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.

 

White House Announces 234-Mile Construction Of The Border Wall

page: 17
68
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2019 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: xuenchen

An easily answerable question.


Sure it is.

As long as the answers come from the Elite/Genius class 😎




posted on Feb, 21 2019 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

If you can't answer that, maybe you should have bootstrapped a bit harder and not gotten a subpar education?



posted on Feb, 21 2019 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: xuenchen

If you can't answer that, maybe you should have bootstrapped a bit harder and not gotten a subpar education?


Stop flirting with each other and get a room k? lol.



posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 12:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Toothache


I don't care. The president can still be wrong in his opinion. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's right or valid.

So you don't believe in the law either?

Again, good to know.

TheRedneck


Huh? Your arguments are overly simplistic. You aren't saying anything except that Trump has the power to do it, which I am not arguing against. I am arguing that his competency is in question here and that he made a BAD DECISION. I'm not arguing that Trump can't legally declare a national emergency.

I just wonder how much you hard core Trumpers will squeal about legality when the 25th amendment is invoked. The dude has clear mental issues.


edit on 22-2-2019 by Toothache because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 12:52 AM
link   
I mean look at this guy.



He talks like a child who just came back from his first trip to the zoo. To think this guy is mentally stable is a YUGE stretch.

And then we saw the MONKEYS, and the LIONS! Then we saw the ZEBRAS! And the ELEPHANTS! And the Rhinos! And the Flamingos! And then we got ICE CREAM! Then we saw the BEARS and Donkeys!

I mean forget using proper sentence structure, he's only the president. He should be allowed full power to appease his whims.

Here is the funny version with musical accompaniment.

twitter.com...


edit on 22-2-2019 by Toothache because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: xuenchen

If you can't answer that, maybe you should have bootstrapped a bit harder and not gotten a subpar education?


My mind was a terrible thing to waste 😎



posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 04:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Toothache


Your arguments are overly simplistic. You aren't saying anything except that Trump has the power to do it, which I am not arguing against. I am arguing that his competency is in question here and that he made a BAD DECISION.

You are entitled to your opinion, but the simple fact is that being legal does make an action valid. Right or wrong are of no consequence here, because that is based on inner morality. The law is not constrained by your morality, nor by your opinions.

As much as you believe he made a bad decision, there are others, like me, who believe he made a good decision. As much as you are allowed to think it was a bad decision, we are allowed to think it was a good decision. Neither opinion has any legitimate bearing on the law. You need to understand that, because your earlier statement about validity indicated you do not.

Your mention of the 25th Amendment reinforces this. The 25th Amendment is not even remotely applicable at this time... it's only possible relevance would be a misuse of that power to remove a President for purely political reasons, denying in the process the will of the people who elected him... a coup d'etat. Are you in favor of a US coup d'etat?

TheRedneck



posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 08:57 AM
link   
Try a reply to: TheRedneck

Trump cannot be removed via the 25. Acting cabinet officials don’t have a vote. If over 50% of the cabinet is acting it cannot ever be applied. This is a loophole in the law, but it is still the law... and another example of how many aspects of our government rely on good faith, and when someone doesn’t govern in good faith it all breaks.



posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I know that; you know that. I wish the anti-Trump people knew that.

According to the 25th Amendment, Pence can assume the duties of President if he and a majority of agency heads transmit their intent to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House. But all Trump has to do is send the same people a rebuttal to block it. If Pence and a majority of agency heads send a second letter of intent, then Trump can be ousted... by a 2.3 supermajority of both houses of Congress. That won't happen. But there are still people who believe it will. Apparently, CNN still has a large following.

Even if by some miracle, Trump were to be removed by the 25th Amendment, Pence would still be President, and he is more conservative than Trump ever was. Pence would then appoint a new Vice President, and Nancy Pelosi would still be two heartbeats away from the Presidency, not one. That particular maneuver already happened when Spiro Agnew resigned as VP under Nixon. Nixon pardoned him, appointed Gerald Ford, resigned himself, and Ford became President, appointed his own VP, and pardoned Nixon.

