If Trump declares his national emergency over border security and it is supported by the Republicans who simply want to give Trump a way out of the hopeless corner he has painted himself into and it is held up by the Courts - what happens down the road when a liberal Democrat is President and decides to pull the same measure regarding an issue like climate change or gun policy or something that Republicans are not eager to accede to? If a Court has already stated that the President indeed has the powers Trump claims, what is to stop future presidents from using them to effectively seriously weaken the powers of Congress in these areas?
And given this argument, how can Republicans in Congress stand by and encourage Trump to do this and not loudly object to it?
Is the momentary benefit to Trump so important that they would risk the very powers of the Congress as established by the Constitution?
The problem is that, on those issue, they are entirely time-based. A democrat could only declare an emergency on those issues for, at most, 8 years. Once the wall is built however well...it's built. There is no need to have a national emergency for 8 years with it. The other issues are simply too time-transcedent to have any real effect. As soon as a democrat is replaced, people buy guns and run gas guzzling cars once again.If Trump declares his national emergency over border security and it is supported by the Republicans who simply want to give Trump a way out of the hopeless corner he has painted himself into and it is held up by the Courts - what happens down the road when a liberal Democrat is President and decides to pull the same measure regarding an issue like climate change or gun policy or something that Republicans are not eager to accede to? If a Court has already stated that the President indeed has the powers Trump claims, what is to stop future presidents from using them to effectively seriously weaken the powers of Congress in these areas?
And given this argument, how can Republicans in Congress stand by and encourage Trump to do this and not loudly object to it?
Is the momentary benefit to Trump so important that they would risk the very powers of the Congress as established by the Constitution?
If Trump declares his national emergency over border security and it is supported by the Republicans who simply want to give Trump a way out of the hopeless corner he has painted himself into and it is held up by the Courts - what happens down the road when a liberal Democrat is President and decides to pull the same measure regarding an issue like climate change or gun policy or something that Republicans are not eager to accede to? If a Court has already stated that the President indeed has the powers Trump claims, what is to stop future presidents from using them to effectively seriously weaken the powers of Congress in these areas?
And given this argument, how can Republicans in Congress stand by and encourage Trump to do this and not loudly object to it?
Is the momentary benefit to Trump so important that they would risk the very powers of the Congress as established by the Constitution?
The problem is that, on those issue, they are entirely time-based. A democrat could only declare an emergency on those issues for, at most, 8 years. Once the wall is built however well...it's built. There is no need to have a national emergency for 8 years with it. The other issues are simply too time-transcedent to have any real effect. As soon as a democrat is replaced, people buy guns and run gas guzzling cars once again.
I certainly hope not, yet the constitution does not require (but does allow) 60 votes in the Senate to pass a bill either.
If Trump declares his national emergency over border security and it is supported by the Republicans who simply want to give Trump a way out of the hopeless corner he has painted himself into and it is held up by the Courts - what happens down the road when a liberal Democrat is President and decides to pull the same measure regarding an issue like climate change or gun policy or something that Republicans are not eager to accede to? If a Court has already stated that the President indeed has the powers Trump claims, what is to stop future presidents from using them to effectively seriously weaken the powers of Congress in these areas?
And given this argument, how can Republicans in Congress stand by and encourage Trump to do this and not loudly object to it?
Is the momentary benefit to Trump so important that they would risk the very powers of the Congress as established by the Constitution?
If Trump declares his national emergency over border security and it is supported by the Republicans who simply want to give Trump a way out of the hopeless corner he has painted himself into and it is held up by the Courts - what happens down the road when a liberal Democrat is President and decides to pull the same measure regarding an issue like climate change or gun policy or something that Republicans are not eager to accede to? If a Court has already stated that the President indeed has the powers Trump claims, what is to stop future presidents from using them to effectively seriously weaken the powers of Congress in these areas?
And given this argument, how can Republicans in Congress stand by and encourage Trump to do this and not loudly object to it?
Is the momentary benefit to Trump so important that they would risk the very powers of the Congress as established by the Constitution?
If Trump declares his national emergency over border security and it is supported by the Republicans who simply want to give Trump a way out of the hopeless corner he has painted himself into and it is held up by the Courts - what happens down the road when a liberal Democrat is President and decides to pull the same measure regarding an issue like climate change or gun policy or something that Republicans are not eager to accede to? If a Court has already stated that the President indeed has the powers Trump claims, what is to stop future presidents from using them to effectively seriously weaken the powers of Congress in these areas?
And given this argument, how can Republicans in Congress stand by and encourage Trump to do this and not loudly object to it?
Is the momentary benefit to Trump so important that they would risk the very powers of the Congress as established by the Constitution?
