Senate Appears To Have Votes to Overturn Emergency Declaration

[pismoe]

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 !!

 

[DJT for Life]

------------------------- my main concern is with Restrictions on Effective GUNS as 'dems' are always trying to limit Americans ' RIGHT' to effective guns , magazines and accessories that are defined by the Second Amendment . And TRUMP just did a NASTY with outlawing ' Bump Socks' but TRUMP is still far better on a whole bunch of issues than any 'dem' or 'repub' that he was running against , for MY purposes Angelo .

Well, people like Alex Jones don't help much (with his Sandy Hooks false flag craziness ) but there is a point to be made for background checks and restrictions on machine guns - civilians in the 21st century have no need for AR-15s.

------------------------ I can't argue , won't argue . You may not know what you are talking about as I perceive you , Guess that you are a youngster. And its even worse if you are an Oldster . That being said I can see that YOU don't believe in Gun RIGHTS and that YOU don't understand the purpose of the 2nd Amendment Angelo .

You don't have to argue his point. There is no point. Congress has not given any President the rights to skirt the 2nd Amendment.
Congress has given the President the right to declare National Emergencies and get the funds in any manner they desire.

You can't write an EO on something that is guaranteed by the constitution. Not and not have it overturned by the SCOTUS.

I totally agree with you.
Congress is having a fit over a bill that was passed in 1976 on EO power, called the National Emergencies Act

It was argued before it was passed in 1976 that it gave Presidents to much power.
Fix it congress, but neither party will do it.
Stop blaming Trump for using it for his purposes, just like all other Presidents have done under it.
Repeal the National Emergencies Act, congress.

And I agree with you.

There probably is, in this day and age, a need for a President to declare a National Emergency, so if they don't
want to overturn the entire law, they, at the minimum, need to detail what constitutes a National Emergency.

The law was written and passed to skirt Congress. Congress is the one that passed it, they need to fix it.

 

[busybee01]

I see this and my reaction is "so what?"

Other than a veto override, what's the mechanism that says that congress can order the executive around?

Start with this.

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

Congress has the power of the purse and they have the sole power to determine how much and how the Executive can spend money

Quit acting like you give a shit about the Constitution.

I do you piece of garbage. Rand Paul got it right. You people were the ones criticizing Obama's executive orders. Now that Trump does the same thing, that is okay with you. Your only concern is whether the President has a D or a R in front of their name. You say the Constitution overrides a law when we are talking about a gun control law yet in this case you say a law overrides the Constitution.

 

[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.

 

[Care4all]

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 P said he believed there were 10 other republicans that would vote against it, but have not come out of the closet yet, to claim that in public. I think there are 47 Dems, (a few in Conservative districts up for reelection might not be voting for it initially, but if it comes close on an over ride and their votes are needed, I think they will have to vote to do such) and say 14 in total Republicans, it still does not reach the 67 for an over ride, but if it does turn out to be 61, it would be getting a lot closer... and with a small miracle, it could happen!

 

[pismoe]

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.

-------------------------------------- troops voluntarily signed up for their taxpayer paid jobs . They work for ME as Public Servants . So let them do as they are told or ordered to do BBee.

 

[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."

Rand Paul is an honest broker, you two partisan hack clowns are not.

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.

 

[Care4all]

I would imagine if the veto over ride were to be successful, that would end the law suits? but not certain??

 

[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.

-------------------------------------- troops voluntarily signed up for their taxpayer paid jobs . They work for ME as Public Servants . So let them do as they are told or ordered to do BBee.

Just because they volunteered does not mean they can be used as political pawns. Trump claims to care about the military but that is false.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Yes indeedy!

 

[pismoe]

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.

-------------------------------------- troops voluntarily signed up for their taxpayer paid jobs . They work for ME as Public Servants . So let them do as they are told or ordered to do BBee.

Just because they volunteered does not mean they can be used as political pawns. Trump claims to care about the military but that is false.

------------------------------------------- just so the Volunteer Military does as they are told all will be cool BBee .

 

[Oddball]

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.

 

[Oddball]

I would imagine if the veto over ride were to be successful, that would end the law suits? but not certain??

