Trump to declare national emergency to build border wall

idiots like yourself, @MojoMan and @Cohete Rojo have supported handing unprecedented presidential power over in exchange for a stupid wall that won't have hardly an impact. It's funny that you do not even comprehend the significance of what just happened.

 

How many illegals living in our country would it take for you to agree with there being an emergency ? Reports are from 11m-32m. That latter figure being roughly 10% of our total population.

Wage depression and job displacement are figments of the imagination ? Is that why real wages have been stagnant for 25+ years ?

This has been an ongoing issue since Reagan was in office and neither side seems to want to solve the problem or enforce current law.
Rather we turn a blind eye once they breach the border zone , they are here for the duration and free to do what they please without fear of deportation so companies get cheap labor … and we get the perception that we somehow benefit from that.

As for his action being unprecedented - that's hardly true. Every president since Carter has declared multiple national emergencies - Carter 2 , Reagan 6 , Daddy Bush 4 , Clinton 17 , Junior Bush 12 , Obama 13 and Trump 3. Obama in particular used it to avoid Congress when he couldn't get cap and trade passed by Congress and went the national emergency route to enact climate change regulations.

That's NOT to say that I agree with Trump declaring a national emergency just that I can understand the why of it all.
I'd much rather that bi-partisan committee have given him the $5.7b he asked for , which covered the 220 miles BP had requested.
This whole mess could have been avoided if Pelosi hadn't gone the total obstructionist route - Not One Dollar! and made compromises from the get go.

When you get right down to it , Trump's national emergency might just have wings when you look at the definition of a national emergency.

Well , we've waited on Congress for 35 years and the situation has gotten progressively worse …. Law after law , bill after bill nothing changes.

 

I think you are giving too much credit to Trump when you start parsing his lies. The wall itself was as much of an unrealistic meaningless rhetoric verbal vomit as Mexico paying for it.

Either way, we agree on Trump and what he means for our country. I will say it is amusing that we are debating which of Trump's millions of lies were more or less serious. That's what Trump has turned this into.

 

here's a link to a Vox symposium today where the majority of participants conclude that in fact Trump does likely have the legal authority to declare a national emergency. So if you think Trump's "declaration of a national emergency" (for whatever reason, even if it is "in order to fulfill a campaign promise to his base") is a crisis, you are likely wrong. That's NOT to say you have no basis for concern. I just don't share your apparent belief that this is some sort of catastrophe for the Republic. Life will go on. It will be interesting. The resulting court struggles will be fascinating. Hold on and enjoy the ride.

Vox Symposium on the Legality of Trump's Plan to Use Emergency Powers to Build the Wall
A variety of legal experts weigh in on the subject, including me. Most conclude Trump may have the authority to declare an emergency, but not to spend funds and seize property for the wall.
Ilya Somin|
Feb. 15, 2019 5:15 pm​

https://reason.com/volokh/2019/02/15/vox-symposium-on-the-legality-of-trumps

here's the link to the Vox site: https://www.vox.com/2019/2/15/18225359/trump-speech-national-emergencies-act-border

 

Let's just look at the national emergency part. We know that most illegals enter through airports and legal points of entry. They overstay their visas. We know that more terrorists crossed the border from Canada.

Again if illegal immigration were an emergency we could absolutely solve it through normal means. We could spend all kinds of money hiring more judges, border patrol agents, getting additional drones, and other technology to increase border security. Trump, however, is demanding a wall instead.

So because Trump is unwilling or unable to work through the normal means and take the necessary steps to battle the emergency doesn't mean it isn't solvable through normal means. It just means Trump is playing it for politics.

So even if illegal immigration was an emergency ( I don't believe it is) the wall isn't the solution.

 

"Most conclude Trump may have the authority to declare an emergency, but not to spend funds and seize property for the wall."

= He CANNOT declare an emergency AND spend funds and seize property for the wall.

 

right

 

isn't his primary reason in declaring a natl emergency is to fund and zeize property for the wall?

 

now, I'm more likely to get worked up over THIS than I am the wall building scenario:

In a State of Emergency, the President Can Control Your Phone, Your TV, and Even Your Light Switches
Under a little-known regulation that dates back to the 1930s, the president has legal power over electronic transmissions.

Michael J. Socolow | February 15, 2019
​

relevant excerpt:

The White House's sweeping power over electricity in a national emergency still exists, and it has been conferred upon the President by legislation passed by Congress. We're simply lucky that it's never been used previously, and that the only serious attempt to use Section 606 in U.S. history was stymied by a bureaucrat with a civil libertarian streak.

So remember: If he wants, President Trump—or any other president—can control your radio, your TV, your laptop, and even your light switches and microwave oven. Once again it's obvious: The history you don't know can hurt you.​

https://reason.com/archives/2019/02/15/in-a-state-of-emergency-the-president-ca

 

I am typing this from my underground, backyard shelter ... has Katy fallen to the Mexican hordes yet?

Thoughts and prayers. Thoughts and prayers.

 

Let's see, there was a Democrat as President when this Senator worried about the constitution and presidential over reach...

 

Evacuate to Katy? Yes or no?

 

If we lose Katy, is that a world in which we want to live?

 

andrew mccarthy of national review opines on trump's national emergency that isn't a national emergency. In fairness to mccarthy, he has previously opposed presidents using such as a way around congressional powers to make laws, and in fact called for former President Obama's impeachment for such actions...

How Is There a National Emergency If Trump Can Sign the Spending Bill?
https://www.nationalreview.com/corn...mergency-if-trump-can-sign-the-spending-bill/

 

Americans unhappy with the president faking a national emergency to build a vanity wall they don't like, want or need...

 

Climate change is next!!!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...declaring-climate-change-a-national-emergency

Spoiler

 

note to @Deckard (and Deck, I'm honestly not picking on you here, it's just you described my reaction as "cavalier," and this further explains why I don't think Trump's actions are the end of the world), see Item #1 below:

I. Not a Big Deal

Trump’s actions have been greeted with now-familiar claims that he is sparking a constitutional crisis or threatening the rule of law.

Considering just the substance of what Trump has done, these are large exaggerations. Everything Trump proposes to do purports to be grounded in congressional statutes and much of what he aims to do does not rely on emergency power. Trump is not relying solely on Article II executive power, and he is not invoking executive power to disregard a congressional statute. Moreover, the statutes in question expressly give Trump authority in the areas in which he claims them.​

Now, of course I will also grant you the rest of what Goldsmith writes under Item #2, "And Yet, a Big Deal."

https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-and-isnt-big-deal-trumps-executive-actions-related-border

 

In earlier posts, it was 12 - 26 million. No study released has ever had the number anywhere near the peak of what you're posting. The only thing I can find close to 32 million is that there are roughly 37 million LEGAL immigrants in the country. The number of illiegal immigrants in the country continues to drop (and has since the peak in 2007 at 12.2 million)...currently estimated at 10.6 million. The number of illegal immigrants in the work force is also at it's lowest since 2007.

5 facts about illegal immigration in the U.S.

You're going to have to settle on some numbers to make up. If numbers are steadily and continuously declining without a nonsensical wall...how exactly is there an emergency?

 

I too agree that ending prohibition would be helpful. However, without doing that a wall won't change things since most of the drugs come through legal ports of entry and not from the wide open border area.

Logistically it would be very difficult for that to happen. Carrying large quantities of narcotics would be difficult for individuals traveling through a desolate territory. Hiding large quantities of narcotics in vehicles, shipping crates, and other large containers etc. is exponentially more efficient. That is why the narcotics enter that way.