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.

 

Trump declares national emergency over wall

page: 20
28
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 03:22 PM
link   
It doesn't make much sense to me. He's not asking for a lot of money considering what the US wastes or gives away to foreign countries every year. Even countries that hate the US. Just to extend the wall and help secure the border? I think he should push for volunteerism or help college students with their tuition if they help construct the wall.




posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris

He can use the military construction budget unfettered



No, he can not.

Congress decides how money is spent, not the President. That is what the constitution dictates.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris

Why would the cic have to justify anything to the sec def or the sec army?
They follow his orders.



Correct.

But according to your own post and link
"no powers or authorities made available by statute for use in the event of an emergency shall be exercised unless and until the President specifies the provisions of law under which he proposes that he, or other officers will act."


The two provisions he can apply are (1)

One allows the secretary of defense to start a military program if it is needed to support armed forces.

The problem here is that there is no real evidence that the armed forces need a wall to support them. Instead, the reverse may be true, you need armed forces to build a wall.


AND (2)


The second statute allows the secretary of the Army to direct troops and resources “that are essential to the national defense.”

Here, again, we have a problem. There is scant evidence to indicate that a border wall is in fact essential to the national defense.


He has no "provisions of law under which he proposes that he, or other officers will act" that would survive a 30 minute court hearing.

So his "Emergency Declaration" is rhetorical fluff about as likely to happen as MEXICO paying for the wall.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Trump may have shot himself in the foot with his press conference. He actually said "I didn't need to do this now. I could have waited".

That doesn't sound like an emergency.
edit on 15/2/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
he did exactly what the Dems wanted him to do. He rejected offer after offer for less wall money than he wanted, ultimately signed a budget agreement with almost no wall money (about 55 mile worth, but you know it will be less) and now he's moved to the "national emergency" which will be held up for years in litigation.

Art of the Deal my ass.

I just don't know what I'm supposed to believe from the right. Is there a crisis at the border, or are illegal crossings at all time lows? They tout both claims...


So 55 miles is OK but 275 is immoral...this is what he is dealing with...lol



It doesn't matter if it is 5 feet of wall or 2000 miles.
Congress decides on spending, so says the founding fathers and the constitution.

Yes, Trump has to deal with Congress and the power the constitution granted them instead of the President, to do otherwise is to act like a spoiled 3rd world dictator.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


I agree with this lawyer @4:55




posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Wayfarer

Doesn't matter, with the emergency the wall will be mostly done by 2020 elections. It'll be his re election campaign, to finish the wall. He's already started it. We all know that no dem or other republican would finish it, so trump has ensured his re-election as of today.


If they want to get it done by 2020, perhaps they should start finalizing the real estate deals. It's not all BLM land you know. Some of the ranchers don want no stinkin wall because their cattle use the Rio Grande as the main source of water.

And eminent domain cases can take years. I know practical considerations aren't as much fun as chanting "build the wall" but they have to be considered before the contractors and vendors can sign the contracts.
edit on 15-2-2019 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-2-2019 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

Yes, Trump has to deal with Congress and the power the constitution granted them instead of the President, to do otherwise is to act like a spoiled 3rd world dictator.


My response was to the "Art of the Deal my ass" comment... but anyhow, can we say all sides are within their rights to use the powers they have available to them? Your remarks above sound like a Pelosi talking point...lol



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig


However, if the President wins, then here is the thing to consider, it sets a precedent that will come back to haunt many who would support the current President, and that is that any President can thus do such, including on issues like say gun violence, and there will be nothing to stop that sitting president.

You sure you want this to go through?

Yep, I'm sick of the dems holding this country hostage on issues the majority of this country wants addressed. Just like Pelosi threatening this country to take away a constitutional right that "shall not be infringed" or dems going against increasing our border security that is severely needed and effecting many American citizens in a very negative way and people like Water's calling for violence against her own countrymen. Spin it however you want, It's just more BS political games the dems are playing at the detriment of this country's citizens in order to get their way.

