Mirror Finish Polishing ~ 1-816-529-6089 ~ sales@mirrorfinishpolishing.com ~ mirrorfinishpolishing.com For the best rate on home, auto, life or business/commercial insurance call me at 888-959-0955, cell 636-734-1310 or bricehazelwood@weiss-ins.com. Never Done Garage - donewhenimdead.com Peerless Automotive Reconditioning - 1155 W. Dennis Ave, Olathe Ks, 66061 - 913-893-1201 Mark H. Epstein ~ The Epstein Law Firm, LLC ~ 913-396-5123 Wilkes Automotive ~ wilkesautomotive.com ~ 246 Marion St, Olathe, KS 66061 ~ 913-254-7171 Skandalous Inc ~ www.skandalousinc.com DIY Auto Repair Inc ~ www.diyautorepairkc.com ~ 11509 Strangline Rd, Olathe KS 66062 ~ 913-226-3806 Your advertisement here! The Law Offices of Jeremiah Johnson, LLC ~ 104 E. Poplar, Olathe, KS 66061 ~ (913)764-5010 ~ www.kcatty.com - www.johnsoncountydui.com ~ jeremiah@kcatty.com Santa Fe Body, Inc ~ 8717 Lenexa Drive, Overland Park, KS 66214 ~ (913) 894-6090 House of Boost LLC Nude? HouseofHID.com - The #1 source for HID The Print Shop KC 816.200.6694 or Ryan@RMD-Photography.com the art of tyleR ~ http://tyleR.bigcartel.com ~ TYLERcoey.com ~ MUTTtoy.com ~ MUTTtoy@gmail.com W-K Chevrolet Buick Pontiac Cadillac GMC ~ 3310 W. Broadway, Sedalia, MO 65301 ~ 800-382-5088 ~ Cell 660-553-8928 ~ dustin@wkchevy.com ~ www.wkchevy.com

Go Back   KCSR - THE Kansas City Forum > General Forums > Politics, Religion, Current Events

Reply
Thread Tools
Unread 2019-02-14, 09:17 PM   #1
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 172,257
Post Thanks / Like
Default Trump Will Declare a National Emergency. What Happens Next?

Congress has tools to override the president’s declaration, but opponents most likely do not have the votes to overcome a veto.

WASHINGTON — In declaring a national emergency to try to build his long-promised border wall, President Trump will invoke extraordinary and seldom-used authorities to bypass Congress’s constitutionally granted power of the purse.
Democrats are fuming, and many members of Mr. Trump’s party are uneasy about the precedent that such a declaration will set. Lawmakers seeking to block the president have two paths — one in Congress, the other in the courts.
Democrats, who control the House, will drive the opposition. Party leaders did not detail their plans on Thursday, as they reviewed options and awaited the text of the president’s declaration. But outspoken senior lawmakers indicated that they will likely use both paths at once.
“He may want to talk to a good lawyer,” said Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee.

Can Congress stop Trump from declaring an emergency?

No, Congress does not have the power to stop the president from declaring a national emergency. But when lawmakers granted the president emergency powers in the first place, they built a check into the law.
Under the National Emergencies Act, the House and the Senate can take up what is called a resolution of termination to end the emergency status if they believe the president is acting irresponsibly or the threat has dissipated. The House has signaled that it intends to do that in the coming weeks, and with a comfortable majority in the chamber, Democrats will most likely pass it.
“I will fully support the enactment of a joint resolution to terminate the president’s emergency declaration, in accordance with the process described in the National Emergencies Act, and intend to pursue all other available legal options,” said Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
To keep a president’s party from bottling such a measure up, the law says that if one chamber passes such a resolution, the other one must bring it up for a vote within 18 days. Though Democrats are in the minority in the Senate, they would need only a handful of Republicans to join them to pass the resolution there and send it to Mr. Trump’s desk. It is easy to imagine a half-dozen or more Republican senators joining Democrats out of concern for the precedent that Mr. Trump’s declaration will set.
What would Mr. Trump do next?

