Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
That_Guy

McConnell: Senate will pass resolution blocking Trump's emergency

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

That_Guy

You people really need to brush up on the National Emergencies Act, which doesn't grant discretion to the Majority Leader and requires that a resolution to terminate be voted on relatively quickly.

Edited by That_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
USNRETWIFE

You nailed it right there. There is no constitutional right for illegals to gain entry to this country. There IS a constitutional right for US citizens to legally own firearms. Apples and oranges, but SanFranNan apparently doesn't know the difference between "apples and oranges" and a "pen and a phone."

 

Are you kidding? She doesn't know the difference between a president and a speaker of the house. She thinks they are of equal power.

And I am watching my two worthless senators on this and will use my vote in their next elections accordingly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

You people really need to brush up on the National Emergencies Act, which doesn't grant discretion to the Majority Leader and requires that a resolution to terminate be voted on relatively quickly.

 

The national emergencies act authorizes the POTUS to declare national emergencies and spend discretionary funds that were earmarked for military construction but were not spent on emergency orders of the POTUS. In other words it is money that has already been outlayed for this very sort of thing.

 

So they can do their kubuki dance and get veto'd.

Edited by Taggart Transcontinental

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

It's all a moot point. Regardless what you think of McConnell's position, or Rand Paul's manhood, or T_G's declarations about the National Emergencies Act, or anything else that has been discussed in this thread, one fact remains: President Trump will veto it, and there aren't enough votes to overcome the veto.

 

So the whole thing is a pointless dog-and-pony show.

 

B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup

It's all a moot point. Regardless what you think of McConnell's position, or Rand Paul's manhood, or T_G's declarations about the National Emergencies Act, or anything else that has been discussed in this thread, one fact remains: President Trump will veto it, and there aren't enough votes to overcome the veto.

 

So the whole thing is a pointless dog-and-pony show.

 

B)

 

:exactly:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crabby Appleton

THANK YOU! I have been making this point, and so pissed at the Republicans for not stating it (or somehow buying into it) for a while now. The BS argument that a Dem President will just start using executive orders to do things like gun control is insane. The President can, by executive order, only take such action as Congress itself could have taken. An executive order that does something that is unconstitutional is wring not because it is done by executive order, but because it violates the constitution. A gun grab by congress OR the president both are unconstitutional because they violate the second Amendment. What Trump is doing is NOT unconstitutional in terms of the subject of the order because Congress could otherwise pass this law and it would be upheld.

 

Also, the fear that the next president could implement the Green New Deal by executive order is also misplaced, because unlike Trumps Order, which is taking discretionary spending dollars in the military budget that congress has appropriated already and shifting them, the green new deal would likely violate the power of the purse of the house. Though if it does not, but instead just created insane CAFA standards or such, then it might be upheld. But the argument that if Trump does it, a democrat may do it later based upon the precedent s dumb. That cart has left the barn. A dem president, no matter what Trump does, will be issuing these orders if they want. Like they care about hypocrisy

Yup. My view exactly. Presidential emergency declarations, if they do not impact Constitutional rights, are perfectly legal and have happened hundreds of times in the past. Threats that the declaration sets a precedent that Democrats can use to curtail or impact precious Constitutional rights is false on its face. Any declaration that would inhibit or deny Second Amendment rights, for example, would fail, if not immediately in the courts, certainly in the Supreme Court. Rand Paul's fear that his conscience-based principles would be violated is based on an imaginary set of Constitutional worries.

Edited by Crabby Appleton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crabby Appleton

It's all a moot point. Regardless what you think of McConnell's position, or Rand Paul's manhood, or T_G's declarations about the National Emergencies Act, or anything else that has been discussed in this thread, one fact remains: President Trump will veto it, and there aren't enough votes to overcome the veto.

 

So the whole thing is a pointless dog-and-pony show.

 

B)

All true, but I, personally, get irritated that Senators like Paul, Murkowski, Collins and Tillis can masquerade as Republicans, take campaign funds and let Trump boost their prospects, then turn on him in implementing his most important agenda item. I don't like dogs and ponies in the GOP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

All true, but I, personally, get irritated that Senators like Paul, Murkowski, Collins and Tillis can masquerade as Republicans, take campaign funds and let Trump boost their prospects, then turn on him in implementing his most important agenda item. I don't like dogs and ponies in the GOP.

