From the article:
House Speaker Mike Johnson announced a new approach to pass a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that would not include funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Johnson and Majority Leader John Thune said in a joint statement Wednesday.
The partial DHS shutdown strained airport operations nationwide and imposed financial hardship on federal workers, raising pressure for a resolution even as Congress split over immigration enforcement policy.
Democrats and Republicans have been unable to come to an agreement that allowed DHS funding to move forward without the inclusion of funding for ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Read more: [https://www.newsweek.com/mike-johnson-caves-to-democrats-dhs-funding-bill-demands-11771221?utm\_source=listnook&utm\_campaign=listnook\_influencers](https://www.newsweek.com/mike-johnson-caves-to-democrats-dhs-funding-bill-demands-11771221?utm_source=listnook&utm_campaign=listnook_influencers)
1
CT_Phipps-AuthorApr 1, 2026
+1
Johnson got informed by the Republican Senate that they, in fact, still have power.
1
RadiantBeeeesApr 1, 2026
+1
Maybe the Republicans should pick a new leader for themselves in the house. Johnson seems to not be the solution to their problem.
1
nodogma2112Apr 1, 2026
+1
By the time they can get enough votes to select a new speaker the house will belong to the dems.
1
Few-Button6004Apr 1, 2026
+1
More like Speaker of the White House amirite
1
TheDo0ddoesnotabideApr 1, 2026
+1
Mike Johnson’s title isn’t “Speaker”, it’s “Supplicant”.
1
turningsteelApr 1, 2026
+1
The entire Republican party is just one long train of human centipede with Donald Trump at the front.
Don't google that if you aren't familiar and want to keep your lunch down.
1
Normal_Ad_2337Apr 1, 2026
+1
We need a Supplican, not a Supplicant.
1
FizzyBeverageApr 1, 2026
+1
Took them like 5 months last time. Squandered 1/4 of their time.
Fine by me if they drag ass through October.
1
amateurbreditorApr 1, 2026
+1
mike johnson looks fat and ugly on camera. maybe that will help?
1
LizziedeeeApr 1, 2026
+1
I’ve noticed that lately, more so than usual, his face is all red, too. He looks like Porky Pig.
1
EtzellApr 1, 2026
+1
Shhhh, don't tell them, they might be dumb enough to do it!
1
Stang1776Apr 1, 2026
+1
I doubt anybody wants that job. Who in their right mind wants to explain the Administration's rational.
1
25point4cmApr 1, 2026
+1
Meh. Easy. Just say you haven’t seen it or been briefed on it, whatever it is.
1
informedinformerApr 1, 2026
+1
From Trump on down, this Administration is not rational. And it has no rationale for anything it does.
1
petrovmendicantApr 1, 2026
+1
I'm honestly kinda shocked that Mike Johnson is still Speaker, considering how the divisive voting to finally vote him in took three weeks and nearly led to a drunken brawl between Republicans on the House floor.
1
LovelieLunaApr 1, 2026
+1
No one else wants the job probably. You basically become a mouthpiece for the fascist administration and get attacked by everyone.
1
MasterofPandas1Apr 1, 2026
+1
Do they still have the provision that one congressperson can start a re-election vote for Speaker or did they take that out for this session?
1
Factory2econdsApr 1, 2026
+1
rules were updated that a motion to vacate requires 9
1
MasterofPandas1Apr 1, 2026
+1
Gotcha, thank you for the updated information!
1
opeth10657Apr 1, 2026
+1
Maybe they fired him weeks ago and he just hasn't seen the email?
1
BallBearingBillApr 1, 2026
+1
When it's Trump that's the problem, picking a feckless minion was never going to be the answer!
1
LazyDynamiteApr 1, 2026
+1
Do you remember the fiasco of how Johnson got the job? I'm guessing they want to avoid that if possible
1
black_flag_4everApr 1, 2026
+1
I'm writing this to you directly, even if you do not have editorial control over headlines.
Is there a reason why Newsweek and other major media companies uses divisive and combative titles for stories like this?
It is the job of Congress to reach agreements and pass legislation. It's not sports.
Maybe it's just me but I've noticed that the rise in Trumpian politics, which actually goes back to the Tea Party, also coincides with clickbait/rage bait headlines for everything. Using "caves in" implies that the GOP will have to get revenge later. It tells the reader that the lost this match, can they win the next? But it's not a game. It's our lives.
I'm tired of living in a country where retribution is how our country is governed. Revenge politics is a shitty way to run this place. Ragebait as the country's operating system is unpleasant. It's how we got Trump.
In the past, we would have a headline like "After Lengthy Debate, House Comes to Agreement on DHS Funding." Then the pundits would add the color to the story in the opinion section. Now, it's opinion first, facts later. The opinion is in the headline even if the story is just straight reporting. The text of this story is standard journalism but the headline feeds into this politics-as-sports narrative about winners and losers and I feel like the impact of this keeps snowballing to a point where the actual point of what Congress does gets lost. They are supposed to compromise. They are supposed to reach agreements. They are supposed to not be little whiny babies that won't do anything unless they can be perceived as winners, which is what we mostly have now.