As with any other bill that comes to the president’s desk, Mr. Trump can veto a joint congressional resolution terminating the national emergency, as long as it has not passed with supermajorities in both the House and the Senate.






Congress did not originally intend to give the president this recourse when it enacted the law during the post-Watergate reform era that has governed how and when presidents may invoke emergency-power statutes.
But the Supreme Court struck down what it calls legislative vetoes in 1983, ruling that for a congressional act to take legal effect, it must be presented to the president for signature or veto. Because it takes two-thirds of both chambers to override a veto, the ruling made it substantially harder for Congress to stop a president’s declaration.
How strong is opposition to a declaration in the House and the Senate?

This is the crucial question. Half a dozen or so Republicans made their disapproval of an emergency declaration clear on Thursday.
“I don’t believe that the National Emergencies Act contemplated a president repurposing billions of dollars outside the normal appropriations process,” said Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine. “I also believe it will be challenged in court and is of dubious constitutionality.”
Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky and an ally to the president on other issues, said a national emergency declaration of this sort ran counter to the separation of powers outlined in the Constitution. Senator Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, agreed.
“My view is that this is better to be resolved through the legislative process,” he said.
Still, it is highly unlikely that Democrats can pick up enough Republican supporters in the House or the Senate to override Mr. Trump’s likely veto. The best case for the president’s opponents is that they show deep fissures among Republicans over the wall.
They could also try to build bipartisan support for legislation preventing Mr. Trump from drawing money for the wall from funds allocated by Congress for disaster relief.











Could Congress sue?

Here Democrats appear to have two choices. The House could either support a lawsuit challenging the emergency declaration brought by a third party or file a suit of its own.
There are questions about the House’s legal standing if it were to try to sue on its own. Regardless, a legal challenge is likely to tie up Mr. Trump’s efforts in court for an extended period of time.
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-14, 09:42 PM   #2
jwdb1fish
 
jwdb1fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sharpening my harpoon.
Posts: 12,914
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 34
Thanks (Received): 483
Likes (Given): 59
Likes (Received): 4124
Dislikes (Given): 7
Dislikes (Received): 124
Default

Yesssss!


I love him


Whether you agree or disagree with the wall, love him or hate him, he’s doing exactly what he said he was going to do
jwdb1fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-14, 10:39 PM   #3
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 172,257
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Mitch McConnell just set a hugely dangerous precedent on national emergencies

(CNN)With a simple statement on the Senate floor, Mitch McConnell set a hugely important precedent on the relationship between the legislative and executive branches.
In announcing that President Donald Trump would sign the compromise legislation to keep the government open past Friday, McConnell also expressed support for Trump to declare a national emergency on the border -- a move that will allow the chief executive to tap into funds already allocated by Congress for other purposes to bridge the gap between the funding for his border wall in this compromise deal ($1.375 billion) and the amount Trump says he needs ($5.7 billion).


Why does that matter so much? Because what McConnell is doing is effectively ceding Congress' power to allocate money. He is saying that on this one issue -- in order to get what he wants (the government staying open) he is willing to allow Trump to declare a national emergency and, thereby, take money Congress has dedicated to some other purpose to use for something the President considers more of a priority.

"Oh, who cares?" you say. "There are billions of dollars swimming around all over the federal government. What difference does it make if McConnell lets Trump use a few billion that was supposed to be spent elsewhere?"







The Constitution cares. It's right there in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."





In layman's terms, that means that while the executive branch can ask for whatever it wants, it's up to Congress to decide where the money actually goes. And the way they do that is through a series of appropriations bills governing the various parts of the federal government (or, in more recent years, massive omnibus spending packages that roll a series of appropriations bills into one massive spending package).
Now, Trump's move will be challenged legally. We already know that.

But that doesn't change the fact that when you break those rules, you open Pandora's box.