 

Agreed.

 

I expect this sort of pettiness from habitual turncoats Collins and Murkowski. I didn't know much about Tillis before this, but so far he's not making a very good impression.

 

It's Rand Paul who's the big disappointment to me. I usually hold him in fairly high regard, even on those occasions when I disagree with him. But this time he's just plain wrong. Shame on you, Rand.

 

<_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coach

THANK YOU! I have been making this point, and so pissed at the Republicans for not stating it (or somehow buying into it) for a while now. The BS argument that a Dem President will just start using executive orders to do things like gun control is insane. The President can, by executive order, only take such action as Congress itself could have taken. An executive order that does something that is unconstitutional is wring not because it is done by executive order, but because it violates the constitution. A gun grab by congress OR the president both are unconstitutional because they violate the second Amendment. What Trump is doing is NOT unconstitutional in terms of the subject of the order because Congress could otherwise pass this law and it would be upheld.

 

Also, the fear that the next president could implement the Green New Deal by executive order is also misplaced, because unlike Trumps Order, which is taking discretionary spending dollars in the military budget that congress has appropriated already and shifting them, the green new deal would likely violate the power of the purse of the house. Though if it does not, but instead just created insane CAFA standards or such, then it might be upheld. But the argument that if Trump does it, a democrat may do it later based upon the precedent s dumb. That cart has left the barn. A dem president, no matter what Trump does, will be issuing these orders if they want. Like they care about hypocrisy

 

 

 

Excellent analysis, proves the fact that the culling of the Republican party must continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

one fact remains: President Trump will veto it, and there aren't enough votes to overcome the veto.

 

Predictions? Okay...

 

The resolution to terminate the national emergency declaration will pass the Senate, and Trump will veto it. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is a defendant in a lawsuit being brought by a number of property owners, states, and environmental groups who are challenging the declaration.

 

Before Trump can/tries to use national security as pretense for funding border security measures with money allocated by Congress for some other purpose, a court will issue an injunction preventing it. So his veto may prevent Congress from being a check on his (ab)use of executive power, but it won't stop the other co-equal branch from being a check on his power -- at least until the case against the declaration can be heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Predictions? Okay...

 

The resolution to terminate the national emergency declaration will pass the Senate, and Trump will veto it. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is a defendant in a lawsuit being brought by a number of property owners, states, and environmental groups who are challenging the declaration.

 

Before Trump can/tries to use national security as pretense for funding border security measures with money allocated by Congress for some other purpose, a court will issue an injunction preventing it. So his veto may prevent Congress from being a check on his (ab)use of executive power, but it won't stop the other co-equal branch from being a check on his power -- at least until the case against the declaration can be heard.

Before you pat yourself on your own back too hard, note that Trump already stated that he predicts it will end up in the Supreme Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Noclevermoniker

You people really need to brush up on the National Emergencies Act, which doesn't grant discretion to the Majority Leader and requires that a resolution to terminate be voted on relatively quickly.

You've been wrong about everything, forever, Hamilton. Just the fact that "you think so" advises us that whatever fevered dream you've come up with is bullschiess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy

Trump already stated that he predicts it will end up in the Supreme Court.

 

Meaning it's unlikely to "end up" with any of his wall being built before the 2020 campaign?

#Promises(Not)Kept ;)

Edited by That_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rock N' Roll Right Winger

FYI - Mitch has no choice in this case.

:bs:

 

Yes he does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rock N' Roll Right Winger

I see you've pivoted from pissing into the wind to pissing up a rope.

 

Wrong as usual, Hamilton.

:lol: :high5:

 

You people really need to brush up on the National Emergencies Act, which doesn't grant discretion to the Majority Leader and requires that a resolution to terminate be voted on relatively quickly.

What do mean "you people"?

 

RACIST!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rock N' Roll Right Winger

It's all a moot point. Regardless what you think of McConnell's position, or Rand Paul's manhood, or T_G's declarations about the National Emergencies Act, or anything else that has been discussed in this thread, one fact remains: President Trump will veto it, and there aren't enough votes to overcome the veto.

 

So the whole thing is a pointless dog-and-pony show.

