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.
I'm not reading anything. I'm just going based on what it appears to me. Pres. Trump CAN'T back down from his demand for wall money, now that he's gone through all this the last month. IF he does, he's finished politically, and he knows it. So, this is a Hail Mary "I gotta save face" pass, AND his last chance to get something through, while looking like HE'S compromising something, YET the Dems still refuse.
IMO, Pelosi should give on this, and use it as wedge for something else she would want more in the future. A "you owe me Mr. President".
Not at all. You can not trust Trump to honor a debt. His history shows he will not.
If you equate immigrants coming into this country with the true meaning of "invasion" in the acts...well, then, we'd have to check with a judge or real constitutional scholars.
Was all the pot and cocaine coming in an "invasion"?
Since most immigrants come in by other means, he'd then have to extend this "invasion" to every form of transport from every country (Mexicans could country hop) and then also tell the Judge why these were "invaders" while the illegal Canadians, Irish, Asians and others are not. That would be tough.
"An invasion is a military offensive in which large parts of combatants of one geopolitical entity aggressively enter territory controlled by another such entity, generally with the objective of either conquering; liberating or re-establishing control or authority over a territory; forcing the partition of a country; ..."
"An invasion is a military action consisting of armed forces of one geopolitical entity willfully entering territory controlled by another such entity."
So you don't agree with that definition of invasion and think the courts and Congress are going to agree to redefine it?
Using your logic, he might call athletes foot an invasion by the fungus and call out the Military for that.
Your post is stupid beyond words.
The constitution does NOT define an invasion to being just a military invasion, and like it or not, the founding fathers who wrote, and adopted the constitution did so in a manner that would protect this great country for many years after it's inception.
Are you going to tell me you are smarter than they were?
What Trump is really declaring is that his promise he made to his fanatical followers for a wall is not going to happen therefore he is taking over the country by assuming the role of a dictator. This is the best he can do with what he has to work with. Hitler had a Reichstag fire, Trump only has few immigrants trying to crawl over a fence. I am sure the MAGA crowd will be thrilled. All Trump really cares about is whether this improves his chance to get reelected in 2020 with this move.
Your post is stupid beyond words.
The constitution does NOT define an invasion to being just a military invasion, and like it or not, the founding fathers who wrote, and adopted the constitution did so in a manner that would protect this great country for many years after it's inception.
Are you going to tell me you are smarter than they were?
Bob.
Actually she has many salient points. It seems that you regard the original signers of the constitution as Gods that are infallible of mistake. It is well known that the Constitution, in many regards , was a compromise among the original colonies. Somehow you want to ignore history.
I'm not reading anything. I'm just going based on what it appears to me. Pres. Trump CAN'T back down from his demand for wall money, now that he's gone through all this the last month. IF he does, he's finished politically, and he knows it. So, this is a Hail Mary "I gotta save face" pass, AND his last chance to get something through, while looking like HE'S compromising something, YET the Dems still refuse.
IMO, Pelosi should give on this, and use it as wedge for something else she would want more in the future. A "you owe me Mr. President".
No. Why waste all this money on huge wall ? I don’t give a ratz azz about his political future - he is here to serve!
I think I know what may be in his speech at 3pm.
He will open the government on one condition, that being the dems revert back to the time a few years ago, when they not only felt a wall was necessary, but voted to fund it.
A solid no from the dems will mean the shutdown is now on them 100%.
I really do not see the President buckling under, on this wall issue.
I do think however, he is going to make some concessions concerning future caravans (the one headed here presently)as to asylum, and welfare of the children in the caravans.
This will be part of his speech.
I also think he is going to call for an orderly position of letting just a few at a time enter the country, in order for the bp, and immigration officials to have adequate time to process them.
But again, I think this all weighs heavily on the dems accepting his offer.
If the dems refuse, he will more than likely call upon the military to build the wall, and take funds from the military to do it.
As the commander in chief of the military, he would be within the rules of the constitution to do this.
Some fool liberals would more than likely take the matter to court, which would end with the commander in chief of the military proceeding with the duty of constructing a wall.
I also believe it if it falls on the President to exercise his military authority in this matter, the wall will be built with solid concrete, not metal slats.
Bob.
I think I know what may be in his speech at 3pm.
He will open the government on one condition, that being the dems revert back to the time a few years ago, when they not only felt a wall was necessary, but voted to fund it.
A solid no from the dems will mean the shutdown is now on them 100%.
I really do not see the President buckling under, on this wall issue.
I think I know what may be in his speech at 3pm.
He will open the government on one condition, that being the dems revert back to the time a few years ago, when they not only felt a wall was necessary, but voted to fund it.
A solid no from the dems will mean the shutdown is now on them 100%.
I really do not see the President buckling under, on this wall issue.
Bob.
They voted on a fence in 2006 nowhere near the scale of Trump's proposed wall. This will never be on the Democrats. Trump will always own this shutdown.
Trump, "I will be PROUD to shut down the government. It's on me!"
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.
