To the importers who had to pay them, undoing the entire thing.
💼 Careercow Donald J Trump - 45th/47th President of the USA, convicted felon, Epstein bro, Putin/Netanyahu simp, serial liar, sore loser, cheat and the Chris-Chan of Presidents. Lost a war to Iran and algae. THIS IS NOT USPG2.
- Iniciador del tema JaneThough
- Fecha de inicio
-
🚨 DDoS attack. Tor is stable: https://kiwifarmsaaf4t2h7gc3dfc5ojhmqruw2nit3uejrpiagrxeuxiyxcyd.onion/.
🔎 Please read my article, How to Dox Anyone: A Liz Fong-Jones Story. (Xitter), (Substack). -
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
Pigtoad
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 7 de Sep, 2020
some of these people don't even look human, but a mongrel race.
- Registrado
- 4 de Oct, 2016
Which they then made us pay. So they get free money huh.
cuttysnark
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 17 de Jun, 2019
A lot of companies increased their inventory purchases ahead of time to keep prices the same. Some ate the tariffs, many passed on some or all of the tariffs onto the consumer. I stocked up on things like coffee, toilet paper and other toiletries. I literally bought 5 cases of my favorite ground coffee. I also cancelled my Amazon prime and didn't buy any non necessities.
- Registrado
- 14 de Jul, 2024
OH BOY WHO COULD HAVE EVER SEEN THAT ONE COMING
cuttysnark
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 17 de Jun, 2019
Trump’s scandal-ridden Labor Secretary resigns after reports of drinking and misconduct
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ary-resigns-lori-chavez-deremer-b2961427.html
Random Internet Person
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 28 de Jun, 2019
Because he and Bibi are friends, and Bibi promised him a part of Gaza he can turn into a luxury resort. Or Vegas.
- Registrado
- 14 de Feb, 2024
This is what happens when the Supreme Court hands out a "Stay Out of Jail Free" card.
- Registrado
- 16 de Dic, 2019
They had to pay the tariff as they are the one who imported the item. They raise prices on consumers because what the fuck else are you going to make up for the increased costs? And when the government forced them to pay more for their import and that tax turned out to be illegal, the importers get their money back.
Maybe Trump should rebrand this as America being so HOT!!! that the government is giving our great private businesses money back? Now he could claim something like a tariff rebate.
- Registrado
- 7 de Ene, 2026
You can fight people.
You can even fight the Devil if you're really trying.
But one thing nobody can fight and win? CAPITALISM.
Dr. Robert Goddard
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 28 de Dic, 2025
Trump can claim he's not on a timer all he wants, but he is running out of time. 50 U.S. Code § 1544 says the following:
Trump sent the section 1543(a) report on March 2nd, so the 60th day is May 1st. Note that declaring fake peace for a day does not reset the clock since the military buildup in and of itself counts according to 50 U.S. Code § 1543(a)(2) and (3):
With that said, Trump has never cared about deadlines set by Congress (see the blown deadlines for the Epstein files). But Congress cares about their deadlines, and Congressional Republicans are threatening to pass a 50 U.S. Code § 1544(c) concurrent resolution to force the war to end after May 1st:
House Thwarts Bid to Halt Iran War, but Some in G.O.P. See Support Fading
By Robert Jimison and Megan Mineiro
April 16, 2026
House Republicans on Thursday narrowly blocked a challenge to President Trump’s authority to continue combat operations in Iran, fending off a Democratic-led effort to halt the war even as bipartisan frustration grows over a conflict that has dragged on for weeks without congressional consent.
But even as the G.O.P. thwarted the measure, some in the party indicated that support for the conflict, now nearing its eighth week, was not open-ended, and could wane as an initial statutory deadline approaches within weeks for Mr. Trump to either withdraw American troops or certify to Congress it is not yet safe for U.S. troops to withdraw.
After the vote, Representative Brian Mast of Florida, the Republican chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, signaled that patience within his party was running thin and that a resolution to halt the military campaign could very well pass in the coming weeks.
The House could “have a different vote count after 60 days,” Mr. Mast said, alluding to a May 1 deadline that falls 60 days after Mr. Trump formally notified Congress last month of the military operation in Iran. Asked if the vote would be closer then, Mr. Mast predicted that it would. Had just one additional Republican switched positions and voted in favor of the resolution on Thursday, it would have advanced.
