TheHaitian
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 27, 2014 19:39:10 GMT -5
Posts: 10,144
|
Post by TheHaitian on Feb 14, 2019 19:18:41 GMT -5
So I need the next Democratic President to announce :
- the state of the national healthcare to be a national emergency. - DACA to be a national emergency - Global warming to be a national emergency
Cannot go back now! Once we open the door; let’s go all the way!
You go Donald, for once I am rooting for you!GO GO GO DONALD!!!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,401
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 14, 2019 19:25:32 GMT -5
Once a dem president is in office (s)he needs to suspend for at least 8 years the next presidential election. Probable voting fraud in the flyover states.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,401
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 14, 2019 20:23:46 GMT -5
Why Trump shouldn’t declare a national emergency, explained by TrumpIn a tweet. Because there is always a tweet. The president of the United States made it clear that immigration was a priority for him. But while his party controlled the Senate, it didn’t control the House, and he wasn’t able to get what he wanted — a disappointment to his base. So he took unprecedented action, using existing executive branch powers to do as much as he could to accomplish his goal. It looks like that’s going to be the story of Trump’s border wall, which (according to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell) he plans to sign an emergency declaration to build, after Congress appropriated only $1.6 billion for border barriers in a funding bill expected to pass Thursday. But when the same story happened under President Barack Obama, one of his most outspoken critics was one Donald Trump. In yet more proof of one of the enduring truths of the Trump era, There Is Always a Tweet: Why Trump shouldn’t declare a national emergency, explained by Trump
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Feb 14, 2019 20:38:00 GMT -5
Yet Trump DID have both the Senate and the Congress under Repo-Con control. Lest we forget.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,062
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 14, 2019 20:56:45 GMT -5
he could have got $20B for his f*cking wall when he was busy kissing Putin's arse and cutting federal revenue.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Feb 14, 2019 20:57:23 GMT -5
Fail!
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,449
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 14, 2019 23:44:17 GMT -5
My representative: "I do not support this decision because declaring a national emergency sets a very dangerous precedent that undermines our constitutional separation of powers. By circumventing Congress and Article I of the Constitution, President Trump is opening the door for any future president to act alone without congressional approval," Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wa., said in a statement. link Need to give her a call to encourage her to back this up if there is a vote.
|
|
TheHaitian
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 27, 2014 19:39:10 GMT -5
Posts: 10,144
|
Post by TheHaitian on Feb 15, 2019 3:33:29 GMT -5
My representative: "I do not support this decision because declaring a national emergency sets a very dangerous precedent that undermines our constitutional separation of powers. By circumventing Congress and Article I of the Constitution, President Trump is opening the door for any future president to act alone without congressional approval," Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wa., said in a statement. link Need to give her a call to encourage her to back this up if there is a vote. Yeah yeah yeah but that is all lip service because we know when push come to shove they will align with Trump sign off anything. That is ok, I have decided that is ok... just remember : “what is good for the goose, is good for the gander “ May all Democrats remember this and never forget!
|
|
TheHaitian
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 27, 2014 19:39:10 GMT -5
Posts: 10,144
|
Post by TheHaitian on Feb 15, 2019 3:41:47 GMT -5
And I almost forgot :
Gun control as a national emergency
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 15, 2019 7:35:34 GMT -5
So I need the next Democratic President to announce : - the state of the national healthcare to be a national emergency. - DACA to be a national emergency - Global warming to be a national emergency Cannot go back now! Once we open the door; let’s go all the way! You go Donald, for once I am rooting for you!GO GO GO DONALD!!! Democrats have lost the DACA argument. They refuse to even bring it up anymore.
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,504
|
Post by tbop77 on Feb 15, 2019 7:39:14 GMT -5
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 15, 2019 7:44:49 GMT -5
Can anyone tell me how many times Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton used Executive priviledge and now tell me how many of those priviledges are still open today?
