Senate Appears To Have Votes to Overturn Emergency Declaration

[candycorn]

Yeah...those were actual emergencies. In retrospect, he probably should have declared a national emergency for the 10-15% who are not insured, looted already allocated funds and provided universal healthcare. After all, that is what Trump is doing; looting the treasury to fulfill a campaign promise

If those are actual emergencies, the country getting invaded is not only a national emergency, but a planetary, perhaps galactic emergency.

Invaded? Yeah...whatever. Make me laugh harder

If you could get everyone's health care needs provided for 5 billion dollars, go for it. I am waiting for the plan.

Why stop at $5B? Future Presidents can take whatever they want for anything they want if we allow Trump to loot the treasury.

Why stop at 5 billion? CandyCorn, this may be the first legitimate questions I have seen you present here. Indeed, there is no reason to stop at 5 billion. It's the bare minimum to stop the country from being invaded. But, we should spend much more, and do a lot more to eliminate perhaps the biggest security issue in the entire planet / galaxy.

Yeah, those nannies and gardeners face a real threat. Ridiculous.

But to your point, if the President can loot the treasury, we no longer have a system of checks and balances. So why stop at $5B or even $50B?

It just underscores that we've elected a complete fucking clown as our President--Donald Trump. We shouldn't be surprised by the circus that follows.

Are you criticizing Trump for... doing what he was elected to do?

Doubtful you voted for him to loot the treasury. But then again, who knows?

Now that is ridiculous. Indeed, he should use all and every measures necessary to guarantee that the border gets shut down and the invasion is stopped on its tracks.

There is no invasion....but don't let the facts stand in the way of hysterical reasoning.

 

[Norman]

If those are actual emergencies, the country getting invaded is not only a national emergency, but a planetary, perhaps galactic emergency.

Invaded? Yeah...whatever. Make me laugh harder

If you could get everyone's health care needs provided for 5 billion dollars, go for it. I am waiting for the plan.

Why stop at $5B? Future Presidents can take whatever they want for anything they want if we allow Trump to loot the treasury.

Why stop at 5 billion? CandyCorn, this may be the first legitimate questions I have seen you present here. Indeed, there is no reason to stop at 5 billion. It's the bare minimum to stop the country from being invaded. But, we should spend much more, and do a lot more to eliminate perhaps the biggest security issue in the entire planet / galaxy.

Yeah, those nannies and gardeners face a real threat. Ridiculous.

But to your point, if the President can loot the treasury, we no longer have a system of checks and balances. So why stop at $5B or even $50B?

It just underscores that we've elected a complete fucking clown as our President--Donald Trump. We shouldn't be surprised by the circus that follows.

Are you criticizing Trump for... doing what he was elected to do?

Doubtful you voted for him to loot the treasury. But then again, who knows?

Now that is ridiculous. Indeed, he should use all and every measures necessary to guarantee that the border gets shut down and the invasion is stopped on its tracks.

There is no invasion....but don't let the facts stand in the way of hysterical reasoning.

There are more illegals in the country than people enlisted in the US military.

Keep telling yourself that, keep telling yourself that.

People voted for Trump to take the money from the treasury and deal with the problem. Pull your head out of the sand.

 

[justoffal]

Rand Paul and three others have decided that they are “no” votes on the Emergency Declaration.

Senate Seems to Have Enough Votes to Reject Trump’s Emergency Declaration

View attachment 248674

The doesn’t seem to be enough to over-ride the assured Presidential veto however.

Yet.

Rand Paul and three others have decided that they are “no” votes on the Emergency Declaration.

Senate Seems to Have Enough Votes to Reject Trump’s Emergency Declaration

View attachment 248674

The doesn’t seem to be enough to over-ride the assured Presidential veto however.

Yet.

No obstructions for Obama's emergency declaration that I am aware of. But now that someone is finally standing for the American people, of course it has to be overturned.

You are probably wrong that someone like Ron Paul would take that route.

Yeah...those were actual emergencies. In retrospect, he probably should have declared a national emergency for the 10-15% who are not insured, looted already allocated funds and provided universal healthcare. After all, that is what Trump is doing; looting the treasury to fulfill a campaign promise

If those are actual emergencies, the country getting invaded is not only a national emergency, but a planetary, perhaps galactic emergency.

