Thursday, February 14, 2019

Trump to sign bill and declare National Emergency

Well all the media huffing and puffing (aka fake news stories) about how Republicans would join Democrats in decrying a national emergency was just that, huffing and puffing. Not only will the President likely declare a national emergency, but he will do so with the support of many GOP leaders, including Mitch McConnell.

So the idea that Congress (as WaPo, Politico, and NYT contended) would offer up a scathing rebuttal in the form of some sort of overwhelming bipartisan Congressional rebuke is sort of out the window. No doubt Democrats in the House will likely put together some sort of official House denouncement, but it probably will not have the widespread support that some on the left were hoping for.

That being said, many conservatives are not happy with the idea of Trump attempting to garner wall funding with the use of executive action, due to the fact that they believe it creates the wrong precedent. They are afraid that if he ultimately succeeds in pushing this through that it opens the door for future Democratic Presidents to use a similar action to declare a politically charged issue (like global warming) as a national emergency, and then spend trillions.

There are a couple of logical problems with this suggestion:

The most obvious is that national emergencies are unfunded declarations. Most of these declarations spend little or no money. They are policies that do things like restrict international trade with countries, restrict private business with certain entities, seize property, or block entrance into the United States for foreign nationals from hostile nations.

Even with the declaration of a national emergency, Presidents still have no authority to simply add money to the budget.

The statutory language allows for a President to find and use only otherwise unobligated funds. This only would allow the President to move money out of projects that are currently overfunded (such as a national disaster fund that is no longer necessary), or take it from budget areas that allow for non-specific funding (such as certain military construction money that has no specific purpose). In the grand scheme of things there is simply not a lot of cash to be found in this manner. Expert opinions vary, but most suggest that there is only a few billion dollars that could be reasonably allocated for this sort of purpose. While that would certainly accomplish the goals in this situation, it would certainly not allow for any sort of project that would require massive amounts of money (such as funding the Green New Deal).

Secondly, there is actually nothing that would prevent a Democratic President from striking first in this situation. Even if Trump decides against the national emergency, there is nothing to prevent the next President, or the next President after that, or the next President after that from declaring a national emergency over something like global warming.

Of course, this sort of declaration would likely go through the same legal battle that Trump will go through if/when he declares his emergency. While Congress put some very specific limits on what a President can do with a national emergency declaration, it did not provide much input on what sort of situations would fall under the umbrella of a national emergency.

In my humble opinion, the current makeup of the USSC would likely allow Trump to prevail with his national emergency under the logic that Congress did not distinguish what creates a national emergency, and because border security is something that specifically falls under the reign of the executive branch.

However, I think that the current USSC would have a much harder time favoring a declaration of national emergency that attempted to rebuild our economy and business make up because of global warming. In that case, the courts may fall back on the constitutional separation of powers to declare that such an emergency would require not just a declaration from the executive branch, but also specific funding from Congress. Not only because there would not be enough unobligated money to fund such an overhaul, but also because something like the Green New Deal seems to clearly fall under the authority of Congress (not the executive branch).

246 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 246 of 246
thebradfordfile™ said...


@thebradfordfile

We should move congress to a southern border town--one WITHOUT a border wall. They would quickly endorse a national emergency when their safety is in jeopardy. But yours--they do not care.

Congress only serves themselves.

C.H. Truth said...

Is this a National Emergency or a personal emergency?

Well Rog...

That question is not up to me to answer. I would offer that every national emergency is a matter of opinion. We have around 30 current national emergencies and how many of them could you name?

If I had to choose between the national emergency regarding the political unrest in the country of Burundi, and the national emergency regarding our southern border, I think I would find the latter to be more relevant.


But I ask you this...

What percentage of opposition to this particular executive order is based on political disagreement and the fact that it is being enacted by Donald Trump?

I am not a big fan of Executive orders that push the powers of the Presidency. But the reality is that most objections to this are actually objections to how the law is written. The law (like it or not) is little more than Congress deferring to the executive branch (something pointed out in the 1983 USSC ruling on this law). I am not all that fond of the general principle of this law (but appreciate that it is fairly limited in scope).

