Will Republicans Sanction Russia or Prove Their Treason with Inaction

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: aethertek
So even though all the intelligence dept. warned of Russian interference the republicans did nothing but try to derail the investigation into Russia's crimes against America.

So now that indictments have been brought against the first foreign agents will the republicans step up to their claims of protecting America or will they be shown for the seditious sellouts we believe them to be.

America is watching Republicans, show us your love of America that you always claim or be proven hypocritical liars interested only in your own power & greed.

K~

Actually, Congress already approved sanctions against Russia.

President Trump even signed them into law - yet he refuses to implement them.

If anyone's in violation of the Constitution, it would be him - Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to:

“take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

I said this a while ago about a slightly different matter, but he persists in ignoring his responsibilities.

There is but one recourse, yet Congress will not do it.

Hey, it's just like immigration.

Democrat people ignore that, soooo..why not, goosey gander?

Maybe they can get a hawaiian judge to enforce the sanctions?

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: aethertek
So even though all the intelligence dept. warned of Russian interference the republicans did nothing but try to derail the investigation into Russia's crimes against America.

So now that indictments have been brought against the first foreign agents will the republicans step up to their claims of protecting America or will they be shown for the seditious sellouts we believe them to be.

America is watching Republicans, show us your love of America that you always claim or be proven hypocritical liars interested only in your own power & greed.

K~

Actually, Congress already approved sanctions against Russia.

President Trump even signed them into law - yet he refuses to implement them.

If anyone's in violation of the Constitution, it would be him - Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to:

“take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

I said this a while ago about a slightly different matter, but he persists in ignoring his responsibilities.

There is but one recourse, yet Congress will not do it.

Hey, it's just like immigration.

Democrat people ignore that, soooo..why not, goosey gander?

Maybe they can get a hawaiian judge to enforce the sanctions?

originally posted by: Greven
Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to ignore his Constitutional duties, or is it not?

We just wrapped up 8 years of being constantly told by liberals and the media that yes, it is OK for the POTUS to ignore his Constitutional duties, so forgive me for being confused as to why this has suddenly changed just because you personally dislike the current POTUS.

FWIW, something I do know, is that Obama's deportation numbers are thanks to the feds changing the way deportation is defined, broadening it tremendously. In reality, Obama enforced immigration law, including shipping illegals back to their country of origin, far less that his predecessors did. President Trump hasn't caught up to his numbers yet, but he's only been in office for a year. He'll pass him by sometime in 2019 or so...

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

Eh, they didn't do it when Obama acted against the COTUS.

Strangely, Obama is no longer President and instead an irrelevant deflection given that we're discussing President Trump.

Either you support the President of the United States disobeying his duties as outlined in the Constitution of the United States, or you do not.

Which is it?

No 'but Obama.'

Tough #, obama was complicit with the russian collusion from day 1!

You ain't getting away with that BS.

Obama trashed the COTUS and broke everything and now you give a #?

lol.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: ketsuko

or enforcement of immigration laws...
or enforcement of federal drug laws...
or internet gambling laws...
or laws pertaining to gay marriage...
or No Child Left Behind...
or intimidating voters (so long as the people doing the intimidating are considered "minorities")...
or delaying the Obamacare Employer Mandate via EO...
or the law that requires layoff notices be issued 60 days in advance (at least when that 60 days puts the layoff notices in American worker's hands immediately prior to the 2012 elections in which Obama needed every vote)...
or the work requirement in the welfare reform law...

When Obama selectively enforced the law (and even took the extraordinary step of using the courts to prevent others from enforcing laws he disliked), liberals crowed that "This is what the Founders intended, separation of powers! Congress cannot compel the POTUS to enforce laws the Executive Branch doesn't agree with." Goose... Gander. People need to either be consistent or STFU.

Obama is a deflection, and you strangely ignore that Obama deported more illegal immigrants than any other president - including the current one.

Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to ignore his Constitutional duties, or is it not?

BS! He changed the definition of deporting.

You don't count turning someone away at the border, a deportation!

You people are sick and deluded.

Watch this if you can. Ben talks really fast so stay on your toes.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

Eh, they didn't do it when Obama acted against the COTUS.

Strangely, Obama is no longer President and instead an irrelevant deflection given that we're discussing President Trump.

Either you support the President of the United States disobeying his duties as outlined in the Constitution of the United States, or you do not.

Which is it?

No 'but Obama.'

Tough cookies!

All those years of hearing about how Obama was having to clean of GW's mess, but now we can't talk about Obama and the things he did, or in this case didn't, do.

Whatever.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Greven
Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to ignore his Constitutional duties, or is it not?

We just wrapped up 8 years of being constantly told by liberals and the media that yes, it is OK for the POTUS to ignore his Constitutional duties, so forgive me for being confused as to why this has suddenly changed just because you personally dislike the current POTUS.