Invaded? Yeah...whatever. Make me laugh harder

If you could get everyone's health care needs provided for 5 billion dollars, go for it. I am waiting for the plan.

Why stop at $5B? Future Presidents can take whatever they want for anything they want if we allow Trump to loot the treasury.

They will anyway.

Jo

 

[candycorn]

Rand Paul and three others have decided that they are “no” votes on the Emergency Declaration.

Senate Seems to Have Enough Votes to Reject Trump’s Emergency Declaration

View attachment 248674

The doesn’t seem to be enough to over-ride the assured Presidential veto however.

Yet.

Rand Paul and three others have decided that they are “no” votes on the Emergency Declaration.

Senate Seems to Have Enough Votes to Reject Trump’s Emergency Declaration

View attachment 248674

The doesn’t seem to be enough to over-ride the assured Presidential veto however.

Yet.

No obstructions for Obama's emergency declaration that I am aware of. But now that someone is finally standing for the American people, of course it has to be overturned.

You are probably wrong that someone like Ron Paul would take that route.

Yeah...those were actual emergencies. In retrospect, he probably should have declared a national emergency for the 10-15% who are not insured, looted already allocated funds and provided universal healthcare. After all, that is what Trump is doing; looting the treasury to fulfill a campaign promise

If those are actual emergencies, the country getting invaded is not only a national emergency, but a planetary, perhaps galactic emergency.

Invaded? Yeah...whatever. Make me laugh harder

If you could get everyone's health care needs provided for 5 billion dollars, go for it. I am waiting for the plan.

Why stop at $5B? Future Presidents can take whatever they want for anything they want if we allow Trump to loot the treasury.

They will anyway.

Jo

Zero evidence of that having happened

 

[justoffal]

Invaded? Yeah...whatever. Make me laugh harder

Why stop at $5B? Future Presidents can take whatever they want for anything they want if we allow Trump to loot the treasury.

Why stop at 5 billion? CandyCorn, this may be the first legitimate questions I have seen you present here. Indeed, there is no reason to stop at 5 billion. It's the bare minimum to stop the country from being invaded. But, we should spend much more, and do a lot more to eliminate perhaps the biggest security issue in the entire planet / galaxy.

Yeah, those nannies and gardeners face a real threat. Ridiculous.

But to your point, if the President can loot the treasury, we no longer have a system of checks and balances. So why stop at $5B or even $50B?

It just underscores that we've elected a complete fucking clown as our President--Donald Trump. We shouldn't be surprised by the circus that follows.

Are you criticizing Trump for... doing what he was elected to do?

Doubtful you voted for him to loot the treasury. But then again, who knows?

Now that is ridiculous. Indeed, he should use all and every measures necessary to guarantee that the border gets shut down and the invasion is stopped on its tracks.

There is no invasion....but don't let the facts stand in the way of hysterical reasoning.

There are more illegals in the country than people enlisted in the US military.

Keep telling yourself that, keep telling yourself that.

People voted for Trump to take the money from the treasury and deal with the problem. Pull your head out of the sand.

l don't think there's any sand up his ass.

Jo

 

[justoffal]

No obstructions for Obama's emergency declaration that I am aware of. But now that someone is finally standing for the American people, of course it has to be overturned.

You are probably wrong that someone like Ron Paul would take that route.

Yeah...those were actual emergencies. In retrospect, he probably should have declared a national emergency for the 10-15% who are not insured, looted already allocated funds and provided universal healthcare. After all, that is what Trump is doing; looting the treasury to fulfill a campaign promise

If those are actual emergencies, the country getting invaded is not only a national emergency, but a planetary, perhaps galactic emergency.

Invaded? Yeah...whatever. Make me laugh harder

If you could get everyone's health care needs provided for 5 billion dollars, go for it. I am waiting for the plan.

Why stop at $5B? Future Presidents can take whatever they want for anything they want if we allow Trump to loot the treasury.

They will anyway.

Jo

Zero evidence of that having happened

Who said it happened? I'm telling you it will.
For Trump to play the gentleman's bye will only provide Lefty with the opportunity to do it first.... And that will most certainly happen.

Jo

 

[Godboy]

Why do Dimms give a shit if there is a physical barrier on the US southern border? Specifically?