1
pansy_dragoonApr 1, 2026
+1
Fuckin a dude
1
DokterrockApr 1, 2026
+1
you accidentally a comma
1
MaelefiqueApr 1, 2026
+1
Maaaybe he did, maybe he didn't. You don't know him.! 😂
1
iceberg_redheadApr 1, 2026
+1
Language Arts matter.
1
BalorpagorpApr 1, 2026
+1
Is The Dude down with that?
1
Colley619Apr 1, 2026
+1
He did WHAT
1
thatoneabdlguyApr 1, 2026
+1
>"After Lengthy Debate, House Comes to Agreement on DHS Funding."
You are 1000% correct on everything you said, but unfortunately, nobody clicks on an article with that headline.
1
mrgedmanApr 1, 2026
+1
It's also not really the most accurate representation because our politics ARE tribal like sports teams, and I think it's not totally accurate or fair to blame the media- the politicians carry most of the blame.
Johnson caved. He relented, yielded, backed down. A deal was struck because Johnson caved.
1
ary31415Apr 1, 2026
+1
This is true but it's a vicious cycle. Describing it as caving increases the public pressure on him to not do that.
1
mrgedmanApr 1, 2026
+1
Idgaf. These guys can do the right thing (cave) or be complete despotic moron ghouls (ice/cbp)
Idgaf if there's pressure to not do the right thing. It's not my problem, and it's clear as day to a vast majority of Americans who fucked this all up.
1
ary31415Apr 1, 2026
+1
> it's not my problem
I mean, if you're American it kinda is though. That's like, the point of politics.
1
-Yazilliclick-Apr 1, 2026
+1
Was this after and from debate though? (maybe I'm missing you're point).
This seems more like Democrats had a point they were standing on and not accepting the Republicans saying no to that point.
1
ozymanApr 1, 2026
+1
The reason it's 'caves', is because this same bill was up for a vote last week, the house rejected it and said they were not going to support it. Now this week they came back and voted for it. That's 'caves', I guess?
Look at this article from last week full of quotes from house Republican's about how they will not pass this bill:
[https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/27/politics/dhs-shutdown-funding-bill-senate-house-vote](https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/27/politics/dhs-shutdown-funding-bill-senate-house-vote)
If it was a brand new bill with bipartison compromise that would be different.
1
SurprisedJerboaApr 1, 2026
+1
>The text of this story is standard journalism but the headline feeds into this politics-as-sports narrative about winners and losers and I feel like the impact of this keeps snowballing to a point where the actual point of what Congress does gets lost. They are supposed to compromise. They are supposed to reach agreements. They are supposed to not be little whiny babies that won't do anything unless they can be perceived as winners, which is what we mostly have now.
The GOP and Trump want to ram shit through, be it Constitutional or not. They want to rule, not govern. Things are not normal anymore, and Trump wanted retribution during his campaign.
Gerrymandering gave us the worst extremists, so until that is gone, this is the GOP norm. Authoritarianism until it meets one of the few, remaining guardrails.
1
Lashay_SombraApr 1, 2026
+1
While can get what saying, congress and politics in general have been streadly becoming less about finding the best compromise and all about winning and loosing, and vast majority of that change has come from the right.
It started with stupidity like Norquists Taxpayer Protection Pledge back in the 80s and ended up where US is today, with Trump (for the umpteenth time) declaring no deals on anything until he got SAVE and only then they could negotiate on everything else
*and republicans complying* (and no way was anyone on the left going to believe that even if they gave in that republicans would negotiate in good faith down the road)
There is a huge difference between , from the get go, two sides negotiating the best compromise they can reach vs one side just refusing to negotiate until all their (unrelated) demands were met or until they eventually forced to give in and start negotiations due to rercussions (on them) of their inaction
I would say the opposite, press have been to lax/easy on republicans by pretending Republicans were acting normally and doing their jobs.
1
BoomshankApr 1, 2026
+1
Have a free fake award!!!
🥇
1
rgvtimApr 1, 2026
+1
Its all about the money, money, money. Headlines like this generate traffic which allows them to sell ads. The media across the board is not in the business of anything close to fair and balanced, they are all about the cash, and this is they way they do it.
Once you understand that, it all becomes clear. Even fox news, which has a point of view and has additional objectives above and beyond the money from ads, is still in the end about generating cash, either directly, or by influencing the masses allowing their owners to pay less taxes.
1
eiretara7Apr 1, 2026
+1
100% agree. I have no love at all for Mike Johnson but the word “caves” is just so stupid here.
1
magikot9Apr 1, 2026
+1
The sensational and divisive headlines drive clicks so these sites can send you ads. Journalistic integrity is dead.