Don't believe me? Think back to earlier this decade, when then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada) changed the filibuster rules governing the confirmation of federal judges below the Supreme Court level. Reid did so, as he explained at the time, because Senate Republicans were effectively blockading a massive number of President Barack Obama's judicial picks. It worked; a bunch of Obama judges made it to the bench.

But then the power in Washington shifted. Trump won the White House. Republicans controlled the Senate. And not one but two Supreme Court openings occurred. McConnell, citing the precedent established by Reid earlier in the decade, moved to change the rules regarding the confirmation of judges to the nation's highest court. Rather than 60 votes needed to end debate and move to a final vote, 50 became the new margin. And because Republicans held the majority -- and kept their troops largely in line -- we now have Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

That's why institutionalists -- like McConnell before today -- are very, very wary of making decisions that might help them or their party in the near-term but could boomerang back against them in the middle- and long-term. For that very reason, McConnell was adamant about his doubts regarding a national emergency declaration to get the wall money Trump said he needed. Trump repeatedly backed off his threats to declare a national emergency on the southern border, talked down -- at least in part -- by McConnell and other skeptical Republican senators who knew what doing so could mean for the party (and the country) down the line.

What changed McConnell's mind?

The political consequences of the 35-day government shutdown and the prospects that, without a concession on Trump's ability to declare a national emergency, another shutdown would inevitably descend at midnight Friday. McConnell is, at heart, a political strategist par excellence. He saw the damage done to the party's brand from the first shutdown. He knew that a second shutdown -- especially one so hard on the heels of the last one -- would make those negative impacts exponentially worse.

And so, political strategist McConnell won out over institutionalist McConnell. The prospect of another government shutdown was so noxious to McConnell that he gave in to Trump on something that he knows could come back to bite him and his party down the line. This was, without question, a short-term gain, long-term pain political calculation.

How painful might it be for Republicans? Consider if a Democratic president decides -- citing the precedent set by Trump -- to declare a national emergency to use previously allocated funds for other purposes to address the threats posed by climate change or guns in America?


"I know the Republicans have some unease about it no matter what they say, because if the President can declare an emergency on something that he has created as an emergency -- an illusion that he wants to convey, just think of what a president with different values can present to the American people," Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday afternoon. "A Democratic president can declare emergencies as well. So the precedent the President is setting here is something that should be met with great unease and dismay by the Republicans."

She's right.
__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-14, 11:12 PM   #4
JDLM
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 172,257
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Republicans warn Trump against decision to declare emergency to build border wall


President Donald Trump will sign a bill to avert another government shutdown, but also issue a national emergency declaration to build a wall on the US southern border, according to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, replacing lawmakers' most pressing problem with one that strikes at their power to spend money.

For his first two years in office, Trump enjoyed Republican control of Congress and was still unable to get what he wanted on border security, his signature campaign issue. The likelihood of that dropped even further when Democrats won control of the House of Representatives in the November elections.

Trump's first reaction to that result was to fight Congress, shutting down parts of the government from December 22 until January 25. Now, it appears he'll go around it.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers reacted to McConnell's announcement with alarm.









Senate approves deal to avert shutdown, sends measure to House


"I think it's a mistake," said Sen. Susan Collins, Republican of Maine. "The National Emergencies Act was contemplated to apply to natural disasters or catastrophic events such as the attacks on our country on 9/11. For the President to use it to re-purpose billions of dollars, that Congress has appropriated for other purposes that has previously signed into law, strikes me as undermining the appropriations process, the will of Congress and being of dubious constitutionality."




Before Thursday, McConnell made clear that he was also concerned of the prospect that the President would declare a national emergency to build a border wall. On January 10, in the middle of what became the longest US government shutdown ever, McConnell told The New York Times magazine, "I hope he doesn't go down that path."

And on January 29, during yet another round of negotiations over border security, McConnell told reporters, "I am for whatever works -- which means avoiding a shutdown, and avoiding the President feeling he should declare a national emergency."

