Trumps first three National Emergencies...did you even know they existed?

a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The actual statute is 50 USC §1601-§1651.

Trump is well within his rights. Congress has the right to stop the National Emergency if they can pass a joint resolution.

TheRedneck

a reply to: DBCowboy

It's because democrats don't care. Just as long as they vote for leftists. . . .

So answer this question.. when the President of the United States, said that he thanked the Fire dept. for letting 10,000 people into a building that only holds 6,500... and the fire dept said he is lying... who do you believe?

You say democrats don't care... do you? who do you belive on this one?

Number of National Emergencies Declared by recent Presidents:

Clinton - 17

W. Bush -13

Obama - 12

Trump? 1

You folks claiming that taxes, like Federal taxes, would be lessened if immigration was controlled are naive fools. Would you see a break? Maybe.. 1 or 2 bucks? Maybe.. but then, maybe not. Truth is that many immigrants work for large corporations, picking their tomatoes in Florida, or the grapes in Napa. A vast majority (over 50%) are not immigrants who illegally crossed the border. They were already here on work visas.

The hilarious and hypocritical stance that "omg even 1 American dying is too much!" is laughable. Considering most the same folks are flippant when it comes to gun deaths. Gun control? Better vetting? Naw, guns are fine. If EVERYONE had guns, we'd be safe! 20 dying in a church? Pfft.. small numbers when compared to car deaths. I've seen that exact argument countless times.

Yet.. someone gets killed by an immigrant, and it's a NATIONAL EMERGENCY OMG CLOSE THE BORDERS!

Trump doesn't give a crap about immigrants. He cares about him. His wall, his promise, how he looks to his sheep. That is reality.

And as far as the premise that national emergencies are common - yes, they have been all things considered common. National emergencies enacted to bypass the will of congress? NOT common. And that is exactly what Trump is doing. Stop trying to act like this is a normal, common event. It isn't. People are not railing against it because.. Trump. They are against it because it abuses the restrictions created by our Founders to try to prevent an executive from having too much power.

Trump is less political than a potato. Which is why he has to create endless executive orders (although he has no trouble criticizing predecessors for the same), and why he can't handle dealing with Congress, and instead, has to declare a NATIONAL EMERGENCY to get his way.

Sad.

a reply to: vertol

No this is 4 for Trump...check the OP...

a reply to: tinner07

So you want to know who has been affected, do you? I have had friends lose jobs, I have lost jobs, I have seen crimes including murder, prostitution, drug trafficking, and assault with intent. I have met illegal aliens who have lived in the US for twenty years and made no effort to learn English, nor try to gain legal status. I have seen illegal immigrants game the system for fee benefits, including clogging emergency rooms and not paying their bills (and yes, I know for a fact they didn’t pay them) I have seen schools have to hire ESL teachers instead of reducing class size, and I’ve seen twenty year old juniors in high school. I have seen twenty five year old adults dating fifteen year old girls because where they are from it is accepted practice. I have seen wages depressed in fields where Americans supposedly do not want to work, even though no such field exists ( cis.org... ). You say that it shouldn’t matter if a few sneak in, yet it isn’t a few, and there are a healthy percentage that are criminals.

Would you eat from a bowl of 100 jelly beans if I told you even one would kill you?

It is about securing our border, and for many of us, it is simply that. No monument, no hate, no anger. Just a love for our country’s sovereignty that we accept from all other nations as a matter of course except our own.

Immigration is wonderful. It truly is what makes America great. But it is our right to set standards and enforce them. There are millions who would do almost anything to come here legally, yet we let visa jumpers and border jumpers go on unimpeded. I, for one, find it ridiculous and short sighted, if not treasonous and unamerican.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

The actual statute is 50 USC §1601-§1651.

Trump is well within his rights. Congress has the right to stop the National Emergency if they can pass a joint resolution.

TheRedneck

OH yea i see that. Potus has the right to do a lot of things if they are warranted and as usual he is his own worse enemy.

"I did not need to declare an emergency."

It seems that the dems gave potus a green light to launder the money for the wall cause they put aoc in charge of the lawsuit against it.

a reply to: tinner07

What I am not for is a giant concrete wall... And I will be truthful and tell you why... It is not really about the money... throw 10 billion at it and odds are it wont affect my life at all... don't, won't affect me... stop 10,000 illegals from collecting welfare, won't affect me or anybody... either way it will not affect anybody not financially tied to the walls construction... 

The main reason I am against it is honestly I think he wants it as a monument to himself... that is it in a nutshell... honest answer

So, you could care less about money saved, lives saved... What really matters to you, is that you suspect Trump may get some kind of personal enjoyment or honor for doing this great act to protect his country, and you just cant stand for that.

Thank you for having the guts to be honest and admit that.

a reply to: UncleTomahawk

That's not what was said and not the context of what was said. He said, "I did not need to do this..." in reference to the upcoming election.

Someone else didn't watch the speech but paid close attention to CNN telling them what to think about it.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

That's not what was said and not the context of what was said. He said, "I did not need to do this..." in reference to the upcoming election.

Someone else didn't watch the speech but paid close attention to CNN telling them what to think about it.

TheRedneck

No i missed it. I was reading transcript.

"I could do the wall over a longer period of time. I didn't need to do this But I'd rather do it much faster."

Careful with the spin you can make yourself dizzy.

a reply to: UncleTomahawk

No spin, I watched the whole thing live. He was talking about the implications to the upcoming election. That was the context. He also said he did not do it for that reason and didn't need to because he had already built some of the wall and had kept many other campaign promises.

Did you read where several of his generals had said the wall was more critical to national security than the projects money was originally slated for?

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: UncleTomahawk

No spin, I watched the whole thing live. He was talking about the implications to the upcoming election. That was the context. He also said he did not do it for that reason and didn't need to because he had already built some of the wall and had kept many other campaign promises.

Did you read where several of his generals had said the wall was more critical to national security than the projects money was originally slated for?

TheRedneck

You should write fox news and let them know cause they just went over the statement and was saying how it may undo the emergency order in court.

I am not surprised some generals said some things and i am quite sure there are others with different opinions. Anyhow i do not think a judge would take into account what the money was for vs what it is being laundered to do.

yes i know

a reply to: UncleTomahawk

I would have as much luck writing to a donkey and asking it to moo like a cow.

TheRedneck

a reply to: tinner07

Obama said there was not magic wand to bring jobs back either...that was a lie.

Let's go back to the OP.

Why was there no issue with the first 3? Maybe because these were for sanctions.

One for foreign interference in elections - automatic sanctions if evidence found
One for Human rights issues in Nicaragua - Sanctions against past and present officials
One for Human rights in Myanmar- Sanctions against individuals

These were all EO's.

Now, the one that Trump just passed is not an EO. It is an allocation of funds and is a military emergency as far as category. The other 3 were Sanctions.

Now, there are 2 existing USNE's that Trump could also use to allocate funds.

President Obama - Passed in 2011 and still active and approved by Trump is sanction on certain cartels, including one from Mexico. Frozen assets could be used.

President Bush - The only other military USNE was on September 14th. It allows the appropriation of funds for the military.

Now, we have proof of terrorists coming over the border. So, if Congress Decides to say no to Trump there is no way right now they can say no to the "Proclamation 7463 of September 14, 2001, “National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks" too right?

They overplayed their hand again....