1
No_Worldliness_7106Apr 1, 2026
+1
Newsweek is a trash tabloid is why.
1
thotfullawfulApr 1, 2026
+1
They’re upset that they lost all of their special flying privileges. That should be standard for every shut down.
1
oneseventwosixApr 1, 2026
+1
Rather than calling it “caving” why don’t we call it “compromises on DHS funding with Democratic provisions.”
It might help break our partisan deadlock if we stop seeing everything as zero sum, but rather as a win for the American people because the government taking actions with input from both major parties… so everyone can feel somewhat represented.
1
gorginhansonApr 1, 2026
+1
I read the article. It doesn't say what the title is claiming.
It says he's doing some weasely shit to fund the entire department rather than the Democrat plan to fund everyone besides ICE
1
paradoxpancakeApr 1, 2026
+1
And this is how you make Republicans eventually cave, Dems. You hold out. You don't buckle. You don't give them what they want because they'll say they'll support you the next time. Dems believed them once in the first budget fight a few months ago and got burned from it to absolutely no one's surprise, and to everyone telling them that Republicans will go against their word.
About time that they learned that they don't get what they want when they shit all over the table.
1
Powerful_Toe_8155Apr 1, 2026
+1
Nah, the Dems actually got a decent deal out of the last shutdown, but kind of bombed the messaging on it.
The deal was effectively:
- Lots of important stuff like food stamps stay funded until October-ish 2026 (right before the elections) and are thus off-limits on the next government shutdown
- Republicans will open a vote for Democrat demands on healthcare before late January 2026
- If Democrats do not get their healthcare demands by January 2026, part of the government will shut down again.
That's exactly what wound up happening. The current shutdown started more or less as planned, but most people weren't as negatively impacted this time around, so the news didn't really care until airports started having severe disruptions.
In theory, the Democrats could have maintained this partial shutdown all the way until the elections, without nearly as much suffering as the previous shutdown for the average American.
That's what's forcing the Republicans to negotiate now.
1
peptic-horizonApr 1, 2026
+1
>but kind of bombed the messaging on it.
As is tradition
1
Haunting-Ad3001Apr 1, 2026
+1
It's not like they're going against most mainstream media news, which has basically been taken over by GOP operatives. They could be perfect in their messages, and a large part of the country will be lucky to see it.
1
Powerful_Toe_8155Apr 1, 2026
+1
Yeah, I didn't see a single mainstream news outlet cover the end of the Oct/November shutdown as anything but a complete Democrat capitulation in the headlines.
A few of the less biased outlets briefly mentioned mid-article, in passing, that SNAP and many other things would remain funded for a whole year while other things would only remain funded into late January.
In no world would the Republicans give Democrats what they wanted by February, which meant we were 100% getting a partial shutdown, but on much better terms for the Democrats than last year's shutdown.
1
HumanGrapefruit1027Apr 1, 2026
+1
It is the democrat way!
1
BlochamolesauceApr 1, 2026
+1
We won’t take your guns away! How else would we be able to shoot ourselves in the foot, time and time again, if we did?
1
gdex86Apr 1, 2026
+1
I also point out that the leftwing g types intentionally present it as "They got nothing and caved" or like now scream its a betrayal because they didnt get the obviously unlikely ICE changes.
1
1cl3nstd4ytApr 1, 2026
+1
And half of those leftwing types with accounts pumping out attacks on Dems 24/7....
...are actual Republicans cosplaying.
1
belbivfreeordieApr 1, 2026
+1
Anyone who’s trying to convince you not to vote, be very suspicious. That’s classic Republican shit. They’re not only trying to disenfranchise people, they’re trying to manufacture apathy.
1
1cl3nstd4ytApr 1, 2026
+1
Agree 100%
1
Wretched_GourdApr 1, 2026
+1
Repugs, bots, foreign nationals…
Edit: Instantly downvoted by ^
1
1cl3nstd4ytApr 1, 2026
+1
Exactly.
>"I pump out hundreds of attacks a day against Dems.... but only because I'm trying to help them!"
1
Cybertronian10Apr 1, 2026
+1
They also conviently ignore that "holding out" meant that millions of families would have still been denied foodstamps. People where very much dying.
1
HugsForUpvotesApr 1, 2026
+1
It certainly helps that conservatives celebrate their politicians when they succeed whereas left leaning people celebrate shitting on our politicians. Case in point - the Democrats "won" both shutdowns despite not having any policy making power. Do they get celebrated for it? No.
1
Kat_Schrodinger1Apr 1, 2026
+1
Messaging shouldn't matter people should just vote democrat. The parties are not the same.
1
FrogsOnALogApr 1, 2026
+1
Love how we’re still blaming democrats when the media can’t do their job. Democrats told us multiple times but Listnook doesn’t listen.
