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.
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.
bypassing the people's representatives is how Obama ruled for 8 years!!!!!!
the media declared great orator had no ability to communicate or negotiate.
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.
Conservatives have a choice.
1 Defend the US Constitution .
2 Defend Donald Trump.
there is no third choice.
Those who pick a POTUS over the Constitution , are spitting on our flag, our country and the men and woman who died defending it.
Those were not used to bypass Congress on major policy actions. You fail.
Let's see how you squeal when a Dem President uses this precedent to shuffle around $7 billion or so for a "national emergency" of climate change or maybe healthcare or gun violence. Hey, no new law and already appropriated funds, right? Bet you'll hit the high C like a castrated boy when that happens.
And yes, again - the crap you support undermines the Constitution.
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...
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...
I think the tight spot is in the Constitution. The President has the authority to declare national emergencies. The government itself was designed with checks and balances, and probably the biggest check on the President is that the House of Representatives controls the purse strings. The reason McConnell has been stating that he supports the President in this national emergency declaration is that for the courts to side with the President, they have to consider whether the President had a foundation for declaring a national emergency. McConnell understands that, and his support is to help the President establish that foundation. The President doesn't seem to understand that as much, his comments about how he could have waited, and about why he chose to declare a national emergency, as well as his meandering comments during his declaration undermine that this is an emergency. What the courts will have to do is to strike a balance between the President's powers and the legislature's powers. A conservative court is more likely to favor the legislature's powers, because the court isn't thinking about just this incident, but about the future. Which is what Pelosi's comments were supposed to draw attention to. A precedent where a the chief executive asks the legislature to fund something, the legislature declines to fund it, and the chief executive simply declares a national emergency to get those funds, is not a good precedent in our system of government.
A Dem defending the Constitution is as genuine as a Dem quoting Bible verses.
Conservatives used to at least pretend to love the Constitution. They don't even bother to pretend anymore. Now they will willingly throw that document aside for a con man.
And don't even get started on the CINOs who give lip service to the Bible but live their lives as if they never heard of Jesus Christ. This board is crawling with them.
And the difference between Democrats and their love fest with Islam? If they get the chance they'll legalize sharia law in the United States.
Most ridiculous assertion on this thread.
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.