Instead, the House voted 214 to 213 against bringing the war powers resolution to the floor, preserving the broad discretion Republicans have afforded to Mr. Trump to direct the U.S. military campaign in the Middle East.
But the slim margin signaled continuing unease in Congress as the war proceeds with no clear endgame, and with the approach of the midterm elections in which high gas prices threaten to sour voters on Republicans fighting to keep their majorities.
“Thus far, neither side has indicated what comes next, beyond continued blockage of the Strait of Hormuz,” Representative Gregory W. Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee who led the resolution, said ahead of the vote. “We are standing at the edge of a cliff, and Congress must act before this president pushes us off. Every day we delay, we inch closer to a conflict with no exit ramp.”
Democrats pointed to increased energy costs and uncertainty over the fate of diplomatic talks to end the conflict, insisting that Congress must assert its constitutional authority over an unpopular war that is having deep impacts in their communities.
Many Republicans rejected those arguments and said that limiting the president as he commands thousands of deployed service members in the region would be detrimental to the operation.
“My colleagues in an ill-advised way want to say ‘remove all U.S. forces’ in the midst of this cease-fire that we’re in — that’s crazy,” Mr. Mast said ahead of the vote.
Thursday’s vote marked the second time the House has acted on legislation aimed at constraining the president’s authority to wage war against Iran, and fell a day after the Senate, for the fourth time, failed to advance a similar resolution.
Two Republicans again broke with their party: Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky was the only G.O.P. lawmaker to vote in favor of the resolution, while Representative Warren Davidson of Ohio, who previously backed a similar measure, switched his vote to “present,” declining to register a position. Representative Nancy Mace, Republican of South Carolina, who said she has “grave concerns” about the handling of the war, did not vote.
Mr. Davidson’s switch and Ms. Mace’s absence allowed Republicans to narrowly defeat the measure after three Democrats who had opposed an earlier version switched to supporting it: Representatives Greg Landsman of Ohio, Henry Cuellar of Texas, and Juan C. Vargas of California. Representative Jared Golden of Maine was the lone Democrat to vote against it.
The debate has intensified as a critical deadline nears for Mr. Trump to withdraw American forces or seek authorization to continue military operations in Iran. Under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, the president has 60 days after notifying Congress that he has introduced U.S. forces into hostilities to terminate the operation or win authorization to proceed. Mr. Trump began the Iran operation on Feb. 28 without congressional authorization, and sent a formal notification letter to Congress on March 2, putting the statutory deadline at May 1.
Mr. Meeks said after his war powers resolution was blocked that he planned to introduce another, similar measure.
Many Republicans have cited the war powers law in arguing that Mr. Trump has broad latitude to do what he considers necessary in Iran, at least until that deadline passes. The statute affords the president an extension period of up to 30 days if he certifies that “unavoidable military necessity” requires continued operations to ensure the safe withdrawal of U.S. forces.
Mr. Davidson signaled he would support giving the president 30 more days, but if U.S. forces were still engaged in combat operations in June, he said after the vote, “then you’ve got a reasonable constitutional question.”
Many others argue that Mr. Trump should have as much time as he sees fit.
“The end is determined by the enemy,” said Representative Joe Wilson, Republican of South Carolina. “Not by us.”
A senior White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity about private discussions, said the administration was in active conversations with lawmakers about the upcoming deadline.
Some Senate Republicans have suggested they would expect to see an exit plan before signing off on any extension.
“It’s very, very clear to me that the president has some authority during this period of time,” said Senator John Curtis, Republican of Utah, referring to the 60-day window. “It’s very clear to me after that period of time, it falls on Congress.”
Before voting for any extension, he added, “I would want to see some movement, right, to end it.”
The approaching deadline, coupled with lingering uncertainty over a maritime blockade, a temporary cease-fire set to expire next week and little visible progress toward ending the conflict or securing an Iranian commitment to abandon its nuclear program, is giving pause to some Republicans who have steadfastly backed the war and Mr. Trump’s power to wage it without interference or even oversight by Congress.
That dynamic is fueling intensifying calls by Democrats for more congressional action, including repeated war powers votes and demands for public hearings. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is scheduled to testify before the House Armed Services Committee on April 29 regarding the Pentagon’s next budget request, a hearing that falls just before the 60-day deadline and could provide Democrats an opportunity to press for answers on the administration’s legal rationale, military objectives and exit strategy.