FWIW, something I do know, is that Obama's deportation numbers are thanks to the feds changing the way deportation is defined, broadening it tremendously. In reality, Obama enforced immigration law, including shipping illegals back to their country of origin, far less that his predecessors did. President Trump hasn't caught up to his numbers yet, but he's only been in office for a year. He'll pass him by sometime in 2019 or so...

I disliked Hillary as well.

This isn't a difficult question.

Your evasion suggests that you are okay with the President of the United States of America ignoring the Constitution.

Are you or are you not okay with that?

e: Regarding deportation statistics - yes, it was changed; however, this accompanied a change in process under President Bush that fingerprinted and formally deported illegal immigrants who would previously have been stuck on a bus and put back with no deportation proceedings.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

soros is a giant turd in need of flushing
hopefully his days of stealing oxygen will soon end

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

Eh, they didn't do it when Obama acted against the COTUS.

Strangely, Obama is no longer President and instead an irrelevant deflection given that we're discussing President Trump.

Either you support the President of the United States disobeying his duties as outlined in the Constitution of the United States, or you do not.

Which is it?

No 'but Obama.'

Tough #, obama was complicit with the russian collusion from day 1!

You ain't getting away with that BS.

Obama trashed the COTUS and broke everything and now you give a #?

lol.

Oh hey look another "YOU MUST BE THE EVIL OTHER" person.

I'm a Republican, always have been.

Answer the question: is it okay for the President of the United States to ignore the Constitution or not?

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: ketsuko

or enforcement of immigration laws...
or enforcement of federal drug laws...
or internet gambling laws...
or laws pertaining to gay marriage...
or No Child Left Behind...
or intimidating voters (so long as the people doing the intimidating are considered "minorities")...
or delaying the Obamacare Employer Mandate via EO...
or the law that requires layoff notices be issued 60 days in advance (at least when that 60 days puts the layoff notices in American worker's hands immediately prior to the 2012 elections in which Obama needed every vote)...
or the work requirement in the welfare reform law...

When Obama selectively enforced the law (and even took the extraordinary step of using the courts to prevent others from enforcing laws he disliked), liberals crowed that "This is what the Founders intended, separation of powers! Congress cannot compel the POTUS to enforce laws the Executive Branch doesn't agree with." Goose... Gander. People need to either be consistent or STFU.

Obama is a deflection, and you strangely ignore that Obama deported more illegal immigrants than any other president - including the current one.

Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to ignore his Constitutional duties, or is it not?

BS! He changed the definition of deporting.

You don't count turning someone away at the border, a deportation!

You people are sick and deluded.

Watch this if you can. Ben talks really fast so stay on your toes.

Ah yes "you people."

Politics is not a team sport; please stick to actual sports if you are unwilling to answer a simple YES/NO question.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Greven

Eh, they didn't do it when Obama acted against the COTUS.

Strangely, Obama is no longer President and instead an irrelevant deflection given that we're discussing President Trump.

Either you support the President of the United States disobeying his duties as outlined in the Constitution of the United States, or you do not.

Which is it?

No 'but Obama.'

Tough cookies!

All those years of hearing about how Obama was having to clean of GW's mess, but now we can't talk about Obama and the things he did, or in this case didn't, do.

Whatever.

Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?
Yes or No.

Why is this a difficult question that leads members to go off on bizarre tangents in an evasive effort?

Are you politicians???

I think we should arrest Obama and Hillary for collusion with Russia.

They should be arrested for treason.

Then we could punish Russia even worse by sending them there.

a reply to: Greven

daca?

Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?
Yes or No.

Clearly it seems to be fine for some presidents and not for others -- after all, immigration law has been ignored now for at least eight years.

Why is this a difficult question that leads members to go off on bizarre tangents in an evasive effort?

It's only difficult if you don't like the answers you keep getting.

Are you politicians???

No. We just play them on the internet.

a reply to: shooterbrody

DACA is not "yes" or "no" as an answer to the question posed.

a reply to: aethertek

They already did. All but 5 congressmen voted for it.

Trump decided not to enforce them.

originally posted by: aethertek
So now that indictments have been brought against the first foreign agents will the republicans step up to their claims of protecting America or will they be shown for the seditious sellouts we believe them to be.
K~

Nope,

a reply to: Greven

an executive order that is unconstitutional?
or thats not the answer you want?

originally posted by: ketsuko

Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?
Yes or No.

Clearly it seems to be fine for some presidents and not for others -- after all, immigration law has been ignored now for at least eight years.

Why is this a difficult question that leads members to go off on bizarre tangents in an evasive effort?

It's only difficult if you don't like the answers you keep getting.

Are you politicians???

No. We just play them on the internet.

No to being politicians, but again evasive about answering the question.

Yes
-or-
No

"Obama" is not a choice.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Greven

an executive order that is unconstitutional?
or thats not the answer you want?

"Yes" or "No" - those are the options to the question "Is it okay for the President of the United States of America to disobey his or her Constitutional duty?"

Pick one.