In the grand scheme of things a few billion dollars isn't worth this much angst, fighting, triggering, and outright hostility.

This is one big giant pissing match. You know it. I know it. You really couldn't care less about the wall... you just don't like Trump using this sort of executive power.


But now you know how most conservatives felt when Obama unilaterally created DACA (after telling everyone that it was outside his authority). There are certain times when Presidents should simply accept the political realities of their limitations.

Ultimately what is good for the Goose (Obama and DACA) is good for the Gander (Trump and his wall)

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

You dodged the question. I am not surprised. You're claiming that my only motivation is my dislike for the President. You really couldn't care less about the wall... you just don't like Trump using this sort of executive power.

This is far different.

This is what the founding fathers feared. They made sure that the executive branch was not all powerful, by giving the Congress the power to check executive power. Right now they aren't fulfilling their duties.

This is far from dangerous than tying to let children who were born in other countries but brought into the country as children.

It's not goose and gander it's an attack upon the Constitution separation of powers, far more dangerous. You have been critical of Obama's DACA order. But you just shrug your shoulders and refuse to answer a simple question.

There are certain times when Presidents should simply accept the political realities of their limitations. .

This President doesn't accept the reality of his limitations and yet you don't give a damn because he's not a Democrat.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Is this a National Emergency or a personal emergency?


That question is not up to me to answer.

You're a coward.

James said...

How far off his rocker has Trump now gone?

That rambling, incoherent, lying diatribe in the Rose Garden is cause for wonder.

Will the men in white coats soon be coming to take him away?

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

He even sang one of his comments in the hour long rambling episode of his increasingly apparent incompetence.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Headed to Mar a Lago because :
"I could do the wall over a longer period of time. I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster," President Trump

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

https://youtu.be/YaSQ_rNxc8M


For those who didn't watch the President today here you go

James said...

TRUMP EFFECT
Fact-checking Trump's speech declaring a national emergency to pay for border wall
Trump spoke and took questions from reporters for nearly an hour, touching on immigration, his emergency powers, China and more.
Image: Donald Trump
President Donald Trump delivers remarks in the Rose Garden at the White House on Feb. 15, 2019.Brendan Smialowski / AFP - Getty Images
Feb. 15, 2019, 2:32 PM CST
By Jane C. Timm
President Donald Trump declared a national emergency on Friday in an effort to unlock money for his promised wall on the U.S.-Mexico border, delivering a freewheeling speech that included a number of false or misleading claims.

From the Rose Garden at the White House, Trump spoke and took questions from reporters for nearly an hour, touching on immigration, his emergency declaration, China and more as he pressed the need for a wall to counter what he asserted was an "invasion" threatening the southern border.

Here's what the president said, and the facts.

1. A BORDER WALL IS NECESSARY TO CURB ILLEGAL DRUG TRADE
Border fencing is essential "because we have tremendous amounts of drugs flowing into the country," Trump said Friday, later saying the country is facing an "invasion" of drugs.

"With a wall, it would be very easy" to stop drugs and crime from entering the U.S., he said.

Donald Trump's 'political emergency'
FEB. 15, 201907:16
But it's unlikely a border wall would have much effect on the illegal drug trade. Drugs primarily come into the U.S. through ports of entry and through the mail, not through unsecured portions of the southern border, according to the government's own data.

2. IT IS A "LIE" TO SAY DRUGS COME THROUGH PORTS OF ENTRY
"When you look and when you listen to politicians — particular certain Democrats, they say it all comes through the port of entry. It's wrong. It's wrong. It's just a lie," Trump said.

It's Trump who has his facts wrong here. Government reports have repeatedly shown that illegal drugs primarily enter the country through ports of entry. And it's not just Democrats who have publicly acknowledged this information.

Trump's then-Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly — who went on to become White House chief of staff, until December 2018 — said in April 2017 that illegal drug traffic “mostly comes through the ports of entry.”

