2016 or paid the penalty by filling out line 61 on their form 1040s. Alternatively, they could claim exemption from the mandate by filing a form 8965.

For most filers, filling out line 61 would be mandatory. The IRS would not accept 1040s unless the coverage box was checked, or the shared responsibility payment noted, or the exemption form included. Otherwise they would be labeled “silent returns” and rejected.

Instead, however, filling out that line will be optional.

Earlier this month, the IRS quietly altered its rules to allow the submission of 1040s with nothing on line 61. The IRS says it still maintains the option to follow up with those who elect not to indicate their coverage status, although it’s not clear what circumstances might trigger a follow up.

But what would have been a mandatory disclosure will instead be voluntary. Silent returns will no longer be automatically rejected. The change is a direct result of the executive order President Donald Trump issued in January directing the government to provide relief from Obamacare to individuals and insurers, within the boundaries of the law.

“The recent executive order directed federal agencies to exercise authority and discretion available to them to reduce potential burden,” the IRS said in a statement to Reason. “Consistent with that, the IRS has decided to make changes that would continue to allow electronic and paper returns to be accepted for processing in instances where a taxpayer doesn’t indicate their coverage status.”

The tax agency says the change will reduce the health law’s strain on taxpayers. “Processing silent returns means that taxpayer returns are not systemically rejected, allowing them to be processed and minimizing burden on taxpayers, including those expecting a refund,” the IRS statement said.

The change may seem minor. But it makes it clear that following Trump’s executive order, the agency’s trajectory is towards a less strict enforcement process.

Although the new policy leaves Obamacare’s individual mandate on the books, it may make it easier for individuals to go without coverage while avoiding the penalty. Essentially, if not explicitly, it is a weakening of the mandate enforcement mechanism.

“It’s hard to enforce something without information,” says Ryan Ellis, a Senior Fellow at the Conservative Reform Network.

The move has already raised questions about its legality. Federal law gives the administration broad authority to provide exemptions from the mandate. But “it does not allow the administration not to enforce the mandate, which it appears they may be doing here,” says Michael Cannon, health policy director at the libertarian Cato Institute. “Unless the Trump administration maintains the mandate is unconstitutional, the Constitution requires them to enforce it.”

“The mandate can only be weakened by Congress,” says Ellis. “This is a change to how the IRS is choosing to enforce it. They will count on voluntary disclosure of non-coverage rather than asking themselves.”

The IRS notes that taxpayers are still required to pay the mandate penalty, if applicable. “Legislative provisions of the ACA law are still in force until changed by the Congress, and taxpayers remain required to follow the law and pay what they may owe‎,” the agency statement said.

Ellis says the new policy doesn’t fully rise to the level of declining to enforce the law. “If the IRS turns a blind eye to people’s status, that isn’t quite not enforcing it,” he says. “It’s more like the IRS wanting to maintain plausible deniability.”

Tax software companies are already making note of the change. Drake Software, which provides services to tax professionals, recently sent out a notice explaining the change in policy. As of February 3, the notice said, the IRS “will now accept an e-filed return that does not indicate either full-year coverage or an individual shared responsibility payment or does not include an exemption on Form 8965, as required by IRS instructions, Form 1040, line 61.”

The mandate is a key component of Obamacare’s coverage scheme, which is built on what experts sometimes describe as a “three-legged stool.” The law requires health insurers to sell to all comers regardless of health history, and offers subsidies to lower income individuals in order to offset the cost of coverage. In order to prevent people from signing up for coverage only after getting sick, it also requires most individuals to maintain qualifying coverage or face a tax penalty. While defending the health law in court, the Obama administration maintained that the mandate was essential to the structure of the law, designed to make sure that people did not take advantage of its protections.

In a 2012 case challenging the law’s insurance requirement, the Supreme Court ruled that the individual mandate was constitutional as a tax penalty. The IRS is in charge of collecting payments.

Some health policy experts have argued that the mandate was already too weak to be effective, as a result of the many exemptions that are included. A 2012 report by the consulting firm Milliman found that the mandate penalty offered only a modest financial incentives for families making 300-400 percent of the federal poverty line. More recently, health insurers have said that individuals signing up for coverage and then quickly dropping it after major health expenses is a key driver of losses, and rising health insurance premiums.