By Robert Jimison and Megan Mineiro
April 16, 2026
House Republicans on Thursday narrowly blocked a challenge to President Trump’s authority to continue combat operations in Iran, fending off a Democratic-led effort to halt the war even as bipartisan frustration grows over a conflict that has dragged on for weeks without congressional consent.
But even as the G.O.P. thwarted the measure, some in the party indicated that support for the conflict, now nearing its eighth week, was not open-ended, and could wane as an initial statutory deadline approaches within weeks for Mr. Trump to either withdraw American troops or certify to Congress it is not yet safe for U.S. troops to withdraw.
After the vote, Representative Brian Mast of Florida, the Republican chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, signaled that patience within his party was running thin and that a resolution to halt the military campaign could very well pass in the coming weeks.
The House could “have a different vote count after 60 days,” Mr. Mast said, alluding to a May 1 deadline that falls 60 days after Mr. Trump formally notified Congress last month of the military operation in Iran. Asked if the vote would be closer then, Mr. Mast predicted that it would. Had just one additional Republican switched positions and voted in favor of the resolution on Thursday, it would have advanced.
Instead, the House voted 214 to 213 against bringing the war powers resolution to the floor, preserving the broad discretion Republicans have afforded to Mr. Trump to direct the U.S. military campaign in the Middle East.
But the slim margin signaled continuing unease in Congress as the war proceeds with no clear endgame, and with the approach of the midterm elections in which high gas prices threaten to sour voters on Republicans fighting to keep their majorities.
“Thus far, neither side has indicated what comes next, beyond continued blockage of the Strait of Hormuz,” Representative Gregory W. Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee who led the resolution, said ahead of the vote. “We are standing at the edge of a cliff, and Congress must act before this president pushes us off. Every day we delay, we inch closer to a conflict with no exit ramp.”
Democrats pointed to increased energy costs and uncertainty over the fate of diplomatic talks to end the conflict, insisting that Congress must assert its constitutional authority over an unpopular war that is having deep impacts in their communities.
Many Republicans rejected those arguments and said that limiting the president as he commands thousands of deployed service members in the region would be detrimental to the operation.
“My colleagues in an ill-advised way want to say ‘remove all U.S. forces’ in the midst of this cease-fire that we’re in — that’s crazy,” Mr. Mast said ahead of the vote.
Thursday’s vote marked the second time the House has acted on legislation aimed at constraining the president’s authority to wage war against Iran, and fell a day after the Senate, for the fourth time, failed to advance a similar resolution.
Two Republicans again broke with their party: Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky was the only G.O.P. lawmaker to vote in favor of the resolution, while Representative Warren Davidson of Ohio, who previously backed a similar measure, switched his vote to “present,” declining to register a position. Representative Nancy Mace, Republican of South Carolina, who said she has “grave concerns” about the handling of the war, did not vote.
Mr. Davidson’s switch and Ms. Mace’s absence allowed Republicans to narrowly defeat the measure after three Democrats who had opposed an earlier version switched to supporting it: Representatives Greg Landsman of Ohio, Henry Cuellar of Texas, and Juan C. Vargas of California. Representative Jared Golden of Maine was the lone Democrat to vote against it.
The debate has intensified as a critical deadline nears for Mr. Trump to withdraw American forces or seek authorization to continue military operations in Iran. Under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, the president has 60 days after notifying Congress that he has introduced U.S. forces into hostilities to terminate the operation or win authorization to proceed. Mr. Trump began the Iran operation on Feb. 28 without congressional authorization, and sent a formal notification letter to Congress on March 2, putting the statutory deadline at May 1.
Mr. Meeks said after his war powers resolution was blocked that he planned to introduce another, similar measure.
Many Republicans have cited the war powers law in arguing that Mr. Trump has broad latitude to do what he considers necessary in Iran, at least until that deadline passes. The statute affords the president an extension period of up to 30 days if he certifies that “unavoidable military necessity” requires continued operations to ensure the safe withdrawal of U.S. forces.
Mr. Davidson signaled he would support giving the president 30 more days, but if U.S. forces were still engaged in combat operations in June, he said after the vote, “then you’ve got a reasonable constitutional question.”
Many others argue that Mr. Trump should have as much time as he sees fit.
“The end is determined by the enemy,” said Representative Joe Wilson, Republican of South Carolina. “Not by us.”
A senior White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity about private discussions, said the administration was in active conversations with lawmakers about the upcoming deadline.