1
Button-Down-ShoesApr 1, 2026
+1
But, think of the trauma for Schumer’s imaginary Republican family!
1
Content-Fudge489Apr 1, 2026
+1
The Democrats don't have a tv channel with zombified viewers hooked on 24/7. So it is harder for them to spread such messages.
1
seriousbusinesApr 1, 2026
+1
* Republicans will open a vote for Democrat demands on healthcare before late January 2026
Ah yes, the fabled Republican pinky promise. Because thats worked out great so far!
1
sc0lm00Apr 1, 2026
+1
Isn't this the one they opened voting and closed it before everyone could vote to ensure it wouldn't pass?
1
Powerful_Toe_8155Apr 1, 2026
+1
It was only a promise to start the vote, not a promise to do anything further.
That's why the 2nd side of this was that the Dems planned to shut the government back down. I'm not sure why people find this so hard to understand.
The Democrats never expected the Republicans to support their healthcare platform.
The important thing is that this shutdown is less disruptive than the previous one for most Americans, and federal workers were given notice ahead of time that the government was going to shut down in late January.
1
FrogsOnALogApr 1, 2026
+1
They got the vote and it failed which also showed the whole country they don’t care about us. The Republican controlled house also passed a discharge petition for the ACA too lol
1
arounddroApr 1, 2026
+1
But if the Republicans lose the House during the midterms, the ACA will be funded. This date is purposefully pushed out in hopes that Republicans can actually pull off disenfranchising enough voters to win seats. Which isn’t going to happen. Especially now with Trump’s EO attacking election administration.
1
f8NegativeApr 1, 2026
+1
The Smithsonians budget actually increased again.
1
Philo_Publius1776Apr 1, 2026
+1
>Republicans will open a vote for Democrat demands on healthcare before late January 2026
This already happened and it failed like everyone knew it would. That's not a win.
1
Powerful_Toe_8155Apr 1, 2026
+1
It was expected to fail. The whole point was that the failure would trigger the 2nd shutdown in February, but this shutdown has been significantly less damaging for the Democrats to maintain.
Imagine trying to maintain the previous shutdown all the way to the elections. That was not a sustainable situation for the country, and the Republicans were just cackling as impoverished children starved.
1
Philo_Publius1776Apr 1, 2026
+1
>Imagine trying to maintain the previous shutdown all the way to the elections.
Exactly what they should have done.
> That was not a sustainable situation for the country
That's the point.
>and the Republicans were just cackling as impoverished children starved.
And the country seeing them do it was the point.
You just listed every reason why it should have continued.
1
Powerful_Toe_8155Apr 1, 2026
+1
And I'm sure the hungry children were happy to be sacrificed.
1
WildYamsApr 1, 2026
+1
I'm totally with you on this. Also, for the people who maintain that the Dems should have just kept the government shut down indefinitely they need to realize that ending that shutdown late last year was what led to [Adelita Grijalva being sworn into Congress,](https://www.npr.org/2025/11/12/nx-s1-5606350/adelita-grijalva-swearing-in) which led to there being enough votes to force the Epstein Files to be released. The Epstein Files continues to be a major millstone around the neck of Trump and the GOP. This idea that things are worse off because the government was reopened in November is just wrong.
Republicans were *never* going to cave on the healthcare demands. The whole point was the messaging, and I think quite convincingly the Dems won that battle. Virtually everyone who thinks about the issues with healthcare know that it's being underfunded because of the GOP. The Dems don't currently have the power to actually govern, so the best they can hope for is that people know to blame the Republicans for all the horrible shit that's going on, and I'd say they're easily getting that message out.
1
Philo_Publius1776Apr 1, 2026
+1
That's the Republicans fault if it happened. You're literally saying dems should give in to hostage takers. They shouldn't. Because now that they see that it works, Republicans will hold starving children hostage every time they want something, because it works.
You're putting children in more danger, not less.
Martin Luther King, Jr. had children march at the front of his marches with the intention that they would be mauled by dogs if the police chose to use the dogs. If you'd had your way, MLK would have gone home.
1
mojitzApr 1, 2026
+1
1. Saying "lots of stuff" followed by a single example here seems to be doing a lot of lifting for what amounts to slightly less draconian cuts to social services rather than any positive gains.
2. This healthcare vote failed as everyone always knew it would, so that's hardly any real concession.
3. They immediately threw out most of their leverage over the second shutdown — leaving behind a smaller, *3rd* shutdown threat whose principle demands around incredibly basic, non-controversial demands like not allowing masked thugs to be deployed in our streets to terrorized citizens or a uniform code of conduct for feds was promptly abandoned the moment any real pressure started to mount.
4. House Reepublicans didn't reject the current deal because they didn't like the concessions Dems were getting. They rejected it because they themselves wanted even *more* than they already got.
1
1cl3nstd4ytApr 1, 2026
+1
Maybe next time we should give them control of a single branch of government? Or just half of Congress?