|
|
tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,504
|
Post by tbop77 on Feb 15, 2019 7:52:01 GMT -5
They do, and they simply don't care. This is a calculated measure for the next election, and that is all. Frickin' morally bankrupt Republicans should have given him his baby wall when they controlled it all. Now they are really mucking up constitutional precedent and separation of powers. LOOOZERS You are right...look at the comment under this one. It's like they cannot see that the wool is being pulled over their eyes to get his campaign promise fulfilled. No true conservative would support it.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,384
|
Post by thyme4change on Feb 15, 2019 8:51:13 GMT -5
I am ready to pull way back on executive powers - for both parties. However, if we have leaders like McConnell, absolutely nothing will get done.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,449
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 15, 2019 9:21:14 GMT -5
Can anyone tell me how many times Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton used Executive priviledge and now tell me how many of those priviledges are still open today? If you mean National Emergencies, your answer is here. At that site, there is a "running list" you can download which includes information on which are still in effect. If you mean Executive Orders, those orders from Clinton are here. Carter's here.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,449
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 15, 2019 9:28:10 GMT -5
Can anyone tell me how many times Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton used Executive priviledge and now tell me how many of those priviledges are still open today? To clean up terminology: Executive privilege is the power of the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch of the United States Government to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government in pursuit of information or personnel relating to the executive. link
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,449
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 15, 2019 9:49:53 GMT -5
My representative: "I do not support this decision because declaring a national emergency sets a very dangerous precedent that undermines our constitutional separation of powers. By circumventing Congress and Article I of the Constitution, President Trump is opening the door for any future president to act alone without congressional approval," Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wa., said in a statement. link Need to give her a call to encourage her to back this up if there is a vote. Yeah yeah yeah but that is all lip service because we know when push come to shove they will align with Trump sign off anything. That is ok, ... Sorry, but it isn't. This is a serious constitutional situation that has been developing for some time. President Trump is pushing it to a new level. If unchecked, it marks the end of Legislative control of allocation of government funds, an essential part of separation of powers. It will fundamental change our governmental system.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 15, 2019 10:11:43 GMT -5
My representative: "I do not support this decision because declaring a national emergency sets a very dangerous precedent that undermines our constitutional separation of powers. By circumventing Congress and Article I of the Constitution, President Trump is opening the door for any future president to act alone without congressional approval," Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wa., said in a statement. link Need to give her a call to encourage her to back this up if there is a vote. Do the Democrats even need any Republicans in the House to vote yes on this issue? It should come down to whether how many Republicans will back the measure to get it to 49 to 50.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,920
|
Post by bean29 on Feb 15, 2019 10:18:42 GMT -5
Yeah yeah yeah but that is all lip service because we know when push come to shove they will align with Trump sign off anything. That is ok, ... Sorry, but it isn't. This is a serious constitutional situation that has been developing for some time. President Trump is pushing it to a new level. If unchecked, it marks the end of Legislative control of allocation of government funds, an essential part of separation of powers. It will fundamental change our governmental system. If we allow him to do this, I don't see any way we can continue to call ourselves a democracy. If the president can just do whatever he wants - what do we need congress for? They will just be figureheads.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 15, 2019 10:27:03 GMT -5
Sorry, but it isn't. This is a serious constitutional situation that has been developing for some time. President Trump is pushing it to a new level. If unchecked, it marks the end of Legislative control of allocation of government funds, an essential part of separation of powers. It will fundamental change our governmental system. If we allow him to do this, I don't see any way we can continue to call ourselves a democracy. If the president can just do whatever he wants - what do we need congress for? They will just be figureheads. And this could have been avoided if Nancy, as well as Republicans actually tried to make the money avaliable in the budget. They did not. Yes, I said Republicans.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,873
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 15, 2019 10:37:53 GMT -5
1) As previously mentioned, Trump should have made the push for his wall when the GOP controlled both houses of congress. He did not, because he knew Ryan was against it, and he was afraid he wouldn't get the support he needed to get it approved, and didn't want the bad optics of fighting against his own party to get the money. Showing his base that he is fighting against the dems to MAKE AMERICAN GREAT AGAIN is better. 2) If he isn't happy with the money set aside for his wall in the current legislation, he shouldn't sign it. He can't sign the legislation and then immediately claim to be dissatisfied with it so much that he has to declare an emergency. 3) Congress determines how we spend the money, the president can't just snatch money from one part of the budget and spend it in a different one. 4) Truman tried this with the steel companies, and the courts rejected it. 5) Agencies that he is siphoning the money from can and probably will sue to get the money that was promised to them by Congress - so this will get mired up in the courts for years, probably at least until the next election, when hopefully the next president will kill it. 6) In the testimony of his own security council several weeks back, 'the southern border' did not even make the highlight reel of threats against our nation. If his own security council doesn't think the southern border is a serious threat, it makes zero sense for Trump to continue to remain zero focused on it (except that it's the red meat he dangles in front of his voters). There are higher risks we should be focused on, at least according to our security experts.
As someone else mentioned, this is just a publicity stunt for the 2020 election, so Trump can claim that he shut down the government, and then he declared a national emergency, so that he could try to get the swamp and the treasonous Dems to approve the money. Someone at the WH must already know this will either get rejected by the SC or will get permanently stuck in lawsuits - Trump will never get this money - but that isn't the important part. All that matters is that Trump will be able to brag in his stump speeches that he punched back at the swamp and the dems.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,873
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 15, 2019 10:40:05 GMT -5
If we allow him to do this, I don't see any way we can continue to call ourselves a democracy. If the president can just do whatever he wants - what do we need congress for? They will just be figureheads. And this could have been avoided if Nancy, as well as Republicans actually tried to make the money avaliable in the budget. They did not. Yes, I said Republicans. They made it available multiple times. The Dems offered him 20 billion for the wall on the condition that he let the DACA kids remain. Trump said no that time, and every other time it was offered.