"Exactly how to do that, as you all know, has been quite challenging," he added.
But on Thursday, McConnell said that Trump supported the bill and he had "indicated" that he would support the President's national emergency declaration. That announcement paved the way for the Senate to overwhelmingly pass a bill that funds 25% of the federal government, including around $1.375 billion for barriers, which is much lower than Trump's push for $5 billion to fund the border wall. The House is expected to pass it Thursday night, sending it to the President for his signature.

When asked by reporters about his latest call with Trump, McConnell said he "urged" the President to sign the bill. "That was my focus," he said.

If the President proceeds with the declaration, it'll likely be challenged in court and by Democrats in Congress, as critics have argued that Trump cannot use the national emergency authority to free up taxpayer funds and build the border wall he has long promised to his political supporters.

Even among members of his own party, support for the President was tepid at best. Veteran Republican senators raised various doubts about using his emergency powers to try to build the wall. Some said they wanted to wait and see exactly what Trump will declare and are skeptical he will do more than use existing executive authority.


Here's what a national emergency could look like



"I do (support that decision) if that's what it takes to do it," said Sen. Jim Inhofe, the Republican chairman of the Armed Services committee. "I just don't want it coming out of defense."

"But what I want doesn't seem to make that much difference," he added.
Other rank-and-file Republicans, including Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington and Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota, said they were worried that it would set a new precedent for a Democratic president to set liberal policies without engaging Congress.

In an interview, Rounds asked, "What if somebody else thinks that climate change is a national emergency -- then what will they do and how far will they go?"
Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said an emergency declaration is "not a very practical solution to the problem" since the funding would get "tied up" if there's lawsuit.

According to federal law, Congress can rescind a presidential emergency declaration by passing a joint resolution. In the likely event that such a bill would be vetoed by the President, Congress could then override it with a two-thirds majority in the Senate and the House.
If the House passed it, then the Senate would be required by law to vote on the measure within 18 days, leaving McConnell without a way to stop a vote on the floor.
Democratic leaders said the President's action would be a threat to the separation of powers. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler said he would "fully support" a joint resolution to rescind the emergency declaration and intended to "pursue all other available legal options."


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said "the President's fearmongering" doesn't make it an emergency.


"He couldn't convince Mexico, the American people or their elected representatives to pay for his ineffective and expensive wall, so now he's trying an end-run around Congress in a desperate attempt to put taxpayers on the hook for it," they said in a statement. "The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities."

__________________


B68 | F82 |///M | S55B | NAV | LED | Avant Garde | Toyo Proxes 4
JDLM is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 08:38 AM   #5
ForcFed93
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Topeka KS
Posts: 4,258
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 16
Thanks (Received): 99
Likes (Given): 336
Likes (Received): 690
Dislikes (Given): 2
Dislikes (Received): 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwdb1fish View Post
Whether you agree or disagree with the wall, love him or hate him, he’s doing exactly what he said he was going to do
Why didn't he do this when he had both chambers? What has changed in the last year that has now ramped this up from not an emergency, to a national emergency?

Call it a wall, call it a fence, call it national security, whatever you want. I'll tell you exactly what Trump sees it as: A National Monument to himself. He wants a lasting mark on this country and he wants everyone to see that wall and think of him. That's the only reason why he's doing what he is.
__________________
2016 Frozen White Focus RS2
1997 Pacific Green SVT Cobra
ForcFed93 is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 09:44 AM   #6
Lazarus
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,818
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 9
Thanks (Received): 5
Likes (Given): 39
Likes (Received): 26
Dislikes (Given): 1
Dislikes (Received): 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForcFed93 View Post
He wants a lasting mark on this country and he wants everyone to see that wall and think of him. That's the only reason why he's doing what he is.
He's already leaving a great big skid mark, so maybe the wall should be stylized after one.
Lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 11:01 AM   #7
Ryan Stewart
Mr. Plow
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 38,075
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwdb1fish View Post
Yesssss!