So....yeah, scumbags like Pelosi, Schumer, Waters and the people in the democratic party supporting this childish BS, can go pound freaking sand as far as I'm concerned. I'm done with these backstabbing a-holes and their f'd up agenda and ideologies they're trying to force on this country, without a care in the world for the well being of the very people they were elected to serve and protect.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:28 PM
link   
I find it interesting that the spending bill allocates money towards Israel and Jordan for their walls, yet here we are with our wall.

Interesting..

So I guess only some walls are immoral?

Like if they stem the flow of new Dem votes?



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Extorris

Yes, Trump has to deal with Congress and the power the constitution granted them instead of the President, to do otherwise is to act like a spoiled 3rd world dictator.


My response was to the "Art of the Deal my ass" comment... but anyhow, can we say all sides are within their rights to use the powers they have available to them? Your remarks above sound like a Pelosi talking point...lol


No, my remarks are a constitutional reality and not one of those provisions left open to interpretation. Congress decides on appropriating funds, not the president.

President Obama certainly had to deal with a GOP Congress holding the purse strings just like every President ever.
The proposal by Trump Supporters that the most consistently unpopular President in History, or any President ever, deserves a special pass to circumvent our constitution is ridiculous. Really I am embarrassed for Trump and all his supporters that they took the effort this far.
It exposes them as both unamerican and ineffective at the same time.
edit on 15-2-2019 by Extorris because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Extorris




legal description of National Emergency

that would be whatever the potus designates

there is no qualifier in the law
quit posting the lie that there is


Of course the President is not forbidden from making the declaration, but the declaration will never take effect because it fails the legal test.



Once President Trump declares a national emergency, what is the next step? He should point to specific statutory authority to get the resources and funds he needs to build a wall.

There are two statutes that he is most likely to use. One allows the secretary of defense to start a military program if it is needed to support armed forces. The problem here is that there is no real evidence that the armed forces need a wall to support them. Instead, the reverse may be true, you need armed forces to build a wall. The second statute allows the secretary of the Army to direct troops and resources “that are essential to the national defense.” Here, again, we have a problem. There is scant evidence to indicate that a border wall is in fact essential to the national defense.


The trouble with this guy's statement is that there isn't "scant evidence".

At present our nation depends on criminal organizations not to allow terrorists through our southern border. It is abundantly clear that, if the Cartels want to, they can let them through. We're just hoping they don't want to.

I don't think hoping a criminal organization doesn't want to hurt us is a very secure position for our nation to be in.

We should put ourselves in a position where were are not dependent on that.

Otherwise we're caught between a rock and a hard place.

Rock: Cartels use their position as leverage to get away with murdering American citizens the way they get away with murdering Mexican citizens on a regular basis.

Hard Place: We refuse to let them leverage anything. They let a single terrorist group in to teach us a lesson.

There is no third good outcome here. (Other than building a wall.)





www.vox.com...

But hey, at least he stroked his base by violating the constitution, trying to usurp congresses congressional authority over spending.

Shored up the fascists among his base, but it actually has ZERO chance of ever being implemented.

The only thing President Trump has consistently succeeded at is embarrassing the United States and most of all his own supporters.


He made the dems own the shutdown, by being the first to cave. He knows what he's doing.

He did it to show he had exhausted every normal option. (It obviously wasn't going to work. It just made Pelosi look like a lunatic.)



edit on 15-2-2019 by bloodymarvelous because: fix quotes

edit on 15-2-2019 by bloodymarvelous because: quotes, spelling



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: mtnshredder


So....yeah, scumbags like Pelosi, Schumer, Waters and the people in the democratic party supporting this childish BS, can go pound freaking sand as far as I'm concerned. I'm done with these backstabbing a-holes and their f'd up agenda and ideologies they're trying to force on this country, without a care in the world for the well being of the very people they were elected to serve and protect.


Not just the democrats its supporters as well, I cant call any of these far left open border people who visit ATS a countryman of mine. Im not gonna lie I despise all of them and spit in their direction. I don't want civility with them anymore because talking with them does no good, thousands of lines of debate and none of them change their anti American views. And on top of that they have attempted a coup that's basically been admitted already.

They claim they want border security but not a wall, they don't want any border security at all they lie through their commie teeth.

