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.

 

Rand Paul's vote likely gives Senate enough to oppose national emergency declaration

page: 3
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 03:16 AM
link   
isn't this the "democracy" and american constitutional republic you patriots fetishise?

or do you want a complete authoritarian power to go to the president





posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 06:34 AM
link   
The real number to worry about is 66 or is it 67 votes in the Senate. 2/3rds vote is required They can't override the veto without 2/3rds of the Senate vote. Without them all this sound and fury from congress is just for show.

And the courts are going to eventually rule the emergency was legal. Just in time for the elections. Showing Trump keeps his promises and Democrats are a bunch of dangerous deep staters and Socialists. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for Occasional Cortex. And that won't play in 45 of the 50 states.
edit on 4-3-2019 by ntech because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: ntech

www.msn.com... ews11



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Good for him. I agree....the president doesn't control the purse strings.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I would submit that using a law that congress passed is in no way attempting to "control the purse strings".
Perhaps congress should remedy the law in question instead of whining when outflanked?



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

The reality is that Trump asked for funding, didn't get funding, approved the resolution anyway, then tried to run an end around.

Do we have an actual budget? Or are we still running off continuing resolutions? If we do not have a budget, how would anyone know what could be afforded for wall building anyway?

None of them are doing their jobs here. But petty politics makes people believe that they ones on "their side" are outmaneuvering "the other side".



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: ntech




And the courts are going to eventually rule the emergency was legal.


On what grounds would they decide that way?

I think that since potus got money for the wall in the spending bill the likely decision will be that since the congress addressed the matter and allotted some funds then any emergency if it exist has been addressed legally through congress.

Short of a serious influx of immigrants from Venezuela or an actual uptic in border crossing numbers and crime there is no emergency since the actual legal verbiage of words like invasion require such invaders to be armed to be considered an emergency.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: shooterbrody

The reality is that Trump asked for funding, didn't get funding, approved the resolution anyway, then tried to run an end around.

Do we have an actual budget? Or are we still running off continuing resolutions? If we do not have a budget, how would anyone know what could be afforded for wall building anyway?

None of them are doing their jobs here. But petty politics makes people believe that they ones on "their side" are outmaneuvering "the other side".

I do not disagree that they are not and have not been doing their jobs for a loooong time now.
Your "tried and end run" is a pretty funny way of describing using an existing law that other presidents have used (precedent anyone). Seems people only get sour when it is the "orange dumb ass" portrayed potus that does these things.
The established law says he can declare an emergency. The established law says in such emergency he can use the military construction budget to remedy said emergency.
Interesting these established laws are now viewed as "unconstitutional".



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

That "end run" is an approved law passed by Congress. Trump took advantage of the law. That's all he did. The complaint right now is only because the law was used for something Congress doesn't want it used for. They're fine about a President using it when they like the agenda; witness what? 58 National Emergencies still in effect?

None of this would be an issue had Nancy Pelosi had a vocabulary of more than the word "no."

Oh, and no, we don't have a budget. The last attempt was another CR. Congress can't even seem to get that right. They claim they want marijuana legalization' they do nothing about it. They claim they want DACA codified; they refuse to propose legislation. They can't pass a budget. What in the world are we paying these people for?

If it weren't for laws like this, we likely wouldn't have a government at all right now. We certainly wouldn't get anything accomplished.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
We certainly wouldn't get anything accomplished.

TheRedneck


And that is fine by me.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

That's hard to argue against.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Yeah the do nothing republicans that opposed obama and the resist democrats that oppose trump are worthy of your praise.

At least Trump got 2 SCOTUS nominees through before the grinding halt.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: ntech
The real number to worry about is 66 or is it 67 votes in the Senate. 2/3rds vote is required They can't override the veto without 2/3rds of the Senate vote. Without them all this sound and fury from congress is just for show.

And the courts are going to eventually rule the emergency was legal. Just in time for the elections. Showing Trump keeps his promises and Democrats are a bunch of dangerous deep staters and Socialists. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for Occasional Cortex. And that won't play in 45 of the 50 states.


They don't even have 2/3rds in the House (245 out of 435, 56%], let alone that in the Senate.

This is all theatrics.



posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: pavil

They were counting on the common core kids to do the math.....
They would have gotten away with it too........



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Duderino

You do realize we are under emergency declarations now , some are hold overs from obama



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join