 

B)

:yeahthat:

 

And it will hold up in the courts too if it goes that far.

 

All true, but I, personally, get irritated that Senators like Paul, Murkowski, Collins and Tillis can masquerade as Republicans, take campaign funds and let Trump boost their prospects, then turn on him in implementing his most important agenda item. I don't like dogs and ponies in the GOP.

Me neither.

 

Predictions? Okay...

 

The resolution to terminate the national emergency declaration will pass the Senate, and Trump will veto it. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is a defendant in a lawsuit being brought by a number of property owners, states, and environmental groups who are challenging the declaration.

 

Before Trump can/tries to use national security as pretense for funding border security measures with money allocated by Congress for some other purpose, a court will issue an injunction preventing it. So his veto may prevent Congress from being a check on his (ab)use of executive power, but it won't stop the other co-equal branch from being a check on his power -- at least until the case against the declaration can be heard.

:biglaugh:

 

Meaning it's unlikely to "end up" with any of his wall being built before the 2020 campaign?

#Promises(Not)Kept ;)

More :bs:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Noclevermoniker

Meaning it's unlikely to "end up" with any of his wall being built before the 2020 campaign?

#Promises(Not)Kept ;)

It's being built now. But you knew that.

Edited by Noclevermoniker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SARGE

You people really need to brush up on the National Emergencies Act, which doesn't grant discretion to the Majority Leader and requires that a resolution to terminate be voted on relatively quickly.

 

Excuse me, you tribalistic, hypocritical, cretin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Meaning it's unlikely to "end up" with any of his wall being built before the 2020 campaign?

#Promises(Not)Kept ;)

The sooner the better; popular opinion supports him; from re-election viewpoint the delay won’t hurt him, and it will be on democrats.

 

I look forward to the presidential debates where this will become entirely clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

Meaning it's unlikely to "end up" with any of his wall being built before the 2020 campaign?

#Promises(Not)Kept ;)

 

Thank you for proving once again that Democrats aren't merely "the other", they are in fact enemies of America. See, your comment is what this whole thing is really all about: Harming Trump. "If we can block the building of the wall, it'll be a 'Promise Not Kept', which will make Trump look bad and even harm his chances for re-election in 2020!"

 

I appreciate your uncharacteristically honest admission - The Democrats (and Never-Trump Republicans) are in fact willing to sacrifice national security on the altar of "Trump Bad".

 

<_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

Predictions? Okay...

 

The resolution to terminate the national emergency declaration will pass the Senate, and Trump will veto it. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is a defendant in a lawsuit being brought by a number of property owners, states, and environmental groups who are challenging the declaration.

 

Before Trump can/tries to use national security as pretense for funding border security measures with money allocated by Congress for some other purpose, a court will issue an injunction preventing it. So his veto may prevent Congress from being a check on his (ab)use of executive power, but it won't stop the other co-equal branch from being a check on his power -- at least until the case against the declaration can be heard.

 

Immaterial, have you heard of imminent domain? They can ignore that nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

Meaning it's unlikely to "end up" with any of his wall being built before the 2020 campaign?

#Promises(Not)Kept ;)

 

He's already started moving on it you do realize the emergency only covers a portion of the money, the rest is being done already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
grimreefer

Thank you for proving once again that Democrats aren't merely "the other", they are in fact enemies of America. See, your comment is what this whole thing is really all about: Harming Trump. "If we can block the building of the wall, it'll be a 'Promise Not Kept', which will make Trump look bad and even harm his chances for re-election in 2020!"

 

I appreciate your uncharacteristically honest admission - The Democrats (and Never-Trump Republicans) are in fact willing to sacrifice national security on the altar of "Trump Bad".

 

<_<

I was getting ready to post something similar but you beat me to it. :thumbsup: A rare, honest moment from T_G.

 

 

#PromisesObstructed ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

I was getting ready to post something similar but you beat me to it. :thumbsup: A rare, honest moment from T_G.

 

 

#PromisesObstructed ;)

 

Yup. Except probably not an "honest" moment so much as an "oops" moment.

 

B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buckwheat Jones

You people really need to brush up on the National Emergencies Act, which doesn't grant discretion to the Majority Leader and requires that a resolution to terminate be voted on relatively quickly.

“You people?”...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...