Senate Appears To Have Votes to Overturn Emergency Declaration

[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?

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

Really? Which ones were those? Did they use previously allocated funds?

 

[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?

Really? Which ones were those? Did they use previously allocated funds?

There qere many. Mandated contraftor overtime, cost sharing provisions and more.
It was funded through administrative maneuvering. Like what the govt us doing with the wall. Or so i read.

 

[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 !!

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 .

 

[pismoe]

and my point stands , YOU type / sound annoyed and i'm happy to see that annoyance CandyCorn .

 

[pismoe]

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?

-------------------------------------- so she is SPECIAL in your view eh Bulldog , a 'queen' or one of your elites eh Bulldog ??

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Walls work. Ask Israel.

We have over 11 million illegals in this country that cost we the tax payer billions every year.

Illegals rob, rape and murder American citizens every year.

This has been an ongoing emergency for decades.

Glad one President has decided to do something about it. Go Trump.

seeing who the people were that laughed at this post is all the proof in the world to me right there this post is spot on.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

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.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Good.
I love rand pauls consistency.
But im glad trump did this anyways. It made Democrats ACTUALLY support the constitution. This is his biggest accomplishment.

I completely agree. Consistency and forcing the Democrats to be constitutionalists at the same time.

That is a win for America.

.

 

[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?

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

Really? Which ones were those? Did they use previously allocated funds?

There qere many. Mandated contraftor overtime, cost sharing provisions and more.
It was funded through administrative maneuvering. Like what the govt us doing with the wall. Or so i read.

Examples please.

 

[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.

-------------------------------- 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 .

Compared to you, I would be considered an expert.

 

[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?

Really? Which ones were those? Did they use previously allocated funds?

There qere many. Mandated contraftor overtime, cost sharing provisions and more.
It was funded through administrative maneuvering. Like what the govt us doing with the wall. Or so i read.

Examples please.

I just gave you 2

 

[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?

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

Really? Which ones were those? Did they use previously allocated funds?

There qere many. Mandated contraftor overtime, cost sharing provisions and more.
It was funded through administrative maneuvering. Like what the govt us doing with the wall. Or so i read.

Examples please.

I just gave you 2

Which Emergency Declarations were those? There was one that “mandated contrafor overtime”

 

[pismoe]

yeah , yeah , yeah , so claim the retired on the taxpayers dime government employee CCorn .

 

[OldLady]

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?

The Constitution says when Congress sez no, it means NO. No president has tried to do this before (well, maybe Truman during WWII, but he got stopped cold by the SC). Of course, we didn't have the national emergency legislation then, either. It might be time to reword that damned thing.

 

[pismoe]

sure , go ahead , right after TRUMPS Emergency Declaration is implemented and on the books . Take yer time , take a few years or more OldLady .

 

[BULLDOG]

Good.
I love rand pauls consistency.
But im glad trump did this anyways. It made Democrats ACTUALLY support the constitution. This is his biggest accomplishment.

I completely agree. Consistency and forcing the Democrats to be constitutionalists at the same time.

That is a win for America.

.

At the same time, that obese orange fool was wiping his butt on the constitution. You call that a good thing?

 

[pismoe]

Good.
I love rand pauls consistency.
But im glad trump did this anyways. It made Democrats ACTUALLY support the constitution. This is his biggest accomplishment.

I completely agree. Consistency and forcing the Democrats to be constitutionalists at the same time.

That is a win for America.

.

At the same time, that obese orange fool was wiping his butt on the constitution. You call that a good thing?

----------------------------------- In yer OPINION Bulldog !!

 

[BULLDOG]

Good.
I love rand pauls consistency.
But im glad trump did this anyways. It made Democrats ACTUALLY support the constitution. This is his biggest accomplishment.

I completely agree. Consistency and forcing the Democrats to be constitutionalists at the same time.

That is a win for America.

.

At the same time, that obese orange fool was wiping his butt on the constitution. You call that a good thing?

----------------------------------- In yer OPINION Bulldog !!

Standing up for the constitution means opposing Trump's effort to steal money for his wall.

 

[toomuchtime_]

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.

 

[toomuchtime_]

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?

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.

And it has to be authorized by Congress.

lol Stop making things up.