Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If the Dems REALLY wanted to improve border security why didn't they do it in the past? The "compromise" bill is a bunch of horse dung that does almost nothing to improve border security. Had they come up with something "reasonable," Trump would not have had to take the "national emergency" approach.
I predict the "national emergency" will find its way to the SC pretty quickly.
If Trump REALLY needed a wall, why didn't he do it in the past?
If this was REALLY a national emergency why did Trump say he didn't really have to do it? Hope lawyers use that little tidbit in their briefs.
If the Dems REALLY wanted to improve border security why didn't they do it in the past?
If Trump REALLY wanted his wall why didn't he do it in the first two years, when his party held all the cards?
Quote:
Originally Posted by carcrazy67
Had they come up with something "reasonable," Trump would not have had to take the "national emergency" approach.
You do know that even Trump himself admitted he didn't have to do this, right? Or do his words mean nothing to you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by carcrazy67
I predict the "national emergency" will find its way to the SC pretty quickly.
Let's hope the SC puts country over party and votes to uphold the Constitution. If they don't, they will pretty much render the Constitution moot. Which seems to be fine with you, but would not be fine to any real American.
If the Dems REALLY wanted to improve border security why didn't they do it in the past? The "compromise" bill is a bunch of horse dung that does almost nothing to improve border security. Had they come up with something "reasonable," Trump would not have had to take the "national emergency" approach.
I predict the "national emergency" will find its way to the SC pretty quickly.
They did. Border apprehension dropped precipitously during he Obama years to the lowest levels in decades. You're full of it.
Trump doesn't care about reasonable. That's clear to see. He cares about image.
The only people who took Trump literally about Mexico paying for the wall were those who were dead set against it from the beginning.
Now, the whole "Mexico paying for the wall" has become little more than a sour grape talking point for those same people.
Did you really think that Trump literally meant that Mexico would cut us a check?
Actually,FatBob96, you are incorrect.
Candidate Trump did say, in over 13 different ways, that Mexico would pay for the wall. Currently he is falsely asserting, and you and his other followers are repeating, that he never promised prepayment or direct payment.
There is visual, audio and written evidence that proves he did make the promises he is denying, including a check or prepayment plan. For example, in March of 2016, he was under pressure to explain how he was going to get Mexico to pay for the wall. He then circulated a 2 page memo to most major news outlets, and posted it on his campaign website, as well. His campaign's plan for financing the wall called for a one-time payment from Mexico: basically, a check.
"It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion" is a word for word sentence in the memo.
For a picture of the memo, along with articles revealing additional evidence proving your post is incorrect and that you are falsely asserting that Trump never made the statements and promises he did indeed make, see below.
Let's hope the SC puts country over party and votes to uphold the Constitution. If they don't, they will pretty much render the Constitution moot. Which seems to be fine with you, but would not be fine to any real American.
I think it is a safe bet they will, even if both Trump appointees think it's fine i seriously doubt the OG conservative members would see it the same way. TBH I have serious doubts even the Trump appointed justices would go for it.
If the Dems REALLY wanted to improve border security why didn't they do it in the past? ...
They did. Border apprehension dropped precipitously during the Obama years to the lowest levels in decades. You're full of it.
Trump doesn't care about reasonable. That's clear to see. He cares about image.
Exactly ... to all three of your points.
Trump is using the Madison Avenue technique of artificially creating a demand and then offering to fill it. Something he has basically tried all of his life.
"Perception is more important than reality. If someone perceives something to be true, it is more important than if it is in fact true. ... don't go out of your way to correct a false assumption if it plays to your advantage.”
Ivanka Trump | The Trump Card: Playing to Win in Work and Life
If the Dems REALLY wanted to improve border security why didn't they do it in the past? The "compromise" bill is a bunch of horse dung that does almost nothing to improve border security. Had they come up with something "reasonable," Trump would not have had to take the "national emergency" approach.
I predict the "national emergency" will find its way to the SC pretty quickly.
You might ask yourself the same question about Republicans, eh?
Yet you don't.
I don't even see Gorsuch siding with Trump on this one but you never know.
Coulter is right on this point -- and I never thought I'd say that.
r example of the game he plays with himself on pushing the envelope of privilege to see what he can get away with.
Liberals like to say constantly that Trump "lies". I think that is debatable.
The better argument I think is that Trump has long been a privileged person. Protected and promoted by his father and family and likely surrounded by yes men. Mistakes are never his doing in his Trump Industries world but I am sure various and sundry real people were fired as scapegoats for him.
So he believes he is this great creature.
But this presidency has shown the world that he isn't. He is just a delusional fool who doesn't know how bad he is.
That is the better argument to make.
Over the few months I have heard various and sundry good ideas how to get this wall in better ways, such as Bonds being sold to fund it and or using drug runners money. But he doesn't seem to have any other options. That is either pure laziness or stupidity.
I think it is a safe bet they will, even if both Trump appointees think it's fine i seriously doubt the OG conservative members would see it the same way. TBH I have serious doubts even the Trump appointed justices would go for it.
I agree. Alito, Thomas, and Roberts are conservatives but they are conservatives in that they believe the text of the Constitution should be followed exactly. Nothing is more clear than that the Constitution says the President cannot spend money not allocated by Congress.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