Then you wouldn't have to make logic pretzels about them having mysterious power they refuse to wield
1
ProfessionalBench832Apr 1, 2026
+1
The vote was fake af and meant to fail (and it did). Sure, we got SNAP back but lost ACA subsidies entirely. Are you trying to say 2027? Jan 2026 was months ago and we still have no healthcare. Losing healthcare for an entire year is literally a death sentence for many or a quick trip to extreme debt.
So we got back something that was already funded and lost healthcare for millions. Heck of a win. What the actual f? Did ai write that noise for you?
1
ledfoxApr 1, 2026
+1
> "Republicans will open a vote for Democrat demands on healthcare before late January 2026"
How did this one turn out?
1
Powerful_Toe_8155Apr 1, 2026
+1
As expected, we did not get ACA subsidies back, and the government shut back down as a result.
1
SpadufApr 1, 2026
+1
None of that was worth funding Brown shirts to the tune of a medium nations military.
1
TheElbowApr 1, 2026
+1
I could be totally talking out of my ass here, but I think the Dems caving on the last shutdown was about getting Congress to vote on releasing the Epstein files as quickly as possible.
1
DundeenotdaleApr 1, 2026
+1
Democrats were also the only ones that cared about starving kids when SNAP ran out
1
SuperstitiousPigeon5Apr 1, 2026
+1
I think that was part of it too. The problem is had they waited another month they probably could have had both.
1
specialkk77Apr 1, 2026
+1
Maybe but people were hungry. Poor people who had nothing to do with the bickering that was happening.
My family is fortunate enough that we have an emergency credit card to use and did in fact use it when SNAP ran out. There are many families on SNAP who don’t have that choice.
I was in a place of privilege when I said they should keep it shut down. Did it suck paying interest on a f****** grocery order? Yeah of course. But I know I’m one of the lucky ones and not one of the victims of the government being so incompetent.
1
VanbyRiveronbucketApr 1, 2026
+1
Yer right. The Thanksgiving holiday travel was about to start, and the Repubs did not want that shutdown… the Schumer got paid off and caved.
1
Alarming_Head_4263Apr 1, 2026
+1
Yeah that's why they caved and not the fact that the last shutdown was much more widespread affecting many dem constitutes.
1
1cl3nstd4ytApr 1, 2026
+1
And, the House couldn't vote in favor of ACA subsidies when they were closed. When it opened, they passed ACA subsidies in the House. That was a big win.
1
FizzyBeverageApr 1, 2026
+1
Republicans need their spanking. A big part of why Trump is the way he is, is that he never heard no.
1
MyDogIsACoolCatApr 1, 2026
+1
NYT is reporting that Dems got none of what they asked for unless I’m misunderstanding
1
nihilisticpunchlineApr 1, 2026
+1
I had the same confusion. What I believe NYT was trying to say is the bill was passed without any of the ICE reforms previously discussed. It did, however, pass by removing ICE funding from the bill which was the new demands set by the Democrats. It was odd reporting nonetheless by the NYT.
1
1cl3nstd4ytApr 1, 2026
+1
F****** bullshit. But sure, use every Dem victory as a chance to attack them.
That really helps /s
1
captaingymshortsApr 1, 2026
+1
I wouldnt say this comment is attacking democrats, it's saying "Hey, look at what happens when you hold out for your principles"
1
1cl3nstd4ytApr 1, 2026
+1
I disagree they 'gave them what they wanted' the first time.
We got a vote in the House that passed in favor of ACA supplements.
1
Philo_Publius1776Apr 1, 2026
+1
That's not a win considering what was lost. That's absolutely an example of giving them what they wanted.
Also, the ACA supplements are meaningless because they kicked so many people off ACA and then refused to allow that money to be spent on the ACA anyways.
1
dcdttuApr 1, 2026
+1
The buckling is all part of the plan for corporatist Democrats. They aren't on our side like AOC or Bernie are. Chuck Schumer is a corporatist who profits off his position. He doesn't care.
1
Particular-County277Apr 1, 2026
+1
Did Schumer not recently say at a presser, that his (tachlis)-essential purpose is to get as much money as he can for Israel?
1
1cl3nstd4ytApr 1, 2026
+1
What a crock of shit
1
Dsarg_92Apr 1, 2026
+1
The Democrats finally stood on business and it’s about time.
1
we_are_sex_bobombApr 1, 2026
+1
Mike Johnson is a spineless little parsnip, that’s how he got the job in the first place, so this can work every single time if they are just willing to stick it out.
1
BrobeastApr 1, 2026
+1
Well they did try that once or twice, but the effects were catastrophic while trumo had more breathing soace between then and midterms. Now? His polling is abysmal, and red save havens are flipping blue. They are panicking.
1
specialkk77Apr 1, 2026
+1
Republicans were holding hostage the people who rely on SNAP. Democrats wanted that to be restored as quickly as possible so they made a handshake deal that also included keeping SNAP benefits off the table from being weaponized that way again this year.
