grinreaper Posted February 14, 2019 Posted February 14, 2019 40 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: How many inches was he? FIFY
IDBillzFan Posted February 14, 2019 Posted February 14, 2019 31 minutes ago, DC Tom said: The problem with this is that it's expanding a precedent, that has until now been used for trivialities, to a dangerous degree. What happens, for example, when the next Democrat in the White House decides to bypass Congressional oversight of funding by declaring Climate Change a National Emergency? This is why I'm not a fan of declaring an emergency. The dude has access to all the money he needs to build the wall. Sign the deal, switch money around, build the wall, claim victory during your 2020 campaign, and stop with the stupidity. 2
row_33 Posted February 14, 2019 Posted February 14, 2019 51 minutes ago, TH3 said: You said climate change is a hoax too....so there is that yes, the temperature changes a lot, the stock market rises and falls as well
IDBillzFan Posted February 14, 2019 Posted February 14, 2019 46 minutes ago, TH3 said: You said climate change is a hoax too....so there is that That's crazy. Climate changes every day. Why would he think that's a hoax?
DC Tom Posted February 14, 2019 Posted February 14, 2019 41 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: That's my concern as well, and one I've expressed to some of the people I speak with. The response I was given (these conversations were just shooting the *****, for clarity) was they are just as concerned by this and have ways to work around that. I don't know what that means, which is why I have been speculating for the past two weeks that the NE is a feint. I think there's a chance the money/plan will come about without one being declared - or the NE being declared won't be about the border - otherwise I don't know how you avoid setting a dangerous precedent. Probably a declaration over opioids. It's probably not coincidence that the recent huge fentanyl smuggling bust was made so widely public. 2
Doc Brown Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 (edited) Had a feeling once Dems controlled one of the two houses he'd test the limits of his power. Actually surprised it took him this long. Edited February 15, 2019 by Doc Brown
Uncle Joe Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 1 hour ago, Doc Brown said: Had a feeling once Dems controlled one of the two houses he'd test the limits of his power. Actually surprised it took him this long. Yea, I have a feeling this is going to get interesting. Should probably have a new thread called The Wall.
Deranged Rhino Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 Lost in all the drama is the fact the bill expires in 7 months (end of fiscal year 2019, September 30th). Trump will go build the wall elsewhere, in other needed areas through the military as he's able to do (even without an NE). Then when he wins in 2020 he'll get the rest of what he wants. They don't call him Troller in Chief for nothing. 1
Uncle Joe Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 Basically this minibus shutdown will probably be averted but the drama will continue until 2020.
Q-baby! Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 51 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Lost in all the drama is the fact the bill expires in 7 months (end of fiscal year 2019, September 30th). Trump will go build the wall elsewhere, in other needed areas through the military as he's able to do (even without an NE). Then when he wins in 2020 he'll get the rest of what he wants. They don't call him Troller in Chief for nothing. How’s that wall coming? I’m sure it must be completed by now and Mexico paid for it all! Your leader is a troll and you are proud. Loser! Aren’t your sources leakers? 2
Doc Brown Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 (edited) Ann's twitter diary is interesting. Maybe Trump doesn't sign the bill. Edited February 15, 2019 by Doc Brown
Nanker Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 (edited) Boy, Ann is really butt hurt. Sounds like she’s back banging Bill Maher. For the record, I’m opposed to declaring a national emergency, not because I don’t believe there is one - because I do. But it opens the door for the next POTUS to declare one to push his own agenda through. Pelosi said it Thursday. “There’s a national emergency of gun violence.” Think about Single Payer healthcare coverage. This is Harry Reid level game changing. Edited February 15, 2019 by Nanker 1
Doc Brown Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 15 minutes ago, Nanker said: Boy, Ann is really butt hurt. Sounds like she’s back banging Bill Maher. For the record, I’m opposed to declaring a national emergency, not because I don’t believe there is one - because I do. But it opens the door for the next POTUS to declare one to push his own agenda through. Pelosi said it Thursday. “There’s a national emergency of gun violence.” Think about Single Payer healthcare coverage. This is Harry Reid level game changing. It was going to get to this point anyways with partisan gridlock rewarded at the polls. Eventually they'll nuke the legislative filibuster.
GG Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 I'm guessing good old Annie doesn't own a black kettle or a pot. 1
Tiberius Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 6 hours ago, Doc Brown said: Ann's twitter diary is interesting. Maybe Trump doesn't sign the bill. Wow
Buffalo_Gal Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 5 hours ago, Nanker said: Boy, Ann is really butt hurt. Sounds like she’s back banging Bill Maher. For the record, I’m opposed to declaring a national emergency, not because I don’t believe there is one - because I do. But it opens the door for the next POTUS to declare one to push his own agenda through. Pelosi said it Thursday. “There’s a national emergency of gun violence.” Think about Single Payer healthcare coverage. This is Harry Reid level game changing. Yes, and no on the next President declaring a willy-nilly national emergency... there already are a ton of national emergencies. Many presidents have previously declared them. Currently, there appear to be 28 (I know, I know, CNN... I probably should have used wiki as here cnn says 32 ). Declaring a national emergency on border security is within the purview of the executive branch. There are rules and guidelines within which any president can declare one, and the current president must sign to keep current ones going. A "gun" national emergency would end up in court faster than you can say "gun". Not saying it would not be tried, just saying it would end up in court.
grinreaper Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 51 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Yes, and no on the next President declaring a willy-nilly national emergency... there already are a ton of national emergencies. Many presidents have previously declared them. Currently, there appear to be 28 (I know, I know, CNN... I probably should have used wiki as here cnn says 32 ). Declaring a national emergency on border security is within the purview of the executive branch. There are rules and guidelines within which any president can declare one, and the current president must sign to keep current ones going. A "gun" national emergency would end up in court faster than you can say "gun". Not saying it would not be tried, just saying it would end up in court. Declaring a national emergency is still just a political one when everything is added up.
whatdrought Posted February 15, 2019 Posted February 15, 2019 Good god, did Ann Coulter come on to The Donald and get shut down? Also, I am not a huge fan of the national emergency thing, but the dems were already doing that. Their method was using executive orders and then relying on their liberal scotus to vote in their favor. This seems more legal than Obama’s overreach.
Recommended Posts