• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump's Considering Declaring A National Emergency. That's A Dumb Ploy, Particularly If He Wants A W

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
94,470
Reaction score
32,300
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
https://www.dailywire.com/news/41987/trumps-considering-declaring-national-emergency-ben-shapiro

On Wednesday, the day after a national address in which he laid forth his case for building a border wall and refusing to sign a budget without one, President Trump suggested openly that he might in fact simply declare a national emergency with regard to the border and order the Defense Department to redirect funds toward the building of a border wall.
Trump stated, “I have the absolute right to do national emergency if I want…my threshold will be if I can’t make a deal with people that are unreasonable.” Trump would presumably invoke 10 USC §2808 or 10 USC §284 in order to declare a national emergency. Under 10 USC §2808, the president may “In the event of a declaration of war or the declaration by the President of a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act,” undertake “military construction projects, and may authorize the Secretaries of the military departments to undertake military construction projects, not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces.”
I support the wall, but I'm having second thoughts about the emergency declaration.
 

jnug

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 23, 2018
Messages
29,867
Reaction score
13,961
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

haymarket

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
120,954
Reaction score
28,531
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I would not be surprised to see Trump pull this emergency nonsense and be even less surprised when the usual crowd that screams about presidential power expansion rolls over on their backs and asks Trump to rub their tummy while they purr for him.

Trump does not give a tinkers damn about the actual wall - its only a political ploy that he wants to say he won and fought for. The man has no respect for our government or our institutions nor the Constitution. If he has to piss on it to put out a fire he started himself, he will do just that.
 

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
90,023
Reaction score
38,877
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I like this comment responding to Shapiro's opinion article:

Jerry Erikson • 17 hours ago

your biggest arguments against this are optics and "if they abuse the system, democrats will probably do this next time!". first off, democrats ALWAYS abuse the system and will continue to do so anyways. I admire your faith in the other side to do the right thing, but we all know that time has passed. Democrats are so vehemently anti trump that they'll waste countless dollars on a pointless investigation hoping he's found treasonous than admit he was simply the better candidate than Hillary Clinton. It's why again, optics are pointless in this day and age. Trump won because he was a fighter. Mccain, Romney, and most of the Republicans who would condemn him for this are not fighters. With almost all news and late night media (not to mention hollywood) pumping out consistent democrat propaganda, ANYTHING trump and republicans do will be spun in a negative way.

Trump needs to do what needs to be done. If this is what is needed, so be it. I don't want it to come to that either, but as a last resort? FINE. Everyone will be grateful for it a few years down the road when the money SAVED due to the wall significantly decreasing illegal immigration and smuggling more than pays for its initial costs.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
89,848
Reaction score
53,559
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
https://www.dailywire.com/news/41987/trumps-considering-declaring-national-emergency-ben-shapiro


I support the wall, but I'm having second thoughts about the emergency declaration.

I don't support starting a symbolic Great Wall Of Trump (GWOT) project that will, at most, cobble together a few more miles of border barrier allowing for photo OPs of high fives in a few select border patrol sectors. The problem is that once an illegal immigrant gets inside the US interior (remember that most do so "legally") they can get (low wage) employment and enjoy public services/social programs while producing US citizen offspring able to bring the rest of the extended family in using chain migration. Its simply a scam to use the partial GWOT as an excuse to not do a damn thing about the 12M to 20M illegal immigrants already inside the US.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,365
Reaction score
10,488
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The republicans have had 2 years of full congressional control and the whitehouse. They could have passed wall funding through reconciliation at any time. Without a single democratic vote. Lets not pretend that wall funding is only important now. Trump supporters have been played for fools and are greedily sucking down that koolaid.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
 

Crosscheck

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
12,008
Reaction score
9,394
Location
NW USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I don't support starting a symbolic Great Wall Of Trump (GWOT) project that will, at most, cobble together a few more miles of border barrier allowing for photo OPs of high fives in a few select border patrol sectors. The problem is that once an illegal immigrant gets inside the US interior (remember that most do so "legally") they can get (low wage) employment and enjoy public services/social programs while producing US citizen offspring able to bring the rest of the extended family in using chain migration. Its simply a scam to use the partial GWOT as an excuse to not do a damn thing about the 12M to 20M illegal immigrants already inside the US.

Quite right. Getting into the country is really not that hard. Staying beyond your visa is also not that hard. Just remember our immigration board sent visa renewals to a couple of the deceased 911 hijackers.

This whole dog and pony show is nothing but partisan BS. Trump wants to show the world his masculinity by staying firm and Pelosi is giddy with shutting this man down.

And while Trump enjoys his prime rib tonight there are many federal workers having to use their emergency savings to pay their mortgage.


Well played douchebag.
 