I love him


Whether you agree or disagree with the wall, love him or hate him, he’s doing exactly what he said he was going to do
He said, on camera, at rallies and many times that Mexico would pay for the wall.
__________________
Fast as fuck_________________________Your mom thinks its cool______________Old man bike
Ryan Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 11:05 AM   #8
Ryan Stewart
Mr. Plow
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 38,075
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForcFed93 View Post
Why didn't he do this when he had both chambers? What has changed in the last year that has now ramped this up from not an emergency, to a national emergency?
Thats the funny/sad part talking with Trumpians. They think the Democrats were in charge when the govt shut down and whatnot. They won the elections but didnt take control until the 3rd. The GOP wasnt even on board with the wall, else it would have happened a long time ago.

I think its a combination of nothing else to do and looking for a fight so people cant focus on the fact that people from his campaign are going down. Kind of like Clinton attacking Afghanistan right after the Lewinsky testimony.
__________________
Fast as fuck_________________________Your mom thinks its cool______________Old man bike
Ryan Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 01:05 PM   #9
jwdb1fish
 
jwdb1fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sharpening my harpoon.
Posts: 12,914
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 34
Thanks (Received): 483
Likes (Given): 59
Likes (Received): 4124
Dislikes (Given): 7
Dislikes (Received): 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan Stewart View Post
He said, on camera, at rallies and many times that Mexico would pay for the wall.

Yeah...that didn’t happen. But the means is of less importance than achieving the goal.
jwdb1fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 01:27 PM   #10
Ryan Stewart
Mr. Plow
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 38,075
Post Thanks / Like
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwdb1fish View Post
Yeah...that didn’t happen. But the means is of less importance than achieving the goal.
Gotta love that moving goalpost. He went from making mexico pay for the 30+ billion wall to putting hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work for it.

Also the "author" of the Art of the Deal just gave in and now has to declare an executive order as a national emergency (something he said was a reason for impeachment when Obama was president), which will likely get smacked down as well.

A battle being fought for the few of your racists that still support him despite the leadership in DHS, CBP, the Military and his former advisers who arent currently facing jail or being paid by Fox News contradicting him on it.
Its really just a dick extension for him. He wants his legacy. He called it the "Trump Shutdown" on camera and he said at rallys it will be the "Trump Wall."

The fun part about this, his capitulation to Saudi Arabia and Russia and all of the corruption in his campaign is its putting the GOP in a tough spot. They all lined up behind him so hard during the campaign its hard for them to part ways, even when he does dumb shit like start trade wars or shut down the govt over an un-funded wall just to appease a vocal minority (even Fox News yesterday had to admit that their polls showed Americans dont care about the wall and didn't like the shutdown for it). So you line up behind him and hope your constituency is so far right they will support it no matter what or you have to oppose to retain the moderates. Its either civil war or further losses in the next election.

The only question now is how are Dems going to shoot this gift horse in the mouth. I suspect not keeping the juniors in line and let this green new deal BS die is going to go a long way in killing their advantage.

Edit: Now that he screwed over his base on economy and is doubling down on the racists and the religious whats the Vegas line on his next emergency being abortions? Like leaning HARD into pro-life? Despite making an ex get one I can totally see them falling for that, religious people are pretty gullible.
__________________
Fast as fuck_________________________Your mom thinks its cool______________Old man bike

Last edited by Ryan Stewart; 2019-02-15 at 01:39 PM..
Ryan Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 02:05 PM   #11
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,979
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 50
Thanks (Received): 701
Likes (Given): 363
Likes (Received): 4014
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwdb1fish View Post
Yesssss!