It's not even a bill.....But whatever.

 

[Care4all]

I would imagine if the veto over ride were to be successful, that would end the law suits? but not certain??

It's not even a bill.....But whatever.

this headline calls it a Bill, but in the copy it calls it a "measure", so I don't really know?

• Politics

House Passes Bill Blocking Trump Border Emergency

Democratic-led bill will soon head to U.S. Senate, where GOP support has grown


WASHINGTON—The House voted to block the White House from redirecting federal funds toward building a border wall, and the Senate inched closer to doing the same, raising the specter of President Trump exercising his veto power for the first time.


As newly empowered House Democrats moved to assert congressional authority over government spending, there appeared to be nearly enough Republican support for the measure to clear the Senate in the coming weeks. Mr. Trump has already said he would veto the measure should Congress...

House Passes Bill Blocking Trump Border Emergency

 

[candycorn]

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.

 

[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 P said he believed there were 10 other republicans that would vote against it, but have not come out of the closet yet, to claim that in public. I think there are 47 Dems, (a few in Conservative districts up for reelection might not be voting for it initially, but if it comes close on an over ride and their votes are needed, I think they will have to vote to do such) and say 14 in total Republicans, it still does not reach the 67 for an over ride, but if it does turn out to be 61, it would be getting a lot closer... and with a small miracle, it could happen!

It will be interesting to see how the Mueller report may influence this; if there is a stronger tinge of impeachment or censure... perhaps some of the fear of opposing the blob will disappear. It won't be released soon enough to affect this round but future attempts to suspend the state of emergency?

 

[BULLDOG]

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, whats stupid is that the people on the left were told that walls don't work and they actually believe it.

And this, after years of Democratic politicians telling them that walls do work.

Mark

Walls don’t work, yet every Dimm millionaire in Congress has a wall around their houses.

Such hypocrites. It’s hilarious and disgusting.

Not every Dem has a wall around their house. Pelosi does not.

WALL or not , 'pelosi' has cops , secret service , military and guys with guns at her slightest whim Penny .

Big deal. She is much more likely to be attacked than most. It's reasonable for her to take those precautions. Do you have a point?

 

[22lcidw]

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.

I know these are different times. But the Constitution is written as a Republic. Not a Democracy. The shills perpetuate Democracy every chance they get. Plus you have a slice of the Democratic Party known as the Progressive Socialists with Communist leanings controlling that party. With everyone else not of that ilk have varying degrees of beliefs and views. Tragically we are all stuck on our views of what political realm is good for us. African Americans in real terms do not like people who throw crap out. Yet embrace Hillary who throws out more of it then most others. Hillary is a self serving crony capitalist like most of the shills we see everyday that promotes socialism and even more stringent agendas. She has nothing in common with African Americans. She will not stand in front of them in a civil discourse as she will be like a military person who is hundreds of miles behind the lines in a conflict signing off equipment and supplies but spouting they are macho while others in the front take the real abuse. And there are not any shortages of that.

 

[candycorn]

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.

I know these are different times. But the Constitution is written as a Republic. Not a Democracy. The shills perpetuate Democracy every chance they get. Plus you have a slice of the Democratic Party known as the Progressive Socialists with Communist leanings controlling that party. With everyone else not of that ilk have varying degrees of beliefs and views. Tragically we are all stuck on our views of what political realm is good for us. African Americans in real terms do not like people who throw crap out. Yet embrace Hillary who throws out more of it then most others. Hillary is a self serving crony capitalist like most of the shills we see everyday that promotes socialism and even more stringent agendas. She has nothing in common with African Americans. She will not stand in front of them in a civil discourse as she will be like a military person who is hundreds of miles behind the lines in a conflict signing off equipment and supplies but spouting they are macho while others in the front take the real abuse. And there are not any shortages of that.

Nor is there a shortage of bullshit in your post.

Congress allocates money, not the President. Therefore his re-allocation of the money that Congress has approved for specific programs is unconstitutional.

 

[TNHarley]

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?

What about obamas EOs that cost us billions?
Were you outraged over that?