And just like that Trump caves.

a reply to: Blarneystoner


Same thought

It's one thing to shut down the gvt
it's another to be seen to restrict,
then close ÜS air traffic

All on Trumps watch ...

Polls are indicating a huge deperdition for Trump votes in '20

At one time, the GOP had total control of all branches
- a first in almost a century - yet they've achieved nothing
They're now heading for a bust of massive propportions

Again, on Trump's Watch

They should disown him
let him fly on an independant ticket
See where that gets him...

a reply to: F4guy
so, are you telling us National emergencies are only for when we need to impose sanctions and/or deploy troops on foreign countries? Because many of the existing 30 national emergencies, well thats what comprises alot of them.

In fact, Obama is actually the one that Declared a National Emergency against Venezuela in 2014 which made sanctions on people in his government possible.

So I again ask, National emergency, are they reserved only for foreign interventions?? At what point can they be used to actually secure our nation domestically, here on this land?? Could you please answer this for me?

Hopefully you are already aware that there are over two dozen National Emergencies in effect ...

a reply to: Cassi3l

You and I are living in different worlds. I see the democrats losing here and losing big.

a reply to: soundguy

At least wait 3 weeks and I will agree with you. But thats not really what you are after is it? You know you need to kick while the kicking is good.

a reply to: TinySickTears

No, both are a problem. Breaking the law is one problem, no vetting is another. The security issue comes from the lack of vetting.

Donald is hoping for something that we may not know about, otherwise he would not have stopped the shutdown. Maybe he has a 10 of cards up his sleeve.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: F4guy
so, are you telling us National emergencies are only for when we need to impose sanctions and/or deploy troops on foreign countries? Because many of the existing 30 national emergencies, well thats what comprises alot of them.

In fact, Obama is actually the one that Declared a National Emergency against Venezuela in 2014 which made sanctions on people in his government possible.

So I again ask, National emergency, are they reserved only for foreign interventions?? At what point can they be used to actually secure our nation domestically, here on this land?? Could you please answer this for me?

Hopefully you are already aware that there are over two dozen National Emergencies in effect ...

The key to understanding Youngstown and its progeny is to recoognize that the Exxecutive can "declare" an emergency whenever it wants but the fact of the "declaration does not allow the Executive to usurp the prerogatives of the Legislative Branch. Under the Constituton it is the prerogative of Congress to appropriate money for specific projects. The President's power to ignore those appropriations is limited. I suggest that you carefully read the Youngstown case and then use Shepards citations to find the cases that cited and expounded that case. The most recent of these following cases is Hamdan v Rumsfeld which limited the President's power to use military tribunals in supposed terrorist cases.

a reply to: F4guy
Redirecting the money from existing DOD budget should be easy. We simply cancel a handful of joint military war games for the year. Those things are quite expensive, and we basically are running them non-stop with scores of nations the world over.

We could also de-fund the Global Engagement Center. Doing so would also lead to a steep reduction in TDS, as it is the media's partnerships with the GEC that are the reason everyone is being programmed to only focus on Trump and not the rest of the matters our foreign policy is moving towards.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: F4guy
Redirecting the money from existing DOD budget should be easy. We simply cancel a handful of joint military war games for the year. Those things are quite expensive, and we basically are running them non-stop with scores of nations the world over.

We could also de-fund the Global Engagement Center. Doing so would also lead to a steep reduction in TDS, as it is the media's partnerships with the GEC that are the reason everyone is being programmed to only focus on Trump and not the rest of the matters our foreign policy is moving towards.

In addition to the problem that your plan, while ingenious, violates the US Code provisions regarding line item appropriation, it also ignores the fact that the land needed for the medieval wall is mostly private property. You might think eminent domain solves that problem, but the eminent domain power reposes in the legislative branch of the government and may not be exercised unless the legislature has authorized its use by statutes that specify who may use it and for what purposes. The legislature may take private property directly by passing an Act transferring title to the government. So Trump's desire for a unitary executive is frustrated by the Senate and the House. I think my sixth grade teacher referred to this as "checks and balances."

originally posted by: InTheLight
Donald is hoping for something that we may not know about, otherwise he would not have stopped the shutdown. Maybe he has a 10 of cards up his sleeve.

I think he was never planning to win. Just go to the brink.

(He couldn't have honestly believed he was going to win.)

Make the democrats look crazier than him. At this point we KNOW he was only willing to go 35 days. A limit a determined but reasonable person would not go past.

For all we know, the democrats might have been willing to go for a year.

So why were they so determined to stop a 6 billion dollar expenditure?

originally posted by: InTheLight
Donald is hoping for something that we may not know about, otherwise he would not have stopped the shutdown. Maybe he has a 10 of cards up his sleeve.

I think he was never planning to win. Just go to the brink.

(He couldn't have honestly believed he was going to win.)

Make the democrats look crazier than him. At this point we KNOW he was only willing to go 35 days. A limit a determined but reasonable person would not go past.

For all we know, the democrats might have been willing to go for a year.

So why were they so determined to stop a 6 billion dollar expenditure?

originally posted by: soundguy
No wall funding for you mr. tRump. Congratulations to Chuck and Nancy for getting the man baby to finally wake up and smell the votes. Then again, maybe the the mueller should get the credit. He needed to get stone out of the headlines quick and what better way than to cave on the wall.

The ignorance on display is really something...

It is really going to be interesting watching the fireworks when Trump actually pulls the trigger and builds the wall.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Well at least it's over.

Really? You have an interesting definition of 'over' (= 3 week temporary reprieve)...

a reply to: Wayfarer

I know who's team you're on now.

a reply to: soundguy

Well Trump has his wall Funding!

Where are you at now huh? Do you ever get tired of being wrong? Tired of losing yet?