The money part is a lie. So list real problems.

Why do Repubs give a shit if there is a physical barrier on the US southern border? Specifically?

The "it will work" part is a proven lie. So list real reasons.

I suspect they just support Trump's whims no matter how goofy those whims are.

Walls will slow them down. Kind of like a door lock at your house.
Idiot.

The money can be better spent other ways. We both know the only reason the right is pushing for that silly wall is because of Trump's dumb campaign promise. That promise is already broken anyway. Mexico isn't going to pay for any wall.

Its better than amnesty and shit.
I don't support the wall, i want to actually fix the system. Nevertheless, the arguments against the wall are stupid.

The arguments for the wall are stupid.

No, your arguments against it are stupid.

 

[candycorn]

Invaded? Yeah...whatever. Make me laugh harder

Why stop at $5B? Future Presidents can take whatever they want for anything they want if we allow Trump to loot the treasury.

Why stop at 5 billion? CandyCorn, this may be the first legitimate questions I have seen you present here. Indeed, there is no reason to stop at 5 billion. It's the bare minimum to stop the country from being invaded. But, we should spend much more, and do a lot more to eliminate perhaps the biggest security issue in the entire planet / galaxy.

Yeah, those nannies and gardeners face a real threat. Ridiculous.

But to your point, if the President can loot the treasury, we no longer have a system of checks and balances. So why stop at $5B or even $50B?

It just underscores that we've elected a complete fucking clown as our President--Donald Trump. We shouldn't be surprised by the circus that follows.

Are you criticizing Trump for... doing what he was elected to do?

Doubtful you voted for him to loot the treasury. But then again, who knows?

Now that is ridiculous. Indeed, he should use all and every measures necessary to guarantee that the border gets shut down and the invasion is stopped on its tracks.

There is no invasion....but don't let the facts stand in the way of hysterical reasoning.

There are more illegals in the country than people enlisted in the US military.

Keep telling yourself that, keep telling yourself that.

People voted for Trump to take the money from the treasury and deal with the problem. Pull your head out of the sand.

Wow…now we’re playing trivia. There are also likely more used car salesmen than we have in the US Military.

 

[busybee01]

You are the partisan hack. Rand Paul has not been a honest broker. He has pointed out a number of unconservative things Trump has done and always backed down. This is the first time he has followed through.

I'm an anarchist, dumbbell...And Rand has opposed several things that the orange God Emperor has favored and done...Even so, they still have one-on-one confabs and play a lot of golf together.

The partisan hack who only gives a flying fuck about what the Constitution says when it's convenient is you.

That is so much bullshit. Actually you are a neo-Nazi, fascist thug.

Trump supporters believe that the 2nd Amendment prevents ANY gun control. In other words the Constitution trumps law. Now Trump supporters say a law trumps the Constitution. There are numerous threads proving it so take your shit and shove it.

 

[busybee01]

Once again the courts will act as nannies telling our elected officials how they are supposed to act. Half of the nation will be outraged at the verdict that should never have come about in the first place because the issue should never have come up to start with. The Congress allocates the monies. They didn't allocate money for the wall outside of what was spelled out in the CR. That is where it should stop.

That the veto isn't over-ridden 435-0 and 100-0 is a travesty. Why even have a congress if the Executive can just re-allocate funding as it see's fit?

------------------------------------ you sound Annoyed and i'm happy to see that Candy !!

Anyone who believes in the Constitution should be annoyed. That you're not is not surprising.

-------------------------------- yeah , as if you are a 'Constitutional' Expurt CCorn . Heck , as an easy to understand problem with you types , mrobama and 'hilary' included , you don't respect and honor the 2nd Amendment so to heck with your understanding of the Constitution which is meaningless Candy .

 

[Norman]

Why stop at 5 billion? CandyCorn, this may be the first legitimate questions I have seen you present here. Indeed, there is no reason to stop at 5 billion. It's the bare minimum to stop the country from being invaded. But, we should spend much more, and do a lot more to eliminate perhaps the biggest security issue in the entire planet / galaxy.

Yeah, those nannies and gardeners face a real threat. Ridiculous.

But to your point, if the President can loot the treasury, we no longer have a system of checks and balances. So why stop at $5B or even $50B?