James said...

3. "WALLS WORK 100 PERCENT"
Border barriers between the U.S. and Mexico do not have a perfect success rate. These fences have been cut through, dug under and climbed over in the past.

To reduce illegal crossings, border authorities have recommended, and requested in budgets, a combination of fencing, technology and other enforcement efforts.

4. VIOLENCE IN EL PASO WAS "100 PERCENT BETTER" AFTER A WALL WENT UP
Speaking about crime and violence, Trump said "it was not only better, it was 100 percent better" when a border barrier was constructed in El Paso, Texas.

Crime data published by the FBI shows otherwise, as NBC News reported in a fact check earlier this month.

Violent crime has been dropping in El Paso since its modern-day peak in 1993 and was at historical lows before a fence was authorized by Congress in 2006. Violent crime actually ticked up during the border fence's construction and after its completion in 2009, law enforcement data shows.


5. THE U.S. IS BEING INVADED
The president repeatedly used the word "invasion" to describe the situation at the southern border, pointing particularly to drugs, crime and human trafficking.

But there's little evidence the southern border is experiencing a new state of emergency. Violence isn’t spilling over the border, and terrorists aren’t being caught in droves trying to cross it. Illegal drugs largely come through legal ports of entry, not unguarded parts of the border, according to border authorities.

Illegal border crossings have been dropping for years, and while border apprehensions have risen in recent months, they are still markedly lower than they were 20 years ago, Customs and Border Protection data shows.

And though Trump has focused on the border, illegal immigration in the U.S. is being driven by another factor: people who overstay their visas. More than 701,900 people overstayed their visas during fiscal year 2017, according to the Department of Homeland Security. People who overstay their visas usually enter the country through an airport, not from the border.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

President Donald Trump once said taking executive action on immigration was an unconstitutional action that could lead to impeachment.

Scott thought Obama was violating the Constitution.

Trump jumped on Air Force One after his rambling speech. If we are in a National emergency, why is he going to play golf!

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

I keep hearing that what he did is illegal. He said that it isn't a crisis that he wants to fulfill his campaign promises.

Trump today admitted that he "didn't need" to make the emergency declaration, but "I just want to get it done faster." The offhand comment will likely complicate things for his attorneys, who will have to defend it in court.

The President is going the extra mile by declaring a national emergency to build his border wall -- something he teased at in a campaign rally in El Paso, Texas, on Monday.

Trump also got something else this week: a new attorney general, Bill Barr, who served in the same position under George H.W. Bush. Barr will take the reins of the Justice Department -- which is, of course, involved in the Mueller Russia investigation.

There are still questions about what happens when the Russia investigation finally wraps up.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

“I didn’t need to do this, but I’d rather do it faster,” he added. “I want to get it done faster, that’s all.”

The messy outcome left the president in an agitated state. “It’s all a big lie,” he railed. “It’s a big con game.”

Though he often uses prepared remarks and a teleprompter for formal remarks at the White House, on Friday he ad-libbed for 45 minutes, veering from such topics as trade talks with China to an upcoming meeting with North Korea’s leader to the length of talk radio host Rush Limbaugh’s monologues. Even before officially announcing the declaration, he took a winding path through several other topics for about 15 minutes.

Trump even vented frustration that his Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama, was given the Nobel Peace Prize — “He was there for about 15 seconds and got the Nobel prize” — while he will likely never get one for the current administration’s work with North Korea.

“With me, I probably will never get it,” he said wistfully.

Mike Lee said...

Mike Lee
‏@SenMikeLee

My initial assessment is that what Pres. Trump announced is legal. Whether or not it should be legal is a different matter. Congress has been ceding far too much power to the exec. branch for decades. We should use this moment as an opportunity to start taking that power back.

Anonymous said...

KDFebruary 15, 2019 at 2:53 PM

Roger , we will all await your link to the breakdown of drugs seized by, customs agents vs DEA, FBI, TSA, State Police, County Sheriffs and Local Police.