It’s too early to say whether the change will ultimately make any difference. But given the centrality of the mandate to the law’s coverage scheme and the unsteadiness of the law’s health insurance exchanges, with premiums rising and insurers scaling back participation, it is possible that even a marginal weakening of the mandate could cause further dysfunction. Health insurers have said the mandate is a priority, and asked for it to be strengthened. Weaker enforcement of the mandate could cause insurance carriers to further reduce participation in the exchanges. One major insurer, Humana, said today that it would completely exit Obamacare’s exchanges after this year.

It is also possible that congressional Republicans will make it moot by repealing much of the law, including its individual mandate, which, as a tax, can be taken down with just 51 Senate votes.

Regardless of its direct impact, however, the change may signal that the Trump administration intends to water down enforcement of the health law’s most controversial requirement, even if those steps are seemingly small. The Trump administration may not be tearing Obamacare down entirely, but it appears to be taking steps to weaken the law, however subtly, one line at a time.

Correction: The IRS did not reject silent returns last year, as this story originally indicated. The plan was to go into effect this year, for 2016 returns, but the IRS reversed course on February 3. Reason regrets the error.

Illegal Aliens Make Commercial Demanding “Free” Health Care – Obamacare – Wake Up America -Cavuto

Americans Get Ready To Pay!!!
Free Health Care Push For Illegals

Madison Eclectic

Get out of my country.  How dare you demand anything?  You’re lucky there isn’t a $50 bounty on your criminal heads.
ArmyVeteran& MarineWife

Jose Gomez yes and America will turn into a 3rd world country shit hole just like Mexico is now. Then you’ll try to jump to the next country, until you ruin the entire world. Once the white people are gone, you don’t have anyone to feed you, house you or pay for schooling. You’re like a fucking parasite, searching for host, suck them dry then move on. Once we are gone you will have nothing, just like you started out with. You cant take over anything. You cant support your family let alone run a country. I think you are forgetting how Mexico bitched out and RAN when American soldiers came your way. You know what, come on. Keep bringing you and your trash family and everyone you known up into the states. Us white people will continue building our bunkers and when shit pops off you dirty fucks can take the brunt of the damage. Y’all will get eliminated like the vermin you are. Great idea. Get them up here!
andy fraser

get the fuck out of my country this is why trump won build that wall
Pete Smith

I have lived her legally for 40 years,and my Obama health care was denied.Obama is a joke to this country,and the world.

you want Healthcare? pay cash Paco!

Trump will send them packing.


They “Only know how to be opposition, not lead!” Drudge says

| – FEBRUARY 8, 2017

Media mogul Matt Drudge called for obstructionist Republicans to be “sued for fraud” Wednesday over their refusal to address Obamacare and tax cuts that would financially affect millions of Americans.

The proprietor of the popular news aggregator said Wednesday Republicans were focusing on everything but the issues that affect everyday Americans.


“No Obamacare repeal,” or “tax cuts!” Drudge tweeted. “But Republicans vote to shut Warren? Only know how to be opposition not lead! DANGER”.

On Tuesday at an attorney general confirmation hearing for Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell objected to the reading of a letter written by Coretta Scott King, the wife of Martin Luther King, Jr., by Mass. Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Singling out McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan, Drudge said the “Republican party should be sued for fraud. NO discussion of tax cuts now. Just lots of crazy,” and pleaded with them to get “Back to basics, guys!”


Drudge even questioned the Trump administration’s decision to pursue an executive order targeting “conflict minerals,” rather than fulfilling the Republican promise to repeal Obamacare, or at least rescind the mandate portion.



CNN “reminds” audience member what to ask

Jamie White | – FEBRUARY 8, 2017

CNN was caught handing out an apparently edited question to a member of the audience “clarifying” what to ask Ted Cruz during the debate Tuesday night with Bernie Sanders about the future of Obamacare. 

The question, read by Carol Hardaway is as follows:

“I have multiple sclerosis but could not afford insurance – without the treatment or medications I need, I had problems with walking, with my speech, and my vision. When the affordable care act was passed I moved from our home state of Texas because they refused to expand Medicaid to Maryland and within 2 weeks I started receiving treatments through Medicaid and am now well enough to work as a substitute teacher.”

“Senator Cruz, can you promise me that you and the Republican leaders in congress will have – actually have a replacement plan in place for people like me who depend on their Medicaid? In other words, I like my coverage, can I keep it?”

The email is from a Gmail account, with the subject line “Your Question,” as the picture shows.

This isn’t the first time CNN has been caught “managing” questions from the audience.