Some Senate Republicans have suggested they would expect to see an exit plan before signing off on any extension.
“It’s very, very clear to me that the president has some authority during this period of time,” said Senator John Curtis, Republican of Utah, referring to the 60-day window. “It’s very clear to me after that period of time, it falls on Congress.”
Before voting for any extension, he added, “I would want to see some movement, right, to end it.”
The approaching deadline, coupled with lingering uncertainty over a maritime blockade, a temporary cease-fire set to expire next week and little visible progress toward ending the conflict or securing an Iranian commitment to abandon its nuclear program, is giving pause to some Republicans who have steadfastly backed the war and Mr. Trump’s power to wage it without interference or even oversight by Congress.
That dynamic is fueling intensifying calls by Democrats for more congressional action, including repeated war powers votes and demands for public hearings. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is scheduled to testify before the House Armed Services Committee on April 29 regarding the Pentagon’s next budget request, a hearing that falls just before the 60-day deadline and could provide Democrats an opportunity to press for answers on the administration’s legal rationale, military objectives and exit strategy.
- Registrado
- 31 de Oct, 2022
Serious goddamn question- where the fuck is my $2,000?
How much shit comes out on Truth Social vs his diaper?
How much shit comes out on Truth Social vs his diaper?
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 14 de Feb, 2024
HOLY SHIT. This man has lost his mind. He seriously thinks this is going to happen.
- Registrado
- 31 de Oct, 2022
I actually don’t, never did. Diaper Don’s grift ended for me on 01/06/21.
I’m just trying to bring this shit back up because all of the Miggers who have been so smug about it last year just quietly let this shit go. “TWO MORE WEEKS!” right, you strap ons?
- Registrado
- 3 de Feb, 2013
Trump's brain is so mush that he can't remember what he ordered from McDonald's for lunch, much less something from 6 months ago
- Registrado
- 28 de Dic, 2025
Kash Pajeet is my second favorite orbiter of this lolcow so I'm really looking forward to seeing what "evidence" he's suddenly magically found about the 2020 election. Conveniently, right after rumors started going around he was next on the chopping block of Trump's firing spree!
I'm sure he will present very strong and serious evidence that will stick just as strongly as all the investigations and prosecutions of Trump's political enemies that have gone absolutely nowhere and been laughed out of courtrooms.
I'm sure he will present very strong and serious evidence that will stick just as strongly as all the investigations and prosecutions of Trump's political enemies that have gone absolutely nowhere and been laughed out of courtrooms.
- Registrado
- 18 de Ago, 2019
Its probably gonna just be a complete rehash of things Trump said back in 2020. There is no evidence besides Trumps word that "The Big Cheat" happened. He's just saying shit at this point hoping to delay Trump from dropping The Sword of Damocles onto his career like he did with millions of other people.
cuttysnark
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 17 de Jun, 2019
Kash Patel should research those before him
- Registrado
- 9 de Sep, 2021
And none of it is going to Americans because those high prices are here to stay, baby. Coffee is $20-30 north of the border thanks to those tariffs on Brazil. He had to drop tariffs on meat because those prices were so high.Don't let the Iran war distract you from the fact that Trump admin just approved more than 150 billion in tariff refunds
Backtracked on DOGE
Backtracked on tariffs
Backtracked on deportations
Art of the deal.
I guess the Argentine beef deal didn't fall through because they are not eating donkey meat. Remember when the hype was all about Venezuela eating zoo animals? Well Argentina is run by a libertarian. How're those free markets and IMF bailouts, fam?
If the Right has any intention of surviving, whether in the US or abroad, they have to cut off contact with Zionists. Meloni and Sanchez did it, and their popularity skyrocketed. Donald Tusk of Poland, who is not loved by Polish right-wingers, got more popular because he started breaking away from Israel.
'Defeat' was already achieved because Trump backtracked on deportations because certain illegals do farm work 'Americans don't want to do' and American taxpayer dollars are going to a nation committing genocide in multiple countries. And, if Larry Johnson is right, he heard it from an inside source that Trump actually thought about launching a nuke on Iran on Saturday. Nuking a nation that never posed a threat because Israel was threatened would damn the American Right forever, if they aren't damned already. The only way forward is to cut Jewish influence entirely.
- Registrado
- 3 de Feb, 2013
But fatty and USPG2 MAGAloids said that tariffs didn't lead to higher prices!