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
18,882
Reaction score
24,981
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The republicans have had 2 years of full congressional control and the whitehouse. They could have passed wall funding through reconciliation at any time. Without a single democratic vote. Lets not pretend that wall funding is only important now. Trump supporters have been played for fools and are greedily sucking down that koolaid.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

No they could not. Not without constant use of the Nuclear Option (overriding the cloture rule via simple majority vote) which would have allowed the Democrats unfettered license to do the same when they regained control.

It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass a Bill because that's how many it takes to vote cloture* and end debate.

*
Cloture Definition. How to Break a Filibuster Using the U.S. Senate Rulebook
https://www.thoughtco.com/the-definition-of-cloture-3367943

So far the Republicans have limited use to things like Kavanaugh's SCOTUS appointment vote in the Senate.

But constant use by whichever Party had the Senate majority would give them an ability to disregard efforts at bi-partisan cooperation.

This is why back when the Republican's controlled both Houses of Congress, things passed in the House of Reps. did not get past the Senate.

Personally, I think anyone who supports letting either party run roughshod over the cloture rule would have been short-sighted, as it only allows the other Party the license to do the same if and when take they over.
 
Last edited:

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,365
Reaction score
10,488
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
No they could not. Not without constant use of the Nuclear Option (overriding the cloture rule via simple majority vote) which would have allowed the Democrats unfettered license to do the same when they regained control.

It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass a Bill because that's how many it takes to vote cloture* and end debate.

* https://www.thoughtco.com/the-definition-of-cloture-3367943

So far the Republicans have limited use to things like Kavanaugh's SCOTUS appointment vote in the Senate.

But constant use by whichever Party had the Senate majority would give them an ability to disregard efforts at bi-partisan cooperation.

This is why back when the Republican's controlled both Houses of Congress, things passed in the House of Reps. did not get past the Senate.

Personally, I think anyone who supports letting either party run roughshod over the cloture rule would have been short-sighted, as it only allows the other Party the license to do the same if and when take over.
Reconciliaition can be used on any funding or tax bills. Thats how they passed tax cuts with less than 60 votes.

It is very common and used by both parties. You cant pass new laws like obamacare or immigration reform but simple funding or tax changes you most certainly can and they do it all the time.
 

Threegoofs

In mourning for Turtledude
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
59,830
Reaction score
24,871
Location
We had a bad fire in 1871
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

Rexedgar

Yo-Semite!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
50,813
Reaction score
38,188
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Stealers Wheel

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 5, 2018
Messages
7,445
Reaction score
5,734
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
The Founding Fathers gave the House the purse strings for a reason. This is a perfect example of why.

Now the president wants to 'declare a national emergency' specifically because the House won't give him the money he wants. It wasn't a 'national emergency' during negotiations, but now it is. Got it.

If this is not the definition of abuse of power, I don't know what is. I cannot believe any federal court, including the USSC, would let him get away with this.
 

Napoleon

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
21,759
Reaction score
7,710
Location
Columbus, OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The Founding Fathers gave the House the purse strings for a reason. This is a perfect example of why.

Now the president wants to 'declare a national emergency' specifically because the House won't give him the money he wants. It wasn't a 'national emergency' during negotiations, but now it is. Got it.

If this is not the definition of abuse of power, I don't know what is. I cannot believe any federal court, including the USSC, would let him get away with this.

Congress gave the Executive authority to unilaterally commit to expenses and even make advance payments on those contracts if the President determines that it serves a national defense interest.
 

Cardinal

Respected On All Sides
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
96,926
Reaction score
81,182
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

jnug

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 23, 2018
Messages
29,867
Reaction score
13,961
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Reconciliaition can be used on any funding or tax bills. Thats how they passed tax cuts with less than 60 votes.

It is very common and used by both parties. You cant pass new laws like obamacare or immigration reform but simple funding or tax changes you most certainly can and they do it all the time.

Reconciliation can only be used a maximum of three times per year per budget resolution. Congress has banned the use of Reconciliation that would increase deficits. So there are restrictions.

At any rate, you need to be able to get a simply majority in BOTH Houses of Congress to use Reconciliation at all.
 

jnug

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 23, 2018
Messages
29,867
Reaction score
13,961
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The more Trump continues to contend that he "does not want to go the National Emergency route because he wants to cut a deal" the more he cuts the legs out from under the attorneys that will try to make the case for his National Emergency in the courts. It either is or is not a National Emergency.

Trump this morning: "I really don't think they care about crime".

and:

I don't think you really want to build your Wall Donald. You just want a Wall Fight.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,365
Reaction score
10,488
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Reconciliation can only be used a maximum of three times per year per budget resolution. Congress has banned the use of Reconciliation that would increase deficits. So there are restrictions.

At any rate, you need to be able to get a simply majority in BOTH Houses of Congress to use Reconciliation at all.