Just last October, WikiLeaks revealed that CNN commentator and former chair of the DNC Donna Brazile funneled questions to Hillary Clinton ahead of a major Democratic primary debate. She was fired as DNC chair and let go as commentator shortly after the revelations came to light.

A month later, WikiLeaks again revealed that CNN was caught asking the DNC to prepare questions for Wolf Blitzer’s interview with then-candidate Donald Trump

“Wolf Blitzer is interviewing Trump on Tues ahead of his foreign policy address on Wed,” wrote the DNC’s Lauren Dillon to fellow Democrats. “Please send me thoughts by 10:30 AM tomorrow. Thanks!”

Now that CNN is understood to be the fake news network, it’s surprising that they’re still digging their own grave by continuing to brazenly peddle fake narratives.

Media Hypocrisy on Presidential Lies Brutally Exposed By One Cartoon

Robert Gehl reports that to say Donald Trump took Washington and the liberal media by surprise is an understatement.

Still reeling from a campaign they eviscerated to an election they never predicted, they’re off their heels and spitting back like a cornered cat.

Their coverage of the inauguration was over-the-top with images and video of the protesters. Take a look at how they converge on this tipped over garbage can and tiny fire that one protester set:


They’re angry, confused and whiny … boy are they whiny.

So, courtesy our friends at LifeZette, here ar the eight most “unhinged -inaugural meltdowns.”


The leftist website titled a column “The butcher’s bill has come due: President Donald Trump is about to victimize his own voters” which tells you all you need to know about what you’re about to read.

Author Chauncey DeVega actively wishes pain on Trump supporters. “Our new president’s supporters are likely to suffer from his regressive policies. My compassion is limited,” DeVega wrote. “This is my version of liberal Schadenfreude — with slightly more hostile intent.”


The network that owns the disgusting site BuzzFeed was terribly worried about the welfare of Hillary Clinton, especially when some of the crowds turned a bit negative toward her. On “Today,” Matt Lauer was really worried that Hillary might hear a cross word.

“They’re going to look up on that podium, or next to it, and see Hillary Clinton,” Lauer fretted. “And what are the fears that they may react in a vocal way toward her, mimicking some of the things that have been said during the campaign? And I think you know what I’m talking about.”

Lauer couldn’t say the words … they were too triggering. The words are: “Lock Her Up.” And yes, they did chant them, and no, Hillary didn’t go into a seizure.


Another leftists webzine, Slate was praying that Donald Trump would fail. Writer Yasha Mounk said that his fellow liberals don’t need to hope for impeachment. Trump may be such a massive failure that he’ll be beaten in 2020.

“And, yes, there is a good chance that Trump will corrupt the American republic in lasting ways. But there is also a chance that this scary story will ultimately have a happy ending,” he wrote.


The political site that usually pretends to play it middle of the road (while still attacking Trump) went batshit crazy with their article titled “Trump’s Transition of Untruths, Exaggerations and Flat-out Falsehoods.”

They claimed the entire campaign was rife with factual inaccuracies, then went on to list 82 things – eighty two – that they claim are false. Compiling that list must have taken a long time.


Chris Matthews went off his rocker Thursday night by trying to scare America that Trump will have his finger on the “nuclear trigger.”

“So, the voice that’s recognized on the phone is commander-in-chief,” Matthews said. “[Trump] has the potential to do the stuff that scares the bedickens out of people — the dickens out of people who’ve actually been briefed.”

His guest, The Washington Post‘s Catherine Rampell agreed that Trump having the nuclear codes “is somewhat terrifying to me, given that Trump does not have the greatest impulse control and when he says that he gets attacked, he punches back.”

The New York Times:

Columnist Vicki Divoll flat-out announced that if Trump’s agenda is seen through, he will be murdering people.

Make no mistake, if Mr. Trump’s ‘agenda’ is successful more, not fewer, Americans and innocents around the world will suffer or die, and none of us will be safer.”

Paul Krugman:

No list of unhinged liberals is complete without everybody’s favorite leftist economist. Early yesterday morning, he tweeted his fear:


Awww … poor little guy.


The “new media” website, which swings as far left as you can go without breaking the glass, wasted no time bashing Trump, all former presidents, and the entire country: “Donald Trump today sets out to make America great again. But what if it was never great?”

Author German Lopez ponders: “America may be great someday, but it has never been there and is not there just yet.”

We look forward to more complete media meltdowns, courtesy of President Donald J. Trump.