Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump to declare National Emergency to build wall

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kit the Coyote
    replied
    Originally posted by TrumpTrainCA View Post
    I think somebody forgot that they said this.
    How so?

    Leave a comment:


  • WizardofOz
    replied
    Originally posted by drbrumley View Post
    So, too, every action taken by the Trump administration to weaken the system of checks and balances, sidestep the rule of law, and expand the power of the president makes us that much more vulnerable to those who would abuse those powers in the future.

    No matter whether you consider Trump to be a demagogue or a die-hard patriot, there will come a day when Trump no longer occupies the White House, and then what?

    We’ve been down this road before.


    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    Originally posted by WizardofOz View Post
    Yup. And democrats are already talking about using this "emergency" power to ram gun control or climate change legislation down our throats. Republicans cheers now while Democrats whine but the tables will be turned with the next democrat president. And it all causes the government to be more authoritative over us. It's a good cop/bad cop routine and these partisan hacks are too short sighted to see it unfold right before their eyes.
    yep, TrumpTrainCA will be the first to start whining when a democratic despot starts doing it....

    Leave a comment:


  • WizardofOz
    replied
    Originally posted by TrumpTrainCA View Post
    How is him exercising his legal powers a threat to rule by fiat? You just told a lie.
    Oh look. CatholicCrusader has a sock account. How cute.

    Leave a comment:


  • WizardofOz
    replied
    Originally posted by drbrumley View Post
    This latest brouhaha over President Trump’s threat to declare a national emergency in order to build a border wall is more manufactured political theater, a Trojan Horse intended to camouflage the real threat to our freedoms: yet another expansion of presidential power exposing us to constitutional peril.

    This is not about illegal immigration or porous borders or who will pay to build that wall.

    This is about unadulterated power and the rise of an “emergency state” that justifies all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security.

    The seeds of this present madness were sown more than a decade ago when George W. Bush stealthily issued two presidential directives that granted the president the power to unilaterally declare a national emergency, which is loosely defined as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions.”

    Comprising the country’s Continuity of Government (COG) plan, these directives (National Security Presidential Directive 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20), which do not need congressional approval, provide a skeletal outline of the actions the president will take in the event of a “national emergency.”

    Mind you, that national emergency can take any form, can be manipulated for any purpose and can be used to justify any end goal—all on the say so of the president.

    This is exactly the kind of mischief that Thomas Jefferson warned against when he cautioned, “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

    John Whitehead
    Yup. And democrats are already talking about using this "emergency" power to ram gun control or climate change legislation down our throats. Republicans cheers now while Democrats whine but the tables will be turned with the next democrat president. And it all causes the government to be more authoritative over us. It's a good cop/bad cop routine and these partisan hacks are too short sighted to see it unfold right before their eyes.

    Leave a comment:


  • TrumpTrainCA
    replied
    Originally posted by drbrumley View Post
    This threat by Trump to rule by fiat ....
    How is him exercising his legal powers a threat to rule by fiat? You just told a lie.

    As was noted earlier, in 2012, Obama declared a national emergency entitled, "Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen" in order to freeze the assets of anyone perceived to be negatively impacting a political transition in Yemen. In 2014 he issued a national emergency referred to as "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine," which similarly locked the assets of those thought to be undermining democratic processes in Ukraine.

    Trump has declared three national emergencies so far. One centers on creating penalties for individuals around the world who are involved in human rights abuses. Another penalizes individuals involved in perpetuating violence in Nicaragua. And another imposes sanctions on foreign entities who seek to interfere in American elections.

    After all those declarations, did you post that these presidents were ruling by fiat? Or are you just suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome.

    Leave a comment:


  • TrumpTrainCA
    replied
    Originally posted by Kit the Coyote View Post
    Please note, my point has nothing to do with is it technically legal for him to do it.......
    I think somebody forgot that they said this.

    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    This threat by Trump to rule by fiat merely plays into the hands of those who would distort the government’s system of checks and balances and its constitutional separation of powers beyond all recognition.

    Apart from the fact that this highly politicized, shamelessly contrived border crisis does not in any way constitute a national emergency, to allow such a manufactured emergency to override constitutional constraints and the rule of law will push the nation that much closer to outright totalitarianism.

    To be clear, this is not a criticism of Trump or a disavowal of the need for better vigilance at the nation’s border.

    Rather this is a word of warning.

    Remember, these powers do not expire at the end of a president’s term. They remain on the books, just waiting to be used or abused by the next political demagogue.

    So, too, every action taken by the Trump administration to weaken the system of checks and balances, sidestep the rule of law, and expand the power of the president makes us that much more vulnerable to those who would abuse those powers in the future.