I love him


Whether you agree or disagree with the wall, love him or hate him, he’s doing exactly what he said he was going to do
I thought he said he was going to make Mexico pay for the wall, not the taxpayers?

edit: repost.
__________________
-Greg
'18 Forester XT Touring

Last edited by Scooby24; 2019-02-15 at 02:07 PM..
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 04:19 PM   #12
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,979
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 50
Thanks (Received): 701
Likes (Given): 363
Likes (Received): 4014
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

LOL, I just watched part of his declaration.

"I want to do it faster. I could do the wall over a longer period of time. I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster"

He just COMPLETELY fucked himself in any argument in court.

He'll never move forward with this declaration. What a fucking moron. I can't believe I actually agree with Ann Coulter on something.
__________________
-Greg
'18 Forester XT Touring
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 06:43 PM   #13
phreakdna
 
phreakdna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Leawood
Posts: 6,991
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 165
Thanks (Received): 119
Likes (Given): 414
Likes (Received): 643
Dislikes (Given): 8
Dislikes (Received): 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby24 View Post
He'll never move forward with this declaration. What a fucking moron. I can't believe I actually agree with Ann Coulter on something.
waits patiently for JW and DIY to give him credit for creating a sense of bipartisanship in America.

"yeah that that didn’t happen the way we wanted it to. But the means (by everyone of all political stripes calling him a dumbass and recognizing he's a moron) is of less importance than achieving the goal."
__________________
Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that ”all men are created equal.” We now practically read it “all men are created equal, except negroes” When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read “all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.” When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocricy. - Lincoln
phreakdna is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 07:59 PM   #14
LTe
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Kehlsteinhaus
Posts: 2,297
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 106
Thanks (Received): 59
Likes (Given): 842
Likes (Received): 297
Dislikes (Given): 24
Dislikes (Received): 11
Default

I think it’s a slippery slope. Democrats would use it anyways sooner or later so it’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t. They will try to use it on ar15/ak47 type sporting rifles and it will be the perma ban for so called “assault rifles”.
LTe is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 08:10 PM   #15
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,979
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 50
Thanks (Received): 701
Likes (Given): 363
Likes (Received): 4014
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

Sooooo, now we're using whataboutisms for hypotheticals that haven't even happened yet? Shoot, shit's getting real.
__________________
-Greg
'18 Forester XT Touring
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-15, 08:17 PM   #16
JewelsMari
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 2,330
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 135
Thanks (Received): 37
Likes (Given): 733
Likes (Received): 289
Dislikes (Given): 4
Dislikes (Received): 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTe View Post
I think it’s a slippery slope. Democrats would use it anyways sooner or later so it’s a damned if you do and damned if you don’t. They will try to use it on ar15/ak47 type sporting rifles and it will be the perma ban for so called “assault rifles”.
I doubt they would have used it for that as they would still need a law, and they would probably go with precedent.

They’re now setting a precedent to declare an emergency for a non emergency when you don’t get the money you want. So what we might see is an advanced registry and back geround check following a shooting like the Orlando or Vegas or one of the schools. They need money to implement this... and possibly try to pass a law that doesn’t completely circumvent 2A.. so, you can own a gun, but you have to store it with these precautions- and it must be registered, and we should know who owns what...

But.. this should mean more ATF jobs for my hypothetical scenario, so Republicans should be happy right?
__________________
Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. ~ Calvin (and Hobbes)
JewelsMari is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-16, 07:14 AM   #17
mild83
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: cabrini green
Posts: 14,960
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 948
Thanks (Received): 344
Likes (Given): 6627
Likes (Received): 2820
Dislikes (Given): 133
Dislikes (Received): 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ForcFed93 View Post
Why didn't he do this when he had both chambers? What has changed in the last year that has now ramped this up from not an emergency, to a national emergency?

Call it a wall, call it a fence, call it national security, whatever you want. I'll tell you exactly what Trump sees it as: A National Monument to himself. He wants a lasting mark on this country and he wants everyone to see that wall and think of him. That's the only reason why he's doing what he is.
Serious question, why does this matter?