Yeah it sucks that they backed down. But there was a genuine concern that American families were going to starve before an agreement was reached.
1
notfeelanyApr 1, 2026
+1
And what a perfect time to reward Democrats their due: Voting & Supporting Democrats now&forever without exception for at least 50 years, so they can retake Congress and Presidency
1
spazz720Apr 1, 2026
+1
The first shutdown affected the entire govt…it was smarter to kick the can down the road and hold the line on a partial shutdown with DHS. The fact that Ice & Border Patrol are funded meant less collateral damage and gave the Dems for power to point out the hypocrisy.
1
shawnsblogApr 1, 2026
+1
Trump has his hands in all kinds of shit, being up Mike Johnson’s ass and using him as a ventriloquist dummy is just one of those ways.
1
Hopeful_Fishing3Apr 1, 2026
+1
He’s just the latest mouthpiece. Trump pulls the strings and Johnson folds the moment the pressure gets real.
1
DeemaunikApr 1, 2026
+1
Blames democrats for defunding homeland security during this conflict, which he and his dear leader created, and the homeland security he's citing is essentially an occupying army / masked ecret police force that refuses to be investigated when it murders civilians, while being headed by a man who took a 50k bribe from an undercover agent. Make it make sense.
1
pontiacfirebird92Apr 1, 2026
+1
>Make it make sense.
"It's only wrong when Democrats do it."
It's that simple for a lot of folks.
1
gorginhansonApr 1, 2026
+1
I read the article. It doesn't say what the title is claiming.
It says he's doing some weasely shit to fund the entire department rather than the Democrat plan to fund everyone besides ICE
1
WorthynessApr 1, 2026
+1
> Make it make sense.
Create a problem out of a thing that isn't problematic. propose a solution to your new problem that was exactly the same as (or worse than) the status quo before you made the problem. Pass the resolution. Brag about how good your administration is for passing a resolution. Don't bother with the details because your supports will eat it up anyway.
1
SnapingboltsApr 1, 2026
+1
"radical left wing base." WE DO NOT HAVE A TRUE LEFT WING IN AMERICA! Eat a bag of dicks Johnson
1
idksomuchApr 1, 2026
+1
D-did you just tell the Speaker of the House, Micro Johnson, to commit cannibalism?
1
greggldApr 1, 2026
+1
Cannibalism is biblically approved, so he can’t complain.
1
name_escapeApr 1, 2026
+1
Hey, if the Epstein files are anything to go by, it’s completely in vogue with these creeps
1
CT_Phipps-AuthorApr 1, 2026
+1
Trump and Johnson don't know how to deal with someone who doesn't agree with their every demand. Thankfully, for them, they usually didn't have to deal with it from the Democrats.
1
Head-Fun3394Apr 1, 2026
+1
Just wait till trump refuses to sign it because the save act isn’t included
1
tgbst88Apr 1, 2026
+1
Love to watch the GOP to override the president lol..
1
SteaveeApr 1, 2026
+1
God, can you imagine?!
It gives me a half-chubb just thinking about it.
1
soupjawApr 1, 2026
+1
Passed unanimously in the Senate. Could very well be a veto proof majority
1
gsbadjApr 1, 2026
+1
Could be, provided the Senators vote to override. I suspect it was unanimous in the first place because the GOP Senators believed that it would never pass in the House
1
cbass817Apr 1, 2026
+1
If they don't override it, then they have to answer to their constituents and the media why they voted for it unanimously in the first place if they weren't going to back it up. We all know what the answer to that question would be, the real answer, that they do whatever Trump tells them, but at least that would be on record.
1
MoltresRisingApr 1, 2026
+1
It will be veto proof, so even if it’s not signed the bill goes into law after a set amount of days.
1
GanrokhApr 1, 2026
+1
That's not how it works. Even if it passes with a veto-proof majority, he can still veto it. It then gets sent back to the chamber where the bill was first introduced (in this case, the Senate). The president submits a statement on why they vetoed it. The first chamber then holds the override vote, then the second chamber holds their vote, and then it is enacted if a supermajority votes for the override.
This is important to note because there were a few times during Trump's first administration where he vetoed bills that passed with veto-proof majorities, and then the GOP backed down because "it's not what the president wants".
1
Sensitive-Flamingo84Apr 1, 2026
+1
Hell yes dems, this has finally been some back-bone behavior, keep it up.
1
[deleted]Apr 1, 2026
+1
[deleted]
1
Myko475Apr 1, 2026
+1
Standing up to Nancies’
1
SeattleSquatchApr 1, 2026
+1
NYT also says the plan does not include any of the restrictions on immigration enforcement that Democrats demanded.
1
FishGoldenLiteApr 1, 2026
+1
I’m reading that as, “No restrictions, no more funding.”