It just underscores that we've elected a complete fucking clown as our President--Donald Trump. We shouldn't be surprised by the circus that follows.

Are you criticizing Trump for... doing what he was elected to do?

Doubtful you voted for him to loot the treasury. But then again, who knows?

Now that is ridiculous. Indeed, he should use all and every measures necessary to guarantee that the border gets shut down and the invasion is stopped on its tracks.

There is no invasion....but don't let the facts stand in the way of hysterical reasoning.

There are more illegals in the country than people enlisted in the US military.

Keep telling yourself that, keep telling yourself that.

People voted for Trump to take the money from the treasury and deal with the problem. Pull your head out of the sand.

Wow…now we’re playing trivia. There are also likely more used car salesmen than we have in the US Military.

People like yourself will be used as human shields when the conflict starts.

 

[busybee01]

Rand Paul and three others have decided that they are “no” votes on the Emergency Declaration.

Senate Seems to Have Enough Votes to Reject Trump’s Emergency Declaration

View attachment 248674

The doesn’t seem to be enough to over-ride the assured Presidential veto however.

Yet.

lol After 58 national emergencies declared by every president since 1976 and thirteen by Obama and three previous national emergencies by Trump, Paul decided this was a good time to defend the Constitution?

None of them directly confront the Constitution the way this does. The only one that dealt with domestic policy was overturned by the courts.

Rand Paul
"To my mind, like it or not, we had this conversation. In fact, the government was shut down in a public battle over how much money would be spent on the wall and border security. It ended with a deal that Congress passed and the president signed into law, thus determining the amount.

Congress clearly expressed its will not to spend more than $1.3 billion and to restrict how much of that money could go to barriers. Therefore, President Trump’s emergency order is clearly in opposition to the will of Congress.

Moreover, the broad principle of separation of powers in the Constitution delegates the power of the purse to Congress. This turns that principle on its head.

I, and many of my fellow members, called out President Obama for abusing executive authority. President Obama famously said that if Congress wouldn’t do what he wanted, he had his pen and his phone ready. That was wrong. Many of those voting now spent a good portion of their campaigns running ads against these words and actions of President Obama. They will and should be condemned for hypocrisy if they vote to allow this because they want the policy or want to stand with the president in a partisan fight."

First off, defending our borders is a national security matter and that falls under the executive, not the Congress. Paul is arguing that the President must bend to the will of Congress on a national security issue, which is clearly contrary to the intent of the Constitution. Let's keep in mind that this vote is just a gesture and will have no practical effect on building the fence, so Paul's chest thumping is just theater he will not have to take any real responsibility for.

Our country is not threatened by unarmed Hondurans so it is not a national security. issue. The military cannot enforce civilian law. The intent of the Constitution is clear. The President does not have unlimited power as Commander in Chief. Only Congress can declare war and they must authorize funds for any military action. The power of the purse is sacrosanct as Congress can defund any military action a President takes. If Paul does follow through, he will be following the Constitution unlike Trump who is violating his oath of office.

 

[busybee01]

His objection was to re-allocation of funds that were approved by Congress.
Can’t blame him.

That's his excuse for grabbing the spotlight. In fact, no money is being reallocated. The money will come from drug interdiction money held by the Treasury and from the military construction fund.

The military construction fund isn't a slush fund that can be tapped on a presidential whim. It was funded for specific military construction projects, and can not be redirected without some military reason to do so. We are not under attack, and there is no military reason to build a wall.

------------------------- i think that we have USA Military on the Border right now Bulldog .

They are not there in a military role since the military cannot enforce civilian law.

They are there to defend the border in the event the Border Patrol fails.

They cannot arrest anyone as they cannot enforce civilian law.

 

[toomuchtime_]

First off, defending our borders is a national security matter and that falls under the executive, not the Congress. Paul is arguing that the President must bend to the will of Congress on a national security issue, which is clearly contrary to the intent of the Constitution. Let's keep in mind that this vote is just a gesture and will have no practical effect on building the fence, so Paul's chest thumping is just theater he will not have to take any real responsibility for.

No, he’s stating that the constitution says congress allocates the money and looting those previously allocated funds is something he can’t support

That's bullshit. The Pentagon re prioritizes projects all the time depending on changing conditions.

