Jump to content

The Trump Shutdown


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, plenzmd1 said:

and, this means what exactly? 

 

For one, it means cameras will be on the wall. No matter what you think of Trump, the only cameras down there have been by whining networks staging photos of children running from tear gas.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

That alone would make the declaration valuable, for putting a concrete limit on the President's powers to declare such.

 

But it would never get to the Supreme Court.  It would take years to wind through the plethora of lawsuits brought in lower court on such issues as posse comitatus, eminent domain, questions of state sovereignty, questions of Congressional authority...hell, there'll likely even be suits under the NPSA and BLM laws.  By the time all the lawsuits are resolved, everyone involved will have died of old age.

 

Not just that, but if Trump were to ignore the forum-shopped TRO's and do it anyhow, it would be a great opportunity for the Supreme Court to rule on the question of whether a district court judge can issue nation-wide restraining orders (especially when the district court is thousands of miles from any affected area) - an issue Clarence Thomas has been pushing to resolve.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tiberius said:

So you want a wall on the northern boarder too? 

 

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-005-x/2018001/article/54979-eng.htm

 

I want human trafficking combated by any means necessary. It's the key to taking back the world from the evil that's been in charge our whole lives. 

 

*****************************************

 

:lol: 

DwVilvXUwAAZC69.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Not just that, but if Trump were to ignore the forum-shopped TRO's and do it anyhow, it would be a great opportunity for the Supreme Court to rule on the question of whether a district court judge can issue nation-wide restraining orders (especially when the district court is thousands of miles from any affected area) - an issue Clarence Thomas has been pushing to resolve.

There aren't many things I want changed with Trump in office but this is one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:


Agreed. And it was reported earlier that Adam Smith said it is a-ok for Trump to do so. It was how they got walls built in hot spots around the world (Iraq, Afganistan). They'd also challenge it in court (because of course they would), but at some point, the Ds would have to realize that not wanting secure borders is probably not a winning strategy. 

Fun times ahead. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welp, now that tax refunds are gonna get paid, this makes it worse for the Ds. That is where many (most) people outside of the DC area would notice a "government shut down". If people get their tax return, that is a true problem for the Democrats political posturing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video at the link.  I'm not sure I'd trust Lindsey Graham's newly fused spine, but we shall see. 
 

Lindsey Graham on Border Wall: "We’re not going to give in to this radical left, ever"

"I’m not gonna negotiate with someone who calls the border patrol agents a bunch of Nazis when they’re trying to defend the border against a mob."

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...