Of course they still have their slush fund from the BBB but that would appear to be it. The rest of DHS, like TSA, will be funded as expected but ICE and BP will not get anything else, essentially taking away any leverage the Republicans have to secure additional funding. That’s how I’m understanding it, but may be wrong.
1
VerilyShellyApr 1, 2026
+1
That part. I'm not satisfied.
1
CazargarApr 1, 2026
+1
Yeah, this is the part I came looking for some information for. I was worried it was another complete loss by the Dems, which thankfully seems to not be the case, but getting nothing on this front is pretty disappointing.
1
lioneaglegriffinApr 1, 2026
+1
isn't that tied to the funding that was carved out?
1
zeldamaster702Apr 1, 2026
+1
Not gonna lie, between this, the Ballroom being temporarily stopped, NPR/PBS funding stoppage being declared unconstitutional, Krusti Noem's husband being a crossdresser and Trump storming out of the SCOTUS hearing today because it's not going his way, it's been a rough 48 hours for this administration.
*Excellent*
1
IyellkhanApr 1, 2026
+1
they are not caving. they're putting DHS funding through on a reconciliation bill, meaning no reforms to ICE and CBP. this is electorally ok for the democrats but really bad for policy and reigning ICE in before the election
1
ObeseObedienceApr 1, 2026
+1
The Repubs just showed their hand. Dems should now not agree to funding of any of DHS until ICE reforms are instituted.
1
wurtinApr 1, 2026
+1
policy wasn’t going to be fixed right now. not enough leverage
1
King-Mansa-MusaApr 1, 2026
+1
Yea they were never going to fix ICE atm but they can stop additional funding which is what they were asking for
1
Myko475Apr 1, 2026
+1
Political suicide to refuse after bipartisan support, then cave…
1
PockydoApr 1, 2026
+1
I thought trump was gonna pay TSA via his bullshit
Did the Dems finally call his bluff
1
GoodBeneficial2233Apr 1, 2026
+1
They got some of their backpay
1
threehundredthousandApr 1, 2026
+1
Republicans have to be treated like toddlers. Don't reward bad behavior.
1
Commentator-XApr 1, 2026
+1
What a spin. That story is written to make Dems the bad guys and makes no mention of the save act they were trying to prevent.
1
teknikleeApr 1, 2026
+1
Absolutely written in a way that makes it seem like Dems are just anti-ICE
1
Reddit_2_2024Apr 1, 2026
+1
The tenure of Mike Johnson as Speaker of the House is dwindling down as the mid-term election draws near.
1
steve_ampleApr 1, 2026
+1
May Mike get the Judas treatment from the MAGA base.
1
IhathreturdApr 1, 2026
+1
Damn, embarrassed at the Supreme Court AND Johnson caved to the Dems?
Rough day for Trump... anyways!
1
amazingloverApr 1, 2026
+1
Thats a funny way of saying he is actually just doing his f****** job.
1
Unchosenone7Apr 1, 2026
+1
A rare W
1
suckyousidewaysApr 1, 2026
+1
Showing (again) that the GOP has no core values or principles, they just want to rule. They'll all vote against it, then they'll all vote for it, whatever daddy wants.
1
PWL51Apr 1, 2026
+1
Pedo boy will be calling for weak Mike Johnson’s head on a platter
1
Interesting-Risk6446Apr 1, 2026
+1
Johnson sees the writing on the wall. Self preservation.
1
Sanfords_SonApr 1, 2026
+1
The people running our government are just incredibly inept.
1
StillFlickeringApr 1, 2026
+1
The headline should be “republicans finally compromise on their extremist directive and work with democrats to fund DHS”
1
GankdatnoobApr 1, 2026
+1
TMZ stalking them on vacation did this imo.
1
ChefCurryYumYumApr 1, 2026
+1
It's a bad time to be a Team Trumper!
His Iran war? Blew up in his face like his dirty ass diapers.
His Tariffs? Not legal, f*** you, give refunds.
His attempt to intimidate the SCOTUS it ruling in his favor on birthright citizenship? Failed in an embarrassingly public manner.
The writing is on the wall for Donald, especially since his Iran war is f****** with the money and businesses didn't love the tariff shit, the next thing to fail for him will be his attempts to f*** the midterms.
Then the Democrats will have a majority in the house and senate and they will impeach his ass, they will impeach his entire f****** cabinet, impeach JD Vance, and we'll start moving towards repairing the massive, massive amounts of damage Donald Trump and the Republican party have done to America.
1
tazebotApr 1, 2026
+1
Just take money away from ICE and use it to pay TSA. Unlike ICE, TSA is actually doing something constructive for the country. Just break out the ol' sharpie.
