It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

President Trump Says He May Declare a National Emergency to Get The US-Mex Border Wall Built.

page: 5
56
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: SilentSaturn
I've seen some estimates that predict that wall's maintenance by year 7 will cost more than the wall's original construction costs. The problem with that is, they don't even have a design or plot map in place for this proposed "wall".


If you listened to the President's hour long press briefing/Q&A today, you would know that much of that is already taken care of. Land continues to be purchased, and the barrier will be mostly steel, but some sections will be Concrete.




posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Guyfriday

I don't know why Pelosi was upset over her aid declaring that Artic Ice was preventing wall construction, but just fine with her brand new protegee screaming, "Impeach the Mutha Phucka!", less than 10 hours after being sworn in.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 10:49 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


Unfortunately, the President's words in a lengthy and rambling spotlight grab aren't necessarily trustworthy. What was taken care of before has nothing to do with his future wall plans, especially the lack thereof, and specific land plots, wall designs, etc., that are still yet in the very beginnings of the research and development process.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Bhadhidar

Yes...people die at the hands of other people all the time. Directly (Murder, Drunk Driving), and Indirectly ( Drugs, Fast Food).

You can't tackle all causes of deaths at the same time. Nothing at all would be done. You have to focus on one problem until the threat is reduced as much as possible.

Right now, the "problem" keeping our government partially shut-down, is the unwillingness of Democrats to save American lives by enabling construction of a border wall.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

It's better to plan the wall, and start buying up the land needed, before the $5.6 Billion arrives, rather than afterwards.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: WhyDidIJoin
a reply to: okrian
I completely agree with this tactic. The military shouldn't be used to defend someone else's border (which was the precedent set in WW1), they should be used to defend their own borders and sovereignty.


Reading your wise words made me realize that post World War II, our military has saved more lives of foreigners than they have American lives.

Thanks for that mental nudge!



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 11:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Bhadhidar

Yes...people die at the hands of other people all the time. Directly (Murder, Drunk Driving), and Indirectly ( Drugs, Fast Food).

You can't tackle all causes of deaths at the same time. Nothing at all would be done. You have to focus on one problem until the threat is reduced as much as possible.

Right now, the "problem" keeping our government partially shut-down, is the unwillingness of Democrats to save American lives by enabling construction of a border wall.



So, instead of focusing on the problem(s) causing the most deaths “until the threat is reduced as much as possible” as you put it, you suggest that we focus on the (relatively) smaller problem, thus allowing the larger problem to grow even larger.

This is the logic of the right?

I would posit that right now, the “problem” keeping our government partially shut-down is the unwillingness of the under-qualified (to the point of incompetence) current occupant of Office of POTUs to own up to his overheated hyperbole and negotiate a workable compromise.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Sookiechacha

It's better to plan the wall, and start buying up the land needed, before the $5.6 Billion arrives, rather than afterwards.


I wonder if that argument would be effective against those conservative critics of California’s current efforts to build a high-speed railway?

Specifically, it is better to plan the project and start buying up the land needed before the funding arrives rather than afterwards.

They seem to disagree with that reasoning.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 11:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Bhadhidar

When I realized that whining about Obama wouldn't get me/America anywhere, I began working with the local Trump campaign, late in 2015.

I hope that you too will come to realize the futility of whining, and begin working to help get your preferred Trump replacement elected in 2020.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 11:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Bhadhidar

If they knew that the funding was "in the bag" for the rail system, there would be zero risk to planning and purchasing ahead of time. I don't know anything about California's proposed rail system. First I've heard of it, in fact.



posted on Jan, 4 2019 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Business as usual is just going to get more Americans killed by Terrorist organizations.

A Hispanic friend of mine who had relatives still living in Mexico informed me that after the 9/11 attacks many down there wanted to join that Terrorist movement.



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

What if the next president uses that as precedent to declare health a national emergency?

Or gun violence?



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 01:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: carewemust

What if the next president uses that as precedent to declare health a national emergency?

Or gun violence?


That would be horrid. Imagine if a sitting President declared a National Emergency over something that doesn't even involve the US?
Oh... nevermind, I guess I'm just being racist Obama's White House Archives


Pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), I hereby report that I have issued an Executive Order (the "order") declaring a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by the situation in Venezuela. The order does not target the people of Venezuela, but rather is aimed at persons involved in or responsible for the erosion of human rights guarantees, persecution of political opponents, curtailment of press freedoms, use of violence and human rights violations and abuses in response to antigovernment protests, and arbitrary arrest and detention of antigovernment protestors, as well as the exacerbating presence of significant public corruption in that country. In addition to taking action under IEEPA, the order implements the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-278) (the "Act"), which I signed on December 18, 2014, and delegates certain of its authorities.


Just for fun let's look at these gems:
Also archives from the Obama White House


edit on 5-1-2019 by Guyfriday because: Removed a wierd typo



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 01:44 AM
link   
President Trump sent an important "border briefing" letter yesterday (Friday).

See it here: theconservativetreehouse.com... er-security-briefing-to-congress/



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: carewemust

What if the next president uses that as precedent to declare health a national emergency?

Or gun violence?


It wouldn't be the first time, or the last time such a declaration was made.

See here: www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 01:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Guyfriday

So you agree.

Presidents should not be doing this.

Or do you think that powers should be granted to some presidents and not others?
edit on 5-1-2019 by scraedtosleep because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

How do you feel about the president having such powers?

Should it continue?



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 01:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Guyfriday

So you agree.

Presidents should not be doing this.

Or do you think that powers should be granted to some presidents and no others?


I think the President should be using the "National Emergency" declarations for issues that affect the people of the US and not none sense issues. This is a National Security issue that affects the American populace so a National Emergency Declaration is justified. As I stated before, we have done more over less when it comes to boarder issues (Battle of Columbus New Mexico, March 9, 1916)



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 01:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: carewemust

How do you feel about the president having such powers?

Should it continue?


If the President of the United States, who is the supreme commander of the military, isn't allowed to have Emergency Declaration powers, should anyone in our government?



posted on Jan, 5 2019 @ 02:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Guyfriday




This is a National Security issue

I disagree.

Who should be the one that decides if something is a national emergency though?
The potus?
The scotus?
The congress.

Maybe the people should have a vote? ----That would be my choice.







 
56
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join