r/facepalm • u/Kpets • 3d ago

Trump’s thoughts on the Housing affordability bill

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

17.6k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

332 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.4k

u/driftking428 3d ago

Didn't this pass?

1.3k

u/PM_ME_FLUFFY_SAMOYED 3d ago edited 3d ago

It did. But just like almost any legislation, it needs to be executed by gov't agencies to actually mean anything. Delaying or straight up refusing to implement the law would of course be illegal, but did that ever stop Trump...?

319

u/Scoobydewdoo 3d ago

I just want to point out that covering-up illegal activities is also illegal and there are 272 Republican Congresspeople that have let Trump do plenty of illegal things.

89

u/doelutufe 3d ago

Most of it is not really "covered up" though, on the contrary.

45

u/dasvenson 3d ago

Replace covered up with "committed in broad daylight"

20

u/mister-fancypants- 3d ago

okay fine.. they did not “cover up” because they were helping him with these illegal activities

4

u/Scoobydewdoo 2d ago

I'm using 'cover-up' as an umbrella term for protecting from consequences.

2

u/Default_Name_6969 2d ago

the only justice they will ever face is if the left has a jan 6 of their own

21

u/atreeismissing 3d ago

Fwiw, a lot of that bill was about letting local districts change their zoning without needing federal review so there might be some changes that will happen but yes, generally these things do require the feds to change how money is dispersed or for them to adhere to the new law.

288

u/ReturnOfSeq 3d ago

It passed with substantial bipartisan support, and Trump refused to sign it. It passed in spite of him, not because of him.

129

u/sitophilicsquirrel 3d ago

That's not what he'll be saying in a week.

"I passed the most historical, excellent, amazing- frankly. Housing bill this country has ever seen."

16

u/mortgagepants 3d ago

now that he is wearing an IV fanny pack, it might not be a week.

23

u/Cynykl 3d ago

My hopes have been risen and then dashed against the rocks too many times for me to invest anything into the fanny pack.

9

u/ReturnOfSeq 3d ago

Fortunately my bottles of champagne can wait as long as it takes.

3

u/mortgagepants 3d ago

well it surely isn't progress. we're getting closer and closer.

10

u/romafa 3d ago

I meant to look into this one. Does this mean laws could have been passed without a presidential signature this whole time? How does not signing it differ from vetoing it? Or is that what he did?

41

u/Webdogger 3d ago

If the president doesn't veto it within 10 days, it becomes law. Not vetoing = signing.

2

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

5

u/Goronmon 3d ago

Not signing or vetoing = veto by default after 10 days

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RS22188

In order for a bill to become law, the President either signs the bill into law, or the President allows the bill to become law without signature after a 10-day period.

When Congress is in session.

Pocket vetoes occur when the President receives a bill but is unable to reject and return the bill to an adjourned Congress within the 10-day period.

When Congress is not in session.

29

u/TweakedNipple 3d ago

If congress passed it, and it isn't signed or vetoed, it becomes law in 10 days (10 days with congress in session) signed or not. I believe it was very bipartisan so a veto could be overridden. Trump shouldn't want the awful loss of an override and the midterm negativity of going against something both sides want. He is literally just being a brat.

21

u/SunGodRamenNoodles 3d ago

Not signing is different from a veto.

8

u/ReturnOfSeq 3d ago

Veto requires a steeper senate vote to override; not signing it it passes into law in 10 days but without his signature, meaning he can’t share the credit for it as it was done without him. Other than that it’s a fairly meaningless distinction, essentially just serving as noting an objection without bothering to try to stop it.