They used it on the tax cuts. They created a loop hole to get around the deficit problem, but even then, what you're saying is that anytime for the past two years, republicans could have passed 25 Billion for border wall funding with only 51 votes and all they had to do was find a matching 25 Billion dollar cut (over 10 years, so a cut of 2.5 Billion/year) in spending? And they couldn't get that done? It's a national emergency and illegals are slicing innocent americans throats and they couldn't pass wall funding with 51 votes to save american lives? (mocking hyperbole for those wanting to take that serious)

How stupid do they think people are? Yes, there are minor hurdles in reconciliation, but that's a big deal if you think it's actually a national emergency. They can't pretend wall funding is only important when democrats run the house. They can go **** themselves.
 

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
94,470
Reaction score
32,300
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I can’t see what issue a conservative would have with the military seizing private land by force. And I’m sure they would be fine with just any President doing that.

It's too bad that you can't see.
 

jnug

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 23, 2018
Messages
29,867
Reaction score
13,961
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They used it on the tax cuts. They created a loop hole to get around the deficit problem, but even then, what you're saying is that anytime for the past two years, republicans could have passed 25 Billion for border wall funding with only 51 votes and all they had to do was find a matching 25 Billion dollar cut (over 10 years, so a cut of 2.5 Billion/year) in spending? And they couldn't get that done? It's a national emergency and illegals are slicing innocent americans throats and they couldn't pass wall funding with 51 votes to save american lives? (mocking hyperbole for those wanting to take that serious)

How stupid do they think people are? Yes, there are minor hurdles in reconciliation, but that's a big deal if you think it's actually a national emergency. They can't pretend wall funding is only important when democrats run the house. They can go **** themselves.

So yes, now I understand where you were going.

Many here have made the point that there were numerous opportunities for Trump to get his Wall funding through normal process of which Reconciliation might have been one. Though it would have had standing, I am not sure using it would have had merit. If what you want can't stand the heat of the actual Appropriations process, then get out of the kitchen. That would be my message to Donald.

You could easily make the point that since nobody in the House even tried to use Reconciliation for the Wall during the first two years of Trump's term it supports the notion that there never was the votes in either House or Senate even with GOP majorities to get Trump's Wall funding for him. Again, I don't think Trump wants the Wall. He wants a Wall Fight and I think his own party knows it.
 

Cardinal

Respected On All Sides
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
96,926
Reaction score
81,182
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's too bad that you can't see.

That was called "sarcasm."

Traditionally, simply watching a fictional movie in which the military seizes private land by force would have been enough to make conservatives construct walls around their homes in terror to keep the Federal government out. Today, however, conservatism has exploded, and I've seen a significant number of conservatives argue in favor of declaring a national emergency in order to start building a wall right now, which would necessitate the military seizing private property by force.

When a poll is finally completed, how much do you want to bet that support for doing this will be around 35-40%?
 

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
94,470
Reaction score
32,300
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Speaking of border security, McConnell is taking the Democrats to the woodshed, as we speak, on the Senate floor. He's nailing them to the wall on their galactic hypocrisy about funding the wall, since they voted for funding a wall under Obama; and his own border chief supports a wall wholeheartedly! The Democrats are galactic flip-floppers, and many of their voters are the biggest dumbasses on the planet. They talk about common sense this or that on civil rights like gun control, but seem to demonstrate little of it where it matters most right now at the border, which is one of the primary duties of the federal government under the common defense and immigration clauses.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,365
Reaction score
10,488
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Speaking of border security, McConnell is taking the Democrats to the woodshed, as we speak, on the Senate floor. He's nailing them to the wall on their galactic hypocrisy about funding the wall, since they voted for funding a wall under Obama; and his own border chief supports a wall wholeheartedly! The Democrats are galactic flip-floppers, and many of their voters are the biggest dumbasses on the planet. They talk about common sense this or that on civil rights like gun control, but seem to demonstrate little of it where it matters most right now at the border, which is one of the primary duties of the federal government under the common defense and immigration clauses.

Why didn't republicans pass wall funding with reconciliation as they did with tax cuts? They controlled all of congress. Blaming this on democrats is literally one of the dumbest arguments anyone could ever make.
 

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
94,470
Reaction score
32,300
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
That was called "sarcasm."

Traditionally, simply watching a fictional movie in which the military seizes private land by force would have been enough to make conservatives construct walls around their homes in terror to keep the Federal government out. Today, however, conservatism has exploded, and I've seen a significant number of conservatives argue in favor of declaring a national emergency in order to start building a wall right now, which would necessitate the military seizing private property by force.

When a poll is finally completed, how much do you want to bet that support for doing this will be around 35-40%?

Why are Schumer and Pelosi such liars about this wall business? Seriously they both voted for the exact same thing under Obama.
 
Top Bottom