1
spookyliteApr 1, 2026
+1
They are definitely not I remember going to the airport many many times minimum security and it wasn't till the post 911 surveillance state of fear the population has been foolish to accept
1
LaToscaApr 1, 2026
+1
TSA is a jobs program that performs security theater, saying they do anything constructive is hilarious
1
woahmanthatscoolApr 1, 2026
+1
lol he got reprimanded by daddy diapers
1
SandSpecialist2523Apr 1, 2026
+1
Doing your job is not caving.
1
asu2021Apr 1, 2026
+1
April Fools!
1
hackingdreamsApr 1, 2026
+1
What a nice and totally unnecessary adversarial headline.
1
elammcknightApr 1, 2026
+1
Got ya...get used to it Mike!
1
7askingforafriendApr 1, 2026
+1
Are we sure this isn’t an April fools joke?
1
ro536udApr 1, 2026
+1
Finally republicans stop playing games for a sec.
Ice is already funded for years they didn’t need anymore funding
1
SublimotionApr 1, 2026
+1
He caved the instant Trump tells them to cave.
1
gotwafflesApr 1, 2026
+1
I'm surprised he knew anything about this tbh
1
GatorNator83Apr 1, 2026
+1
Wait, a strongly worded letter actually did something?
All jokes aside, Schumer and Jeffries need to go.
1
BigBoyYuyuhApr 1, 2026
+1
Couldn’t Trump just veto it?
1
MoccusApr 1, 2026
+1
He could, but he probably won't.
1
Dano_MilkshakeApr 1, 2026
+1
Does anyone know if it passed with enough votes for it to be veto-proof?
1
needsbeerApr 1, 2026
+1
Don't mess with logistics. The thing that makes a county formidable.
1
Agent-AdeptApr 1, 2026
+1
How is this caving? All of DHS gets funded except ICE. Then, ICE gets funded through budget reconciliation which only requires majority support. So, GOP gets everything. What exactly did the Dems get? Was this just the Dems trying to convince us they’re fighting Trump/GOP? If so, I’m not impressed.
1
Snoo-7943Apr 1, 2026
+1
DHS gets funded without ICE/CBP. Repubs have to fund it through reconciliation, which has strict rules. And considering the deficit, the repubs will need to either pare back funding or sell cuts in other areas to the public. They get 100% of the blame for anything they push through reconciliation.
Yeah....this is a win....albeit not being a huge win.
1
PoodleGuapApr 1, 2026
+1
They literally got nothing. ICE is already funded through the rest of the year.
1
clericofmegalonApr 1, 2026
+1
Forcing ICE to burn BBB money to keep themselves funded is not nothing.
1
ozymanApr 1, 2026
+1
\> ICE gets funded through budget reconciliation which only requires majority support.
Wouldn't this happen regardless of what dems supported and whether this bill passed or not?
1
dcmom14Apr 1, 2026
+1
This is crazy messaging. ICE is already funded through the BBB. The dems did not get any of their asks. And to summarize their asks: to have act behave like any other law enforcement group. These were not unreasonable.
The dems did not win here.
1
teknikleeApr 1, 2026
+1
They didn’t pass the attached SAVE act that was going to really affect the mid-terms?? Seems like a win to me
1
sailorsmileApr 1, 2026
+1
Where are all the usual suspects who use this sub as a diary for constantly complaining about Democrats? Why vanish now?!
1
CoastingUphillApr 1, 2026
+1
Is this the good ending?
1
motionbuttonApr 1, 2026
+1
If they use reconciliation then they have to find money somewhere else to fund. So who knows.
1
steveycipApr 1, 2026
+1
Is this an April fools joke or for real?
1
MrRemotoApr 1, 2026
+1
Mike Johnson subs for a lot of dudes.
1
East1stApr 1, 2026
+1
April fools?
1
ChitowndubsApr 1, 2026
+1
We're dropping boots on the ground. Let's at least give them airports back.
I'm sure this is what happened.
1
rchiwawaApr 1, 2026
+1
Let us not let the general public forget the how's and the whys of his dragging this shit out
1
SXOSXOApr 1, 2026
+1
Trump must've pulled his hand out of the puppet's ass to scratch his nose or something.
1
geologicalnoiseApr 1, 2026
+1
And he'll just roll his eyes and feign respect for anyone that doesn't covet the same lies his life is all about.
How soon will he retire when he sees the writing on the wall?
1
drrhythm2Apr 1, 2026
+1
I posted this one spot elsewhere but someone please explain what the Democrats are getting out of this? It sure doesn't seem like they got much of anything; what am I missing?
1
besos2400Apr 1, 2026
+1
He’s just afraid his cross dressing pics will come to light ! 😭☠️😭☠️
1
CananbaumApr 1, 2026
+1
What will lawmakers listen to?
Protests? No.
Reports of unpaid persons leading to closures of airports? Nah.
Delta removing their privileges? STOP THE PRESSES!
Goddamn I hate these people
1
Professional-Sea4649Apr 1, 2026
+1
Everybody's gangsta until they have to wait in the same TSA lines as us peons
195 Comments