The only way 25th Amendment can be invoked is if the President is so incapacitated he cannot send a rebuttal, or the Congress so completely against him that two thirds of both houses are willing to override the people. We're a long from that even in the condition we're in. Now if someone would explain that to the MSM...

TheRedneck



posted on Feb, 22 2019 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Perfect GOP standard bearer.




posted on Feb, 23 2019 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Toothache

So many things wrong with this. I'll just go with three
1) You didn't post a link to the source of your image
2) When did we do the secure fence act of 2006? was it 2006? weird how the chart tapers after pretty hard after that, almost like barriers work. Who woulda thunk???
3) None of this has anything to do with obama telling ICE to stand down, which means it doesn't disprove anything. All it does is prove that barriers work. Especially that third chart.



posted on Feb, 25 2019 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
1) You didn't post a link to the source of your image


www.pewhispanic.org...


2) When did we do the secure fence act of 2006? was it 2006? weird how the chart tapers after pretty hard after that, almost like barriers work. Who woulda thunk???


Trump was originally talking like he was building the great wall of china, not just fencing. I have no problem with extending fences.


3) None of this has anything to do with obama telling ICE to stand down, which means it doesn't disprove anything. All it does is prove that barriers work. Especially that third chart.


So 2 of your points were the same point.

My point was that illegal immigration has been declining for a decade, thus does not really seem worthy of a national emergency. Trump could have easily funded this earlier before congress flipped. He could have had $24m last year for the project. I wasn't arguing that fences don't do anything, but there are ways around it. It's not a wall.

edit on 25-2-2019 by Toothache because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2019 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Toothache

I think we're to a point on most of our discussion where we either agree or will have to agree to disagree but I do want to address one fallacy that is brought up all too often and that's this:



Trump could have easily funded this earlier before congress flipped.


No he could not. Funding bills require 60 votes in the senate, they were further from getting wall funding, due to this, before the election. Republicans only had 51 votes now they have 53. The house is fractured and much easier to get people to flip votes. If they're in a vulnerable district and trump can lay the lack of wall funding at their feet, when their constituents support it (see ben mcadams in utah for an example) they're easy to flip. It's much more difficult to pressure a statewide elected official.



posted on Feb, 25 2019 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Democrats offered him well over 60 votes in exchange for funding dreamers (which was only a problem because Trump screwed them over in the first place). And they offered him $25 billion. Being the expert negotiator that he is, he turned it down thinking he would be able to get more. After that he lost all negotiating leverage and no sensible Republican, and no Democrats wanted anything to do with it.



posted on Feb, 26 2019 @ 04:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

That never happened. In fact trump offered them that and the dems are the ones that turned it down.
Here's the proof
And here's proof trump didn't turn it down, chucky rescinded his offer.

In fact he offered them that again this year, but they again refused to budge (even for 5 billion, guess dreamers aren't worth much to the dems).

The dems are so scared of the wall and actually securing the border literally nothing will be enough. Trump, the master negotiator, has made this abundantly clear. The dems are anti-america and that's all there is to it.
edit on 26-2-2019 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2019 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

The reason they didn’t budge is they’re not going to reward him for a negotiating strategy of purposefully hurting people and then saying he’ll stop if he gets paid.

That is extortion.



posted on Feb, 27 2019 @ 02:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

So was it extortion last year when chuck shut the government down over the same issue but for the opposite reason?



posted on Mar, 1 2019 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Let's Build a wall around them, then take their guns away!

Oh dear ! Anyone else see whats happening here!

Next thing you know they will turn off the internet and stop you leaving.



posted on Mar, 13 2019 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Looks like REX-84 may have a use after all

Seems they are leaving us with very little choice in the matter. Something has to be done to handle this, and letting unknown actors with unknowable intent remain here just isn't an answer

The interest of our nation must be put first, humanitarian concerns are important but must always take a backseat (along with everything else) to the sovereignty of our nation and dominance of our Constitution.

In order:

1) The Constitution & nation's sovereignty
2) Rule of law & legitimacy of our justice system
3) Humanitarian concerns + all other issues




top topics



 
68
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join