They want the country to collapse and in chaos so they can implement their communist agenda. Here is the tenets of the democrat party and its supporters:

study.com... ZniY10Bw3I



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

How to put this?

Walls do not effect drug traffic. No drug lord straps 10 Million dollars to an immigrants back and sends them through the desert with fingers crossed.

Trump's own DHS and DEA have made it clear that drugs come in through ports of entry (e.g. fake gas tanks or tankers with secret compartments filled with some chemical, planes and corrupt baggage handlers) Or sea where the coast guard is seriously understaffed and just last month said they only have the boats and manpower to intercept only 25% of suspected drug traffic they can spot on radar.
Now, if you are talking about modern drugs they come via shipments from Chinese chemical factories, if you are talking about Meth, Appalachia is the manufacturing center of the USA.

Secondly, criminals MS13 and other orgs also don't send people trudging through the dessert. They send them through ports of entry if they have good papers, if not they send them through tunnels or by boat, but more to the point they are multi-billion dollar enterprises and can easily recruit and employ legal Americans for work that needs to be done on American soil.

A wall fixes NONE of that. It is not only dumb campaign rhetoric, but it saps desperate resources from Law Enforcement and Coast Guard that could otherwise use it for more manpower, technology resources for Airports and Ports of Entry at the Border to detect drugs, DEA to disrupt and disassemble criminal orgs etc



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

How to put this?

Walls do not effect drug traffic. No drug lord straps 10 Million dollars to an immigrants back and sends them through the desert with fingers crossed.

Trump's own DHS and DEA have made it clear that drugs come in through ports of entry (e.g. fake gas tanks or tankers with secret compartments filled with some chemical, planes and corrupt baggage handlers) Or sea where the coast guard is seriously understaffed and just last month said they only have the boats and manpower to intercept only 25% of suspected drug traffic they can spot on radar.
Now, if you are talking about modern drugs they come via shipments from Chinese chemical factories, if you are talking about Meth, Appalachia is the manufacturing center of the USA.

Secondly, criminals MS13 and other orgs also don't send people trudging through the dessert. They send them through ports of entry if they have good papers, if not they send them through tunnels or by boat, but more to the point they are multi-billion dollar enterprises and can easily recruit and employ legal Americans for work that needs to be done on American soil.

A wall fixes NONE of that. It is not only dumb campaign rhetoric, but it saps desperate resources from Law Enforcement and Coast Guard that could otherwise use it for more manpower, technology resources for Airports and Ports of Entry at the Border to detect drugs, DEA to disrupt and disassemble criminal orgs etc


The wall is designed to stop people from entering the country through illegal point of entry, where there is close to zero security. It isn't designed to slow the flow of drug-traffic and illegal immigration through legal points of entry. I'm not sure why critics of the wall keep trying to say otherwise.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

They let a single terrorist group in to teach us a lesson.



Please.

It is amazing that some folks think that the danger of terrorist attacks is something we can stop with a wall.

The danger is that AMERICANS are for sale ideologically, financially, morally and just as vulnerable to being radicalized as anyone else and perhaps a little more likely to be batsh*& crazy than the average foreigner.

"They" don't need to sneak someone across a border anymore. That is very outdated thinking.

List of Terrorist Attacks since 2010.
Tell me which ones were Illegal Immigrants sneaking across a border.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

How to put this?

Walls do not effect drug traffic. No drug lord straps 10 Million dollars to an immigrants back and sends them through the desert with fingers crossed.

Trump's own DHS and DEA have made it clear that drugs come in through ports of entry (e.g. fake gas tanks or tankers with secret compartments filled with some chemical, planes and corrupt baggage handlers) Or sea where the coast guard is seriously understaffed and just last month said they only have the boats and manpower to intercept only 25% of suspected drug traffic they can spot on radar.
Now, if you are talking about modern drugs they come via shipments from Chinese chemical factories, if you are talking about Meth, Appalachia is the manufacturing center of the USA.

Secondly, criminals MS13 and other orgs also don't send people trudging through the dessert. They send them through ports of entry if they have good papers, if not they send them through tunnels or by boat, but more to the point they are multi-billion dollar enterprises and can easily recruit and employ legal Americans for work that needs to be done on American soil.

