Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:01 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,327 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado^ View Post
Hopefully he will seize the assets of all these illegals. Including moneys being send back to Mexico.


A few years hard labor building the wall before they are released back in to Mexico would also be fitting.

And what about the assets of those knowingly profiting from cheap illegal labor? Should they also be seized? Or would that be too much like actually addressing the real problem?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:01 AM
 
2,362 posts, read 776,984 times
Reputation: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
If you believe the base is what is at stake -- you aren't paying attention.

It is the swing voter that will decide all elections and that swing voter could see the time and money expense of law sutis as something that is not necessary....
That's not really true. What wins elections is your base going out there and voting. If your base is disappointed, and stays home, you lose elections.

The undecided/swing voter usually are not fully independent but just don't want to register as a Republican or Democrat. You have conservative Independents who will love this move and liberal Independents who won't. The question who is energized by this move?

I'd say Trump's voters are more energized by this than the opposite. They want this wall real real bad, the rest just want to frustrate Trump.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:01 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,975 posts, read 47,597,802 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakeJones View Post
Unlikely.

The current Supreme Court, where justified, believes in preserving executive discretion. This can be justified here because courts rely on precedent. The left cannot argue that this doesn't qualify as an emergency because there is a long list of prior emergencies that passed from several presidents without objection that you could argue are not emergencies at all, but that under the language of the law is permitted under Presidential discretion. The list of still active national emergencies include:

List of the 31 active national emergencies:
1. Blocking Iranian Government Property (Nov. 14, 1979)
2. Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (Nov. 14, 1994)
3. Prohibiting Transactions with Terrorists Who Threaten to Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process (Jan. 23, 1995)
4. Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum Resources (Mar. 15, 1995)
5. Blocking Assets and Prohibiting Transactions with Significant Narcotics Traffickers (Oct. 21, 1995)
6. Regulations of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels with Respect to Cuba (Mar. 1, 1996)
7. Blocking Sudanese Government Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Sudan (Nov. 3, 1997)
8. Blocking Property of Persons Who Threaten International Stabilization Efforts in the Western Balkans (Jun. 26, 2001)
9. Continuation of Export Control Regulations (Aug. 17, 2001)
10. Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks (Sept. 14, 2001)
11. Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Persons who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism (Sept. 23, 2001)
12. Blocking Property of Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Zimbabwe (Mar. 6, 2003)
13. Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq has an Interest (May 22, 2003)
14. Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Export of Certain Goods to Syria (May 11, 2004)
15. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus (Jun. 16, 2006)
16. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Oct. 27, 2006)
17. Blocking Property of Persons Undermining the Sovereignty of Lebanon or Its Democratic Processes and Institutions (Aug. 1, 2007)
18. Continuing Certain Restrictions with Respect to North Korea and North Korean Nationals (Jun. 26, 2008)
19. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in Somalia (Apr. 12, 2010)
20. Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Libya (Feb. 25, 2011)
21. Blocking Property of Transnational Criminal Organizations (Jul. 25, 2011)
22. Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen (May 16, 2012)
23. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine (Mar. 6, 2014)
24. Blocking Property of Certain Persons With Respect to South Sudan (Apr. 3, 2014)
25. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Central African Republic (May 12, 2014)
26. Blocking Property and Suspending Entry of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Venezuela (Mar. 9, 2015)
27. Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities (Apr. 1, 2015)
28. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Burundi (Nov. 23, 2015)
29. Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption in Myanmar (Dec 20, 2017)
30. Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in the 2016 presidential election (Sept 12, 2018)
31. Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Nicaragua (Nov 27, 2018)

Emergency funding for a border wall is not in contradiction of any of these other existing items.

The Supreme Court will not rule against Trump on this, it will be built
None of the above defies something the Congress specifically ruled, but Trump's declaration does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:02 AM
 
3,105 posts, read 3,831,699 times
Reputation: 4066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
The problem here is that what you call "political BS", is the Constitution of the United States.

Like the 2nd amendment? Yeah the dims really respect that
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:02 AM
 
2,362 posts, read 776,984 times
Reputation: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruithne View Post
He's done nothing of the sort. His key campaign promise was that he would build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it.
This is a million miles away from that promise.
His base doesn't seem to care about Mexico paying for it, they just want the wall. That was proven in December of last year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:02 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,975 posts, read 47,597,802 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAGAalot View Post
Supreme Court approved Trump's travel ban, so the other courts are irrelevant.
The travel ban has nothing to do with this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:05 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,232 posts, read 26,172,300 times
Reputation: 15621
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarc View Post
Exactly, but there's no way you're going to get that through the noggins of a bunch of dumbed down, drugged up Dollar Store product-pinchers. Trump has helped them. They get to feel superior to POTUS. Takes a lot of pharmacy to feel that way, though.
This is not quite 9/11 and most of those actions were recommended by intelligence agencies but here you are comparing actions against Libya to this insanity. Trump made this up all on his own and the smart money says he will be blocked by the courts. He is wasting time on minutia.


Strangely how once rational people like Linsey Graham have changed their tune on Trump, history will not reflect well on them. He does not have the right to make up his emergencies that exist only in his mind but his radical base will love this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:05 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,327 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by NomadicDrifter View Post
As I said about a month ago, declaring a national emergency is the best political move Trump can do. It's going to go to the courts, and it might be struck down. But at least Trump has handed his base what they wanted, and fullfilled his key campaign promise.

Also, with the wall being declared as a national emergency - the wall will immediately be halted if a Democratic president wins in 2020 (this will take years to build). So it will be a perfect wedge issue come in 2020, we will see how much support the wall has among the American public.


By falsely labeling his poutrage an 'emergency' over not getting his way?

IF it really is an emergency he should have acted as soon as he started calling it one, now it just shows what a scam artist he truly is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:06 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
31,340 posts, read 14,247,595 times
Reputation: 27861
Quote:
Originally Posted by auntieannie68 View Post
how mature!


if we have to go ,I will send u a letter .,so dm your address

it will be something you can read while you are standing in the bread,cheese,clothing line or waiting in the gas line

Of course this is assuming your name is not Boris and you have not already done this
Yeah - how mature of you --- you didn't get your way in 2016 so you're going to cut and run to Europe instead of just going about your life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2019, 10:07 AM
 
46,943 posts, read 25,964,420 times
Reputation: 29434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
The problem here is that what you call "political BS", is the Constitution of the United States.
hawkeye2009 and his ilk like strong men who gets stuff done. Make the trains run on time, that sort of thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:37 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top