Graham Signals Support For $2,000 Relief Checks….With Caveats

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said on Tuesday night that he backs President Donald Trump’s push for $2,000 direct payments for COVID-19 relief, but the senator tied his support to repealing Section 230 and whether the GOP keeps control of the Senate after the Georgia runoffs.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1351482
1 Like

Lindsey, I’m sure I speak for everyone here. Could you kindly f***off, you toady?

34 Likes

Yeah, bullshit. Lindsey knows that McConnell is going to quash the higher stimulus amount by adding the Section 230 stuff, and he knows the Dems in the Senate won’t support that. The House isn’t coming back to consider a new bill either.

The three of them – Trump, McConnell and Graham – are relying on the public not understanding what Section 230 actually does, and what the impact would be. Trump just wants to hurt the social media companies because they’ve been mean to him. It has nothing to do with social media “censoring conservatives.”

36 Likes

The consensus among respected economists, including Krugman, is that $2000 payments based on current sliding scale numbers are a poor use of this money, and that it should be more targeted towards people who really need it, with a much lower set of sliding scale numbers. I.e. relief more than stimulus. It’s probably moot though since it doesn’t look like MM’s going to allow a vote on a bill that doesn’t have poison pill provisions.

An aside, since a lot of people end up using these payments to pay down debt (what I did), aren’t they “bad” for the financial industry, since it translates into fewer finance charges collected on outstanding debt? If so, has this been reflected in finance stocks? Or are they make up the losses elsewhere?

11 Likes

So, in Georgia, the Republicans are running calling their opponents “radical socialists” while they are supporting a measure pushed by Bernie Sanders…

26 Likes

It’s the Smucker’s law of US politics: If a Repub supports or does it, it has to be good.

9 Likes

“not the most efficient way to get aid to people who are suffering,”

Dafuq? What could possibly be more efficient than giving people a $2000 check?

Oh, I know. Give it to billionaires and let it “trickle down.” Silly me; how could I have forgotten?

22 Likes

IF the GOP wins Georgia?

Fucking quid pro quo, anyone?

16 Likes

There’s general agreement that Section 230, which was passed over 20 years ago when the internet was a much different place needs revisiting. But doing it as part of an unrelated bill, whether the Defense Authorization or COVID relief in a mad rush to get out of town, without hearings and input is exactly the wrong way to do it and will inevitably result in a mess.

14 Likes

[Edit: Just saw that this is not entirely correct. See at end for the update]

It seems confusing down there.

What if I told you Brad Raffensperger doesn’t even have a brother?

— Brendan Keefe (@BrendanKeefe) December 30, 2020

Referring to below.

...The consent decree signed by the “Secretary”, with the consent of Kemp, is perhaps even more poorly negotiated than the deal that John Kerry made with Iran. Now it turns out that Brad R’s brother works for China, and they definitely don’t want “Trump”. So disgusting! #MAGA

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 30, 2020
[Update]

There remains no basis for Trump’s claim a sibling works for China - it’s some dude by the same last name. But I’m sorry for spreading the inaccurate statement that he doesn’t have a brother at all. A good reminder about the need to double-check even things that seem verified.

— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) December 30, 2020

OK: 1) Brad Raffensperger does not have a brother who “works for China.” Trump was echoing a debunked conspiracy theory. 2) Raffensperger does have *a* brother. His staff said as recently as this morning that he only had two sisters, but there is a bro, and another sister.

— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) December 30, 2020
23 Likes

What does “signal" mean?

Is this mention a signal? Did Graham hoist his middle finger into the air as a signal?

I am very confused over what in the world “signal” means.

1 Like

Cash payments “not the most efficient way to get aid to people who are suffering,”

Gotta love Republicans, right? Much more efficient to give the money to the rich and let it trickle down to people who are suffering, I guess.

13 Likes

Yep, the fix is in. It’s pretty obvious the poison pills added by Moscow Mitch will ensure defeat. The $2,000 relief payment bill is dead.

Miss Lindsey reveals it’s a sham.

9 Likes

‘I’ve got so many Kompromats I can’t keep track of them all’. Sen LG, SC

9 Likes

Up next, they will promote a relief bill in the form of tax breaks for those with zero income.

10 Likes

Law schools would love the repeal of 230. It would take 100,000 new attorneys to handle all the suits filed by every knucklehead alleging they were harmed or slandered by something someone else posted to various social media forums.

4 Likes

The point is that lots of people who aren’t suffering and don’t need it will also get the $2000, or some fraction of it, which is stimulus, not relief. A family of 4 making $250-$350k a year is NOT suffering.

1 Like

Liability exemption laws are often unconstitutional, per the 14th amendment and other provisions and aspects of con law.

1 Like

Mitch had already done that. Lindsey was just being his rudderless self.

4 Likes

Yep, and of course Trump doesn’t realize it would lead to even more censorship of user content to avoid those lawsuits.

The social media companies need more regulation, especially with regard to user data ownership, but a functioning society needs a degree of protection for the “carriers” or it gets real messy. If I can’t sue USPS for delivering a nasty letter to my mailbox, I shouldn’t be able to sue my ISP or Twitter either.

10 Likes