A wall fixes NONE of that. It is not only dumb campaign rhetoric, but it saps desperate resources from Law Enforcement and Coast Guard that could otherwise use it for more manpower, technology resources for Airports and Ports of Entry at the Border to detect drugs, DEA to disrupt and disassemble criminal orgs etc


The wall is designed to stop people from entering the country through illegal point of entry, where there is close to zero security. It isn't designed to slow the flow of drug-traffic and illegal immigration through legal points of entry. I'm not sure why critics of the wall keep trying to say otherwise.


According to Trump's own heads of DHS and DEA and Border Control, Drugs do not flow through "Illegal points of entry".

You seem to be speaking in a rhetorical circle.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

They let a single terrorist group in to teach us a lesson.



Please.

It is amazing that some folks think that the danger of terrorist attacks is something we can stop with a wall.

The danger is that AMERICANS are for sale ideologically, financially, morally and just as vulnerable to being radicalized as anyone else and perhaps a little more likely to be batsh*& crazy than the average foreigner.

"They" don't need to sneak someone across a border anymore. That is very outdated thinking.

List of Terrorist Attacks since 2010.
Tell me which ones were Illegal Immigrants sneaking across a border.

en.wikipedia.org...



That's right. Hence why we don't need to import more through illegal points of entry where there are no security checks and documentation required.



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

How to put this?

Walls do not effect drug traffic. No drug lord straps 10 Million dollars to an immigrants back and sends them through the desert with fingers crossed.

Trump's own DHS and DEA have made it clear that drugs come in through ports of entry (e.g. fake gas tanks or tankers with secret compartments filled with some chemical, planes and corrupt baggage handlers) Or sea where the coast guard is seriously understaffed and just last month said they only have the boats and manpower to intercept only 25% of suspected drug traffic they can spot on radar.
Now, if you are talking about modern drugs they come via shipments from Chinese chemical factories, if you are talking about Meth, Appalachia is the manufacturing center of the USA.

Secondly, criminals MS13 and other orgs also don't send people trudging through the dessert. They send them through ports of entry if they have good papers, if not they send them through tunnels or by boat, but more to the point they are multi-billion dollar enterprises and can easily recruit and employ legal Americans for work that needs to be done on American soil.

A wall fixes NONE of that. It is not only dumb campaign rhetoric, but it saps desperate resources from Law Enforcement and Coast Guard that could otherwise use it for more manpower, technology resources for Airports and Ports of Entry at the Border to detect drugs, DEA to disrupt and disassemble criminal orgs etc


The wall is designed to stop people from entering the country through illegal point of entry, where there is close to zero security. It isn't designed to slow the flow of drug-traffic and illegal immigration through legal points of entry. I'm not sure why critics of the wall keep trying to say otherwise.


According to Trump's own heads of DHS and DEA and Border Control, Drugs do not flow through "Illegal points of entry".

You seem to be speaking in a rhetorical circle.


I never said they did. You seem to be misrepresenting me.

You also seem to be confusing entering a country through legal points of entry vs border hopping. One has security checks, where legal documentation is required, while the other doesn't. Which one will the border wall secure?
edit on 15-2-2019 by MadLad because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2019 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: MadLad

originally posted by: Extorris

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

They let a single terrorist group in to teach us a lesson.



Please.

It is amazing that some folks think that the danger of terrorist attacks is something we can stop with a wall.

The danger is that AMERICANS are for sale ideologically, financially, morally and just as vulnerable to being radicalized as anyone else and perhaps a little more likely to be batsh*& crazy than the average foreigner.

"They" don't need to sneak someone across a border anymore. That is very outdated thinking.

List of Terrorist Attacks since 2010.
Tell me which ones were Illegal Immigrants sneaking across a border.

en.wikipedia.org...



That's right. Hence why we don't need to import more through illegal points of entry where there are no security checks and documentation required.


Then why not wall off Canada? That would be as equally effective in reducing risks from the non-existent illegal-immigrant-terrorist threat.




top topics



 
28
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join