Roger the dodger got nada.


National Review said...


The Law Will Be on Trump’s Side If He Declares an Emergency to Fund His Wall

For all the legal analysts wringing their hands at the prospect of such a move, the courts would likely uphold it.

It seems increasingly likely that President Trump will declare a national emergency at our southern border in order to access funds to build a wall. Last week, I had the pleasure of debating National Review’s very own David French on the legality of such a move in a Federalist Society-sponsored tele-conference. I wanted to take the opportunity to further explain my defense of Trump’s legal authority in response to David’s excellent points.

David and I agree that Congress has not placed any serious limits on the president’s power to declare an emergency and that the Supreme Court was unlikely to second-guess him...continues
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/trump-border-wall-emergency-declaration-legal-likely-upheld/

thebradfordfile™ said...


@thebradfordfile

The clown show has officially begun:

THE CRAZIEST WILL GET THE DEM NOD.

...and destroyed by Trump.

Anonymous said...

Cory Spartacus Booker.

"The tragic reality is this planet simply can’t sustain billions of people consuming industrially produced animal agriculture because of environmental impact. It’s just not possible, as China, as Africa move toward consuming meat the same way America does because we just don’t have enough land.”

This is a special kind of stupid.

Anonymous said...



hypocrisy: the bedrock of liberalism -


Barack Obama started his presidency with his party controlling both houses of Congress. The moment the GOP took back the House, Obama decided he was unwilling to work on compromise legislation to achieve his agenda, and instead repeatedly threatened to enact his agenda unilaterally. “We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help they need. I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,” he said in January 2014. And he followed through on that threat, even on issues such as immigration. Obama created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) programs via executive action, essentially giving amnesty to illegal immigrants without the consent of Congress.

Back then, Democrats in Congress loved it when Obama abused his power to alter immigration law without their consent. In May 2014, Sen. Chuck Schumer (R-N.Y.) warned Republicans in Congress that “if they don’t pass immigration reform... the president will have no choice but to act on his own.”

Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Is this not the same thing Trump has been saying regarding wall funding? But now, Democrats are pretending to be appalled at the very notion of using executive powers, when all Trump is trying to do is enforce existing immigration law and protect our national security interests.



https://pjmedia.com/trending/im-old-enough-to-remember-when-democrats-loved-unilateral-executive-actions-on-immigration/

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Pjmediasshole.con

Anonymous said...

RogerAmaprick.com

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Prosecutors said for the first time that they have evidence of Roger Stone communicating with WikiLeaks, according to a new court filing from special counsel prosecutors.

During its investigation of the Russian hack of the Democrats, "the government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release," the prosecutors wrote Friday to a federal judge.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

THE U.S. IS BEING INVADED
The president repeatedly used the word "invasion" to describe the situation at the southern border, pointing particularly to drugs, crime and human trafficking.


But there's little evidence the southern border is experiencing a new state of emergency. Violence isn’t spilling over the border, and terrorists aren’t being caught in droves trying to cross it. Illegal drugs largely come through legal ports of entry, not unguarded parts of the border, according to border authorities.

Illegal border crossings have been dropping for years, and while border apprehensions have risen in recent months, they are still markedly lower than they were 20 years ago, Customs and Border Protection data shows.




And though Trump has focused on the border, illegal immigration in the U.S. is being driven by another factor: people who overstay their visas. More than 701,900 people overstayed their visas during fiscal year 2017, according to the Department of Homeland Security. People who overstay their visas usually enter the country through an airport, not from the border.

Jimmy Hitler aka rrb doesn't care about the lies, he just wants to keep the beaners out.

Commonsense said...



Well, when a group of people brazenly crosses the border without permission that is generally what it is called. And if they do to conduct a criminal enterprise it's even worse.

caliphare4vr said...

Illegal drugs largely come through legal ports of entry, not unguarded parts of the border, according to border authorities.

