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.

 

Dems warn Trump: Next president could call emergency on guns if courts back border order

page: 5
30
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2019 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Dems warn that they want to start a constitutional crisis that could lead to a civil war if they don't get their way. They will engage in revenge politics and they will put the lives of Americans on the line to do it.




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

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: shooterbrody



All Americans, regardless of whether or not you support it, should be in opposition to the emergency order filed by Trump. We should force our elected officials to follow the law, not allow them to run around it just because they couldn’t get it the right way.

That is hilarious as Trump is using the actual law.
The fact that you preferenced it with this:



Do you see it yet? The Republican vs Democrat crap is just a mirage.

is spectacular!



He is not within the constitution though. Power of the purse is the power of congress and they denied him his wall funding. Now the president is bypassing congress to get money he isnt allowed to have or use for that purpose from other things that congress delegated money too.

Just look how the law has been used in the past and you will see this is a gross overstep by the executive.

The laws used have been posted here.
Perhaps Congress should change the law?
Obama did the same thing with hhs and daca.



posted on Mar, 5 2019 @ 01:14 AM
link   
a reply to: F4guy


An amendment is no stronger or weaker than any other provision in the Constitution. One such provision says that no money can be spent except upon being appropriated by Congress.

Can you point out where in the Constitution it says that? I don't see it, so apparently I missed what you saw.

I did find this: Article I Section 7:

1: All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Now how exactly is President Trump violating the Constitution? Is he creating a tax to get money for his wall? If not, then this really doesn't apply.

TheRedneck



posted on Mar, 5 2019 @ 01:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: shooterbrody



All Americans, regardless of whether or not you support it, should be in opposition to the emergency order filed by Trump. We should force our elected officials to follow the law, not allow them to run around it just because they couldn’t get it the right way.

That is hilarious as Trump is using the actual law.
The fact that you preferenced it with this:



Do you see it yet? The Republican vs Democrat crap is just a mirage.

is spectacular!



He is not within the constitution though. Power of the purse is the power of congress and they denied him his wall funding. Now the president is bypassing congress to get money he isnt allowed to have or use for that purpose from other things that congress delegated money too.

Just look how the law has been used in the past and you will see this is a gross overstep by the executive.

The laws used have been posted here.
Perhaps Congress should change the law?
Obama did the same thing with hhs and daca.


I am not seeing where Obama did the same... Other then sanctions, he used the National Emergency Act powers once to allow movement of patients from over crowed hospitals to other facilities during an H1N1 outbreak.



posted on Mar, 5 2019 @ 11:10 AM
link   
I get that Democrats are angry over Trump abusing the National Emergency Act. The border wall, at Trump's own admission, is not a national emergency. In fact, numbers have improved over time. Not to mention that the concept of the wall to solve any immigration, drug, etc. problems that might exist is misguided at best. Yes, it makes sense for the to be some walls along the border, but we have that already. And the wall at El Paso proves that a wall does not necessarily solve anything. In fact, crime went up after the wall was erected there. But that's not the point. The point is that conditions requiring the wall are not a national emergency, thus it is wrong that Trump would attempt to misapply the act in this manner. Quite frankly, if any administration is going to use the National Emergency Act to circumvent the will of Congress or the people, then it should be stricken. And that goes for Trump, too.



posted on Mar, 5 2019 @ 11:57 AM
link   
www.dailysignal.com...



However, the Senate failed to pay for it, and instead approved a $1.1 billion “emergency” spending supplemental bill that is not subject to the budgetary caps that were agreed to last year.




In March, President Obama gave the United Nations $500 million out of an account under bilateral economic assistance to fund the U.N.’s Green Climate Fund. Congress refused to allocate funding for the U.N. Climate Change Fund last year, so the president used this account designated for international infectious diseases to pay for his priority.


At least Trump is using an existing law to do so.



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: tabularosa

You


And the wall at El Paso proves that a wall does not necessarily solve anything. In fact, crime went up after the wall was erected there.


Care to cite a source?

Is the below a different El Paso?


Violent crime in El Paso before and after border fence: Column

JOHN SHJARBACK AND VICTOR MANJARREZ | GUEST COLUMNISTS | 10:00 am MST February 15, 2019

www.elpasotimes.com...

to mention, citing the wall and the wall alone as the impetus behind El Paso’s crime decline actually displays a lack of consideration and appreciation for the men and women in law enforcement across the El Paso border region at all levels — local, county, and federal, such as U.S. Customs and Border Patrol. They undoubtedly have had an impact on reducing the city’s violent crime rate by nearly 500 percentage points over the last few decades and deserve much of the credit.


Actually, looks like an uptick in crime before El Paso’s wall was reconstruction and replacement. The actual reconstruction seems to have resulted in a downward trend in crime rates.



posted on Mar, 6 2019 @ 10:46 PM
link   
They will regain the Presidency at some point and they're going to do it anyway. How many of you are going to turn yours in?

Civil disobedience will become a duty to those of us who are watching.



posted on Mar, 8 2019 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Let's hope it's Andreas OCasio Cortez w running mate Andrew Basiago. That would be a good democracy that actually works for democratic party.

Seeing as she can't Bogart Jill Stein's place for original founding member of Green Party.



posted on Mar, 9 2019 @ 07:46 PM
link   
Lookin forward to it. Let the courts sort it out



posted on Mar, 9 2019 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
There is actually a substantial body of case law on this exact point. The feds cannot use an emergency as an excuse to confiscate guns or register them (outside of regular requirements).

What the Dems are not grasping is, what Trump did is just moving funding around, in a way that is explicitly provided for in Federal law.


Of course they grasp the fact that Trump is using current law. The truth never got in the way of political propaganda before, so why should it now. That is the Democrat party through and through - manipulate, spin, propagandise.



posted on Mar, 9 2019 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: wills120

They will regain the Presidency at some point and they're going to do it anyway. How many of you are going to turn yours in?

Civil disobedience will become a duty to those of us who are watching.


lol you think it's bad now - the US is already lost ... it's going to be a hell hole in 20 years. You'll be eating dog food or catching rats to cook, with Cortez as President and Ilian Omar as VP, lol.
edit on 9/3/2019 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2019 @ 10:11 PM
link   
The drug problem is at the lv of emergency area I live in drug dependency is darn near 50 % as for guns ( how many people were killed last year O right only 11 000 no emergency there ( less killed in war zones ) ( Detroit is a war zone so are a few other city's .
Banning guns wont work that horse got out of the barn 400 years agaio .
putting millions in prisons wont fix the drug problem ( acutely makes it even worse so maybe high time to fight the adduction and do the same as they did with smoking make it unpopular
Climate change is NOT lol even though climate change is real man helped along or natural in the end warmer means more land you can grow on .
so yes it would be good to do something to lessen gun deaths and good to lessen drug problems and good to lessen people crossing the boarders without proper checks .
along with medical which is way way beyond emergency now we know some of the more pressing problems maybe its time to focus on finding ways to reduce them ALL .
a wall may help ( I honestly don't think it will be much of a impact as so many do just over stay visas ) But maybe worth a try ( what's 5 billion out of what we waste ?
what is with you people because a dem says we need to work on these problems they don't matter ?
sound like the other side of the face saying that .
This country has enough BIG problems to keep us bussie for a 100 years .




top topics



 
30
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join