I keep seeing it brought up, but I'm not sure why it matters. He's attempting to fulfill a campaign promise.
mild83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-16, 08:47 AM   #18
jwdb1fish
 
jwdb1fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sharpening my harpoon.
Posts: 12,914
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 34
Thanks (Received): 483
Likes (Given): 59
Likes (Received): 4124
Dislikes (Given): 7
Dislikes (Received): 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mild83 View Post
Serious question, why does this matter?

I keep seeing it brought up, but I'm not sure why it matters. He's attempting to fulfill a campaign promise.

You know the answer.


#nevertrump
jwdb1fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-16, 04:43 PM   #19
Justin 05 STi
 
Justin 05 STi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: foiling your fun
Posts: 4,810
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 4
Thanks (Received): 100
Likes (Given): 4
Likes (Received): 418
Dislikes (Given): 0
Dislikes (Received): 11
Default

Funny thing is declaring a fake emergency is an age old topic for tinfoilers, but the standard trope is that it is a play used by socialist dictators.
__________________
Quote:
Ancient Astronaut Theorists say YES!
Justin 05 STi is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-17, 09:39 AM   #20
mild83
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: cabrini green
Posts: 14,960
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 948
Thanks (Received): 344
Likes (Given): 6627
Likes (Received): 2820
Dislikes (Given): 133
Dislikes (Received): 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby24 View Post
Sooooo, now we're using whataboutisms for hypotheticals that haven't even happened yet? Shoot, shit's getting real.
Well, Nancy literally said it, sooooo....

How happy are you that these late term abortions are getting traction?
__________________
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Thanks torqueburner thanked for this post
Likes torqueburner liked this post
mild83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-17, 11:44 AM   #21
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,979
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 50
Thanks (Received): 701
Likes (Given): 363
Likes (Received): 4014
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mild83 View Post
Well, Nancy literally said it, sooooo....

How happy are you that these late term abortions are getting traction?
What do abortions have to do with the emergency declaration?
__________________
-Greg
'18 Forester XT Touring
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-17, 12:08 PM   #22
mild83
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: cabrini green
Posts: 14,960
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 948
Thanks (Received): 344
Likes (Given): 6627
Likes (Received): 2820
Dislikes (Given): 133
Dislikes (Received): 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby24 View Post
What do abortions have to do with the emergency declaration?
Oh, you were talking out your ass, so I figured I'd just throw something in.
mild83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-17, 12:53 PM   #23
Scooby24
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Olathe
Posts: 51,979
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 50
Thanks (Received): 701
Likes (Given): 363
Likes (Received): 4014
Dislikes (Given): 27
Dislikes (Received): 40
Default

So the Democrats have used a national emergency in a similar way?
__________________
-Greg
'18 Forester XT Touring
Scooby24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-17, 01:37 PM   #24
mild83
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: cabrini green
Posts: 14,960
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 948
Thanks (Received): 344
Likes (Given): 6627
Likes (Received): 2820
Dislikes (Given): 133
Dislikes (Received): 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby24 View Post
So the Democrats have used a national emergency in a similar way?
Obama has 12 that are currently in force.

As far as a physical piece of property, no. But they do, in effect, have an impact on foreign relations. So it's not that far of a stretch in my opinion, securing our border is in the same vein.

Also, don't act like Obamacare wasn't shoved down our throats, albeit by different means. Sometimes people don't get what they want. I didn't want 8 years of Obama, but lo and behold, that's what I got.
mild83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2019-02-17, 03:40 PM   #25
JewelsMari
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 2,330
Post Thanks / Like
Thanks (Given): 135
Thanks (Received): 37
Likes (Given): 733
Likes (Received): 289
Dislikes (Given): 4
Dislikes (Received): 3
Default

If you’re going that route, you should probably list the 12 emergencies from the Obama administration...
__________________
Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. ~ Calvin (and Hobbes)
JewelsMari is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:00 PM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.13.37
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright (c) 1993-2012, KCSR.org