If you support "national emergency" to bypass Congress, you are an enemy of the Constitution (independence, dictators)
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.
You are hilarious. What Majority Leader McConnell envoked was perfectly legal, with precedence afforded by former Majority Leader Reid. May God rest his soul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilcart
SCOTUS.. will find themselves in a tight spot.
Having been illegally stacked by Mitch they will want to reward their own party, but they also know if they ignore Trump's intent once again they will be setting a strong precedent that will be hard for them to overturn when a liberal POTUS does that same thing.
We have a whole bunch of problems with our old fashioned government. PUTIN's gambit has been a massive success it has thrown our entire system of gov up in the air. It may well be that POTUS and SCOTUS need to be marginalised...
What impact would taking military drug counterintelligence funds - that I think are used to destroy overseas drug supply - might have on drugs flowing into our country.
the funds would not come out of the counterintelligence funds, but rather the military construction budget.
One of the basic ideas of the Constitution is that (1) Presidents don't make the laws, and (2) certain powers - including Power of the Purse - are reserved for the Congress.
With this "national emergency," you conservatives support your guy just bypassing Congress altogether and implementing his policies (which he couldn't get support through Congress) via royal decree.
That's basically called a dictatorship. Might as well disband Congress and just annoint Donald as King.
If you're for this stuff, then you're opposed to the spirit and concept of the Constitution.
If his little National Emergency stunt is going to take funds from disaster relief, I hope Congress blocks it. 16 states (so far) have filed suits.
Trump isn't doing anything the Constitution doesn't grant him the power to do. The left just doesn't like it. Too bad.
Presidential authority doesn't apply only when the left agrees with it.
This!
The Dems had no problem with Obama's "I have a pen and a phone." bypassing of congress with his many EOs for things he couldn't get passed in Congress or his many "National Emergencies" that didn't benefit our own country in any way!
the funds would not come out of the counterintelligence funds, but rather the military construction budget.
Correct. That's why I said (Technically, those funds aren't under the Act but the theory is the same) - what programs, projects are you impacting to switch the money to the wall. The other large pot of funds that he can reach outside the National Emergency declaration are these military counterintelligence drug funds. I just now googled this:
Shanahan will start to identify specific projects to shut down - The administration has said $2.5 billion of military narcotics funding and $3.6 billion in military construction money will be diverted to the wall. But Shanahan will have final say on how much will be taken from which programs.
This is interesting - Under Trump's emergency declaration, Shanahan also has to determine whether border barriers are necessary to support the use of the armed forces. "There've been no determinations by me, so that's what I'll be doing tomorrow," Shanahan said. "But I just want to make a point of this: we are following the law, using the rules, and we're not bending the rules." https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/16/us/se...ing/index.html
That way it works is that (I'm pretty sure) the troops have to ON the border for a fence to build to protect them. You gotta admit. This is bizarre. Under Posse Comitatus (unless maybe there is some sort of other declaration?) the military can't do anything on the border. Except sit there so a wall can be built to protect them?
The Dems had no problem with Obama's "I have a pen and a phone." bypassing of congress with his many EOs for things he couldn't get passed in Congress or his many "National Emergencies" that didn't benefit our own country in any way!
Did President Obama attempt to siphon off funds that Congress had, according to their powers given them by the Constitution, appropriated to other departments in order to fund something Congress expressly said no to funding?
One of the basic ideas of the Constitution is that (1) Presidents don't make the laws, and (2) certain powers - including Power of the Purse - are reserved for the Congress.
With this "national emergency," you conservatives support your guy just bypassing Congress altogether and implementing his policies (which he couldn't get support through Congress) via royal decree.
That's basically called a dictatorship. Might as well disband Congress and just annoint Donald as King.
If you're for this stuff, then you're opposed to the spirit and concept of the Constitution.
MEH -- I see it as just lazy and incompetent in negotiating.
I do think it is a dangerous precedent for the President to be able to redirect funds in such a large scale for something that is clearly NOT AN emergency.
Even if it is a problem that needs addressing, it doesn't make it an emergency.
MEH -- I see it as just lazy and incompetent in negotiating.
I do think it is a dangerous precedent for the President to be able to redirect funds in such a large scale for something that is clearly NOT AN emergency.
Even if it is a problem that needs addressing, it doesn't make it an emergency.
I, for one, believe there is a problem that needs addressing. The "caravans" do not impact (yet) overall trends in potential border-crossers ... but they do raise other issues - legal, humanitarian. I turned on Fox for a few minutes while eating lunch only to find some host railing on about how Democrats decried "putting children in cages" but now say there is no emergency.
Beyond that there's no logic to that above statement - duh, WE were the ones putting the children in "cages" - that the caravans form some sort of crisis is a valid question. What does DHS say?:
Misguided court decisions and outdated laws have made it easier for illegal aliens to enter and remain in the U.S. if they are adults who arrive with children, unaccompanied alien children, or individuals who fraudulently claim asylum. As a result, DHS continues to see huge numbers of illegal migrants and a dramatic shift in the demographics of aliens traveling to the border, both in terms of nationality and type of aliens- from a demographic who could be quickly removed when they had no legal right to stay to one that cannot be detained and timely removed.
Did President Obama attempt to siphon off funds that Congress had, according to their powers given them by the Constitution, appropriated to other departments in order to fund something Congress expressly said no to funding?
Yes.
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.