    No matter whether you consider Trump to be a demagogue or a die-hard patriot, there will come a day when Trump no longer occupies the White House, and then what?

    We’ve been down this road before.

    Leave a comment:


  • drbrumley
    replied
    This latest brouhaha over President Trump’s threat to declare a national emergency in order to build a border wall is more manufactured political theater, a Trojan Horse intended to camouflage the real threat to our freedoms: yet another expansion of presidential power exposing us to constitutional peril.

    This is not about illegal immigration or porous borders or who will pay to build that wall.

    This is about unadulterated power and the rise of an “emergency state” that justifies all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security.

    The seeds of this present madness were sown more than a decade ago when George W. Bush stealthily issued two presidential directives that granted the president the power to unilaterally declare a national emergency, which is loosely defined as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions.”

    Comprising the country’s Continuity of Government (COG) plan, these directives (National Security Presidential Directive 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20), which do not need congressional approval, provide a skeletal outline of the actions the president will take in the event of a “national emergency.”

    Mind you, that national emergency can take any form, can be manipulated for any purpose and can be used to justify any end goal—all on the say so of the president.

    This is exactly the kind of mischief that Thomas Jefferson warned against when he cautioned, “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

    John Whitehead

    Leave a comment:


  • WizardofOz
    replied
    Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
    Can I get a bazooka? a machine gun? a mobile rocket launcher based on my 2nd amendment rights?
    Everyone believes in some form of gun control.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jonahdog
    replied
    Originally posted by TrumpTrainCA View Post
    You are correct. Trump is not taking away any citizen's constitutional rights, but is the left tries to go after guns tats exactly what they will be doing.
    Can I get a bazooka? a machine gun? a mobile rocket launcher based on my 2nd amendment rights?

    Leave a comment:


  • Kit the Coyote
    replied
    Originally posted by glorydaz View Post
    Congress is refusing to negotiate....don't pretend like you've never seen that happen before.
    Saying "No" to a specific item while offering others in return is typically called negotiating. So is drawing hard lines and saying this is non-negotiable. And yes I've seen that happen many times before in the last 30 odd years I've followed politics.

    So tell me do you agree with that statement?

    Leave a comment:


  • glorydaz
    replied
    Originally posted by Kit the Coyote View Post

    Congress is acting on the issue of border security and has offered considerable resources to it.
    That's a joke.

    Let me ask you a question, do you agree with this statement?

    We must not allow the President to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit just because he is unable to negotiate with Congress.
    Gosh, you topped your last joke with your outrageous assumptions.


    Congress is refusing to negotiate....don't pretend like you've never seen that happen before.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kit the Coyote
    replied
    Originally posted by TrumpTrainCA View Post
    My question is, why do you want rapists and murderers and drug traffickers crossing the border? You are okay with rapists and murderers and drug traffickers, but you are mad at Trump for trying to block them. That speaks volumes abut you.
    My answer is, I don't. The fact that you assume that someone who doesn't agree and walk lock step with President Trump on one narrow potential solution to the problem is somehow in favor of the problem speaks volumes about you.

    In 2012, Obama declared a national emergency entitled, "Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen" in order to freeze the assets of anyone perceived to be negatively impacting a political transition in Yemen. In 2014 he issued a national emergency referred to as "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine," which similarly locked the assets of those thought to be undermining democratic processes in Ukraine. So its okay to defend foreigners but not us?.
    No, but don't see how any of those things prevented us from defending ourselves.

    Trump has declared three national emergencies so far. One centers on creating penalties for individuals around the world who are involved in human rights abuses. Another penalizes individuals involved in perpetuating violence in Nicaragua. And another imposes sanctions on foreign entities who seek to interfere in American elections.

    No peep from you.

    Now you are screaming. Why? Because you are a lemming dancing to the fake news media's tune.
    Because none of those things involved what I believe is a direct usurpation of the Balance of Powers.

    You have painted the situation as President Trump acting because Congress is not doing anything. That is not the case. Congress specifically told the President "NO" to funding a single part of border security he wants to do in perfect keeping with their position as a co-equal power in the Federal Government.

    Congress is acting on the issue of border security and has offered considerable resources to it.

    Let me ask you a question, do you agree with this statement?

    We must not allow the President to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit just because he is unable to negotiate with Congress.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kit the Coyote
    replied
    Originally posted by ok doser View Post
    the point is this - congress has a role to play in enforcing our borders

    congress does not and should not have a role to play in violating the second amendment

    hence my comment about false equivalencies
    So you countered by chasing the false equivalence which was never the point down its rabbit hole.

    You are correct, Congress has a role to play and it is playing that role.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X