Illegal immigration is a new condition? We've had over a million arrests in a year in this young century. There was no need for a re-prioritization then; there is no need now.

The money was allocated to the military constructive fund and it is the military that allocates the money to those projects it deems necessary.

This isn't a military operation.

Your bizarre contention that Congress can make all decisions for the military is no where in the Constitution. Of course, none of this matters since even the House will not be able to overcome a veto. Just more political theater.

That wasn't the contention (what ever a contention is)....

Congress funds programs; be it the F22, the Bush aircraft carrier, a new barracks at Fort Riley.... It expressly funded what the President signed in the CR for border security.

The debate is over and the President has legal authority to build the fence with the unallocated funds from the military construction fund and from the drug interdiction funds held by the Treasury.

The fact is, the Democrats screwed up. They had considerable leverage to strike a deal with the President to legalize many of the illegals already in the US, but they weren't interested in helping them if the President got some of the credit for it. So now all the Democrats can do is make noise.

Correct. The debate will be decided by the courts. In my view, the Congress (regardless of Party) should be opposing this looting of the treasury.

There is nothing for the courts to decide. The Democrats are just making noise to cover up the fact they screwed up an opportunity to use funding for the border fence as leverage to get a deal for the "dreamers" and others they claim to care about but clearly don't.

 

[busybee01]

the Military just being there as wusses does show that this is a Military Issue . And law or not the Military should be able to stop an invasion . Hopefully the laws will change in the future as concerns invasion over the USA Southern border BBee .

There is no invasion. This is not a military issue. The troops are being separated from their loved ones so Trump can play politics.

More Migrant Families Arrested at Border in Five Months Than Any Previous Full Year

More Migrant Families Arrested at Border in Five Months Than Any Previous Full Year

Tell me, if this isn't an invasion, wht is it?

Mark

There clearly is a crisis but migrant families coming up is a symptom of the crisis. The crisis is that drug cartels are powerful enough to take over a country. These cartels are fueled by narco-dollars from America. In other words we are responsible for this mess.

 

[pismoe]

That's his excuse for grabbing the spotlight. In fact, no money is being reallocated. The money will come from drug interdiction money held by the Treasury and from the military construction fund.

The military construction fund isn't a slush fund that can be tapped on a presidential whim. It was funded for specific military construction projects, and can not be redirected without some military reason to do so. We are not under attack, and there is no military reason to build a wall.

------------------------- i think that we have USA Military on the Border right now Bulldog .

They are not there in a military role since the military cannot enforce civilian law.

They are there to defend the border in the event the Border Patrol fails.

They cannot arrest anyone as they cannot enforce civilian law.

-------------------------------------- its my HOPE that that will change when it applies to foreign invaders BBee.

 

[toomuchtime_]

That's his excuse for grabbing the spotlight. In fact, no money is being reallocated. The money will come from drug interdiction money held by the Treasury and from the military construction fund.

The military construction fund isn't a slush fund that can be tapped on a presidential whim. It was funded for specific military construction projects, and can not be redirected without some military reason to do so. We are not under attack, and there is no military reason to build a wall.

------------------------- i think that we have USA Military on the Border right now Bulldog .

They are not there in a military role since the military cannot enforce civilian law.

They are there to defend the border in the event the Border Patrol fails.

They cannot arrest anyone as they cannot enforce civilian law.

All law is civilian law and teh military can defend our borders by any means necessary.

 

[busybee01]

Rand Paul and three others have decided that they are “no” votes on the Emergency Declaration.

Senate Seems to Have Enough Votes to Reject Trump’s Emergency Declaration

View attachment 248674

The doesn’t seem to be enough to over-ride the assured Presidential veto however.

Yet.

lol After 58 national emergencies declared by every president since 1976 and thirteen by Obama and three previous national emergencies by Trump, Paul decided this was a good time to defend the Constitution?

None of them directly confront the Constitution the way this does. The only one that dealt with domestic policy was overturned by the courts.

Rand Paul
"To my mind, like it or not, we had this conversation. In fact, the government was shut down in a public battle over how much money would be spent on the wall and border security. It ended with a deal that Congress passed and the president signed into law, thus determining the amount.