In politics, you have to negotiate. Trump claims to be a great negotiator, but the facts don't confirm that. He had many opportunities to get money for the wall and rejected all of them.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,920
|
Post by bean29 on Feb 15, 2019 10:42:09 GMT -5
If we allow him to do this, I don't see any way we can continue to call ourselves a democracy. If the president can just do whatever he wants - what do we need congress for? They will just be figureheads. And this could have been avoided if Nancy, as well as Republicans actually tried to make the money avaliable in the budget. They did not. Yes, I said Republicans. That is a ridiculous assertion. I wouldn’t need to invoke a national emergency if you just let me spend your money any way I want. There may be better ways to accomplish same end, but I say My Way or the Highway! It’s like telling a Domestic Violence Victim “You Made Me Hurt You”
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,216
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Feb 15, 2019 10:45:19 GMT -5
If we allow him to do this, I don't see any way we can continue to call ourselves a democracy. If the president can just do whatever he wants - what do we need congress for? They will just be figureheads. And this could have been avoided if Nancy, as well as Republicans actually tried to make the money avaliable in the budget. They did not. Yes, I said Republicans. Strongly disagree. That's then telling the executive branch if you have a big enough tantrum and hold the government hostage then they can get whatever they want. Nancy was right to hold her ground and check the presidency as Congress is supposed to. I am really shocked at how lackadasial and downright thrilled people have been regarding Trump's behavior over the wall given the outrage and endless threads about the government shutting down under Obama. If it wasn't acceptable then it should not be acceptable now. If it wasn't acceptable for Obama to use executive orders to get around Congress it should not be acceptable for Trump to do so or declare a national emergency. Why the hell is all this suddenly okay behavior for a president when I had to listen to 8 years of people decrying it with the previous one?
|
|
countrygirl2
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 7, 2016 15:45:05 GMT -5
Posts: 16,879
|
Post by countrygirl2 on Feb 15, 2019 10:58:48 GMT -5
I listened to all I want to hear, he is now ranting on and on about a wall. Stupid man. We have so much that needs to be done and this is what he chooses. I hope they do not let him get by with this. As others have said, end of legislative process if they do.
And no I don't want him to get by with it so the dems can, no president needs that kind of power. The congress needs to start clawing back some of these powers.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,449
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 15, 2019 11:00:22 GMT -5
If we allow him to do this, I don't see any way we can continue to call ourselves a democracy. If the president can just do whatever he wants - what do we need congress for? They will just be figureheads. And this could have been avoided if Nancy, as well as Republicans actually tried to make the money avaliable in the budget. They did not. Yes, I said Republicans. Absolutely totally true. HOWEVER, it is not the job of the Legislative Branch to do what the President says should be done. The Congress is an equal branch of government that is tasked with spending decisions (No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law ...). The president may "... recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; ...". His recommend of spending money for a wall was considered and rejected. Constitutionally.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,401
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 15, 2019 11:00:55 GMT -5
Thank goodness for the mute button.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Feb 15, 2019 11:05:47 GMT -5
I know, right?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,449
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 15, 2019 11:08:53 GMT -5
My representative: "I do not support this decision because declaring a national emergency sets a very dangerous precedent that undermines our constitutional separation of powers. By circumventing Congress and Article I of the Constitution, President Trump is opening the door for any future president to act alone without congressional approval," Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wa., said in a statement. link Need to give her a call to encourage her to back this up if there is a vote. Do the Democrats even need any Republicans in the House to vote yes on this issue? It should come down to whether how many Republicans will back the measure to get it to 49 to 50. As an American, I ask that you stop seeing this through a partisan lense. There is a serious constitutional question at hand. A vote to terminate a national emergency declared by a president to circumvent the Legislative Branch's power to allocate funds should be unanimously passed. Any President, any issue, unanimous.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,873
|
Post by happyhoix on Feb 15, 2019 11:10:18 GMT -5
And this could have been avoided if Nancy, as well as Republicans actually tried to make the money avaliable in the budget. They did not. Yes, I said Republicans. Absolutely totally true. HOWEVER, it is not the job of the Legislative Branch to do what the President says should be done. The Congress is an equal branch of government that is tasked with spending decisions (No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law ...). The president may "... recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; ...". His recommend of spending money for a wall was considered and rejected. Constitutionally. Especially when Congress is acting at the will of the people - most voters don't want to blow all that tax money on Trump's stupid wall.
If the wall was overwhelmingly popular with the voters, Trump could at least claim he's doing what the voters want Congress to do.
|
|