Again, that’s seized they have no idea what the mules are getting through, this isn’t hard Roger

Commonsense said...

There no pulling him off that talking point. This is where invincible ignorance meets abject stupidity.

caliphare4vr said...

Illegal drugs largely come through legal ports of entry, not unguarded parts of the border, according to border authorities.

Again, that’s seized they have no idea what the mules are getting through, this isn’t hard Roger

Anonymous said...

For Roger he can't take on new data.

anonymous said...

Ultimately what is good for the Goose (Obama and DACA) is good for the Gander (Trump and his wall)

Funny, now Mon Petit Scotty is practicing the Loretta Russo they did it first argument to support his naive side....Wonder how much more simplistic he will go in his spiral to support the idiot in chief....According to statistics....the lions share of illicit drugs are coming through ports of entry, not by mules crossing the desert...

anonymous said...

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/08/will-trumps-wall-stop-drug-smuggling/

Anonymous said...

The Three Socialist Stooges of CHT now beliveve they know the amount of unsiezed illegal drugs entering the US.

Anonymous said...

Roger , we will all await your link to the breakdown of drugs seized by, customs agents vs DEA, FBI, TSA, State Police, County Sheriffs and Local Police.

anonymous said...

From the Wa Post Note to pauline and rectum breath....see last line!!!

“And a big majority of the big drugs — the big drug loads don’t go through ports of entry. They can’t go through ports of entry. You can’t take big loads because you have people — we have some very capable people, the Border Patrol, law enforcement — looking.”

In demanding a wall on the southern border, Trump has asserted that it would stop the flow of drugs. But the Drug Enforcement Administration says that most illicit drugs enter the United States through legal ports of entry.


Traffickers conceal the drugs in hidden compartments within passenger cars or hide them alongside legal cargo in tractor-trailers and drive the illicit substances right into the United States. Mexican criminal groups control the flow of heroin across the border, the majority of which “is through [privately owned vehicles] entering the United States at legal ports of entry, followed by tractor-trailers, where the heroin is co-mingled with legal goods,” the DEA said in its 2018 National Drug Threat Assessment. (Later in the news conference, Trump dismissed this as “a lie.”)

But the numbers don’t lie: The arm of the DHS that works at ports of entry seized 4,813 pounds of heroin in the first 11 months of fiscal 2018, compared with the 532 pounds seized by Border Patrol. Seven times as much cocaine was seized at ports of entry then between them, as well. Marijuana is the only drug that is seized more often between ports of entry.

Meanwhile, fentanyl, a deadly synthetic opioid, can be easily ordered online, even directly from China.

Anonymous said...

After repeated booty calls, he has been convinced .
"On Friday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “All In,” California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) announced he will endorse Senator Kamala Harris’ (D-CA) candidacy for president.

Newsom said, “I’m very enthusiastic about Kamala Harris. … I’ll be endorsing her candidacy for president. I know her well. ""



anonymous said...

now believe they know the amount of unsiezed illegal drugs entering the US.

You really are dumber than a box of rocks and a loser salesman....maybe you can tell us how many seized children are still missing in US custody?????

Commonsense said...

Again only the drugs seized. Estimates say that drugs seized is less that 10% of the actual drugs that get through border.

So any person saying that the majority of drugs going into the country pass through a port of entry is basically lying.

While no one knows for the actual amount that passes through an unprotected border, it stands the reason that it would be easier and you would have far greater success smuggling drugs across an unwatched and unprotected part of the border rather than risk seizure at a point of entry where vehicles are regularly inspected.

This is just common sense.

Anonymous said...

Blogger Roger Amick said...

Pjmediasshole.con



the truth hurts, eh rog?

what was good for 0linsky is now good for trump.

Anonymous said...



Again, that’s seized they have no idea what the mules are getting through, this isn’t hard Roger


precisely.

what's consistent in this whole debate is that the basis for every argument and talking point coming from the left is intellectual dishonesty. they choose their words carefully, would have us believe that the southern border invasion is really ellis island part deux, and that