Congress clearly expressed its will not to spend more than $1.3 billion and to restrict how much of that money could go to barriers. Therefore, President Trump’s emergency order is clearly in opposition to the will of Congress.

Moreover, the broad principle of separation of powers in the Constitution delegates the power of the purse to Congress. This turns that principle on its head.

I, and many of my fellow members, called out President Obama for abusing executive authority. President Obama famously said that if Congress wouldn’t do what he wanted, he had his pen and his phone ready. That was wrong. Many of those voting now spent a good portion of their campaigns running ads against these words and actions of President Obama. They will and should be condemned for hypocrisy if they vote to allow this because they want the policy or want to stand with the president in a partisan fight."

First off, defending our borders is a national security matter and that falls under the executive, not the Congress. Paul is arguing that the President must bend to the will of Congress on a national security issue, which is clearly contrary to the intent of the Constitution. Let's keep in mind that this vote is just a gesture and will have no practical effect on building the fence, so Paul's chest thumping is just theater he will not have to take any real responsibility for.

No, he’s stating that the constitution says congress allocates the money and looting those previously allocated funds is something he can’t support

33 U.S. Code § 2293, says: "Reprogramming during national emergencies," permits the president to "apply the resources of the Department of the Army’s civil works program, including funds, personnel, and equipment, to construct or assist in the construction, operation, maintenance, and repair of authorized civil works, military construction, and civil defense projects that are essential to the national defense."

It really can't be anymore clearcut than that.

Mark

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 9, clause 7

It really can't be more clear cut than that since the Constitution has priority over a law.

 

[busybee01]

Yeah, those nannies and gardeners face a real threat. Ridiculous.

But to your point, if the President can loot the treasury, we no longer have a system of checks and balances. So why stop at $5B or even $50B?

It just underscores that we've elected a complete fucking clown as our President--Donald Trump. We shouldn't be surprised by the circus that follows.

Are you criticizing Trump for... doing what he was elected to do?

Doubtful you voted for him to loot the treasury. But then again, who knows?

Now that is ridiculous. Indeed, he should use all and every measures necessary to guarantee that the border gets shut down and the invasion is stopped on its tracks.

There is no invasion....but don't let the facts stand in the way of hysterical reasoning.

There are more illegals in the country than people enlisted in the US military.

Keep telling yourself that, keep telling yourself that.

People voted for Trump to take the money from the treasury and deal with the problem. Pull your head out of the sand.

Wow…now we’re playing trivia. There are also likely more used car salesmen than we have in the US Military.

People like yourself will be used as human shields when the conflict starts.

We'll send garbage like you to Honduras.

 

[busybee01]

No, he’s stating that the constitution says congress allocates the money and looting those previously allocated funds is something he can’t support

That's bullshit. The Pentagon re prioritizes projects all the time depending on changing conditions.

Illegal immigration is a new condition? We've had over a million arrests in a year in this young century. There was no need for a re-prioritization then; there is no need now.

The money was allocated to the military constructive fund and it is the military that allocates the money to those projects it deems necessary.

This isn't a military operation.

Your bizarre contention that Congress can make all decisions for the military is no where in the Constitution. Of course, none of this matters since even the House will not be able to overcome a veto. Just more political theater.

That wasn't the contention (what ever a contention is)....

Congress funds programs; be it the F22, the Bush aircraft carrier, a new barracks at Fort Riley.... It expressly funded what the President signed in the CR for border security.

The debate is over and the President has legal authority to build the fence with the unallocated funds from the military construction fund and from the drug interdiction funds held by the Treasury.

The fact is, the Democrats screwed up. They had considerable leverage to strike a deal with the President to legalize many of the illegals already in the US, but they weren't interested in helping them if the President got some of the credit for it. So now all the Democrats can do is make noise.

Correct. The debate will be decided by the courts. In my view, the Congress (regardless of Party) should be opposing this looting of the treasury.

There is nothing for the courts to decide. The Democrats are just making noise to cover up the fact they screwed up an opportunity to use funding for the border fence as leverage to get a deal for the "dreamers" and others they claim to care about but clearly don't.

Yes there is. Trump's own people are telling him it will be blocked by the courts. Alan Dershowitz who is pro-Trump says the only question is whether a court will issue a restraining order. Judge Napolitano also agrees the courts will block this.