The national emergency statutes do not permit the president to change law, it permits the president to do certain things including the construction of military facilities and fortifications. I guess the president can order the military to construct bulletproof doors in schools or seawalls for climate change, but a declaration of national emergency does not give the executive unilateral lawmaking authority
So you say. And others say that Trump cannot do what he says he is likely to do.
No disrespect to you, but your opinion is cold comfort given that Trump is likely to take billions and billions of dollars appropriated for other expenditures and apply them to something that they have not been approved for.
The democrats wanted wanted this law in 1976 so sit back and let a grownup handle things
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Morons like Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, and Kevin McCarthy aside, I just don't see the Republicans in Congress allowing Trump to declare this national emergency.
And you do make a very good point. I agree with everyone who says we should somehow fix the immigration process. Not because I'm in a panic that some immigrant wants to kill me but because I'm a firm believer in processes and the law. But I don't see this as a national crisis, much as Trump wants to make it out to be one.
The biggest reason I think the GOP won't let him get away with it is that they are not stupid. Anyone who isn't so blinded by Trump knows that the Republicans controlled the House, Senate and White House until last week. This "national crisis" didn't become a "national emergency" until the Dems took control of the House. People who don't admit that are liars.
None of this word salad is a valid argument
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Correct so the courts will also look at the fact the senate could have invoked the nuclear option. They didn’t.
Trump has way more support on this than liberals give him, most American adults do still have common sense. Do you want people to knock on the front door to be welcomed in or do you want them to come in an open window around back?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Morons like Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, and Kevin McCarthy aside, I just don't see the Republicans in Congress allowing Trump to declare this national emergency.
And you do make a very good point. I agree with everyone who says we should somehow fix the immigration process. Not because I'm in a panic that some immigrant wants to kill me but because I'm a firm believer in processes and the law. But I don't see this as a national crisis, much as Trump wants to make it out to be one.
The biggest reason I think the GOP won't let him get away with it is that they are not stupid. Anyone who isn't so blinded by Trump knows that the Republicans controlled the House, Senate and White House until last week. This "national crisis" didn't become a "national emergency" until the Dems took control of the House. People who don't admit that are liars.
The problem is that, on those issue, they are entirely time-based. A democrat could only declare an emergency on those issues for, at most, 8 years. Once the wall is built however well...it's built. There is no need to have a national emergency for 8 years with it. The other issues are simply too time-transcedent to have any real effect. As soon as a democrat is replaced, people buy guns and run gas guzzling cars once again.
Only because you refuse to comprehend it.
Do you think anything Trump has presented is a valid argument? Save your condescending nonsense for somebody who respects it.
If Trump declares his national emergency over border security and it is supported by the Republicans who simply want to give Trump a way out of the hopeless corner he has painted himself into and it is held up by the Courts - what happens down the road when a liberal Democrat is President and decides to pull the same measure regarding an issue like climate change or gun policy or something that Republicans are not eager to accede to? If a Court has already stated that the President indeed has the powers Trump claims, what is to stop future presidents from using them to effectively seriously weaken the powers of Congress in these areas?
And given this argument, how can Republicans in Congress stand by and encourage Trump to do this and not loudly object to it?
Is the momentary benefit to Trump so important that they would risk the very powers of the Congress as established by the Constitution?
It is ironic that so called LIBERTARIANS and members of things like the LIBERTY or FREEDOM CAUCUS would be the cheerleaders for this unconstitutional expansion of executive power which rapes the US Constitution.
They and their hollow claims about freedom and liberty and rights are as phony as a three dollar bill with a picture of Pee Wee Herman on one side and a whoopee cushion on the other.
It is ironic that so called LIBERTARIANS and members of things like the LIBERTY or FREEDOM CAUCUS would be the cheerleaders for this unconstitutional expansion of executive power which rapes the US Constitution.
They and their hollow claims about freedom and liberty and rights are as phony as a three dollar bill with a picture of Pee Wee Herman on one side and a whoopee cushion on the other.
If Trump declares his national emergency over border security and it is supported by the Republicans who simply want to give Trump a way out of the hopeless corner he has painted himself into and it is held up by the Courts - what happens down the road when a liberal Democrat is President and decides to pull the same measure regarding an issue like climate change or gun policy or something that Republicans are not eager to accede to? If a Court has already stated that the President indeed has the powers Trump claims, what is to stop future presidents from using them to effectively seriously weaken the powers of Congress in these areas?
And given this argument, how can Republicans in Congress stand by and encourage Trump to do this and not loudly object to it?
Is the momentary benefit to Trump so important that they would risk the very powers of the Congress as established by the Constitution?
Blame Congress for enacting the Emergency Powers act in the 70's. :shrug:
I've said for years now that Congress has abdicated too many of its powers to the executive branch. Do you believe me now?
I was talking about him declaring a national emergency and how his party would respond to it, not my front door. Will you kindly read and comprehend my posts so you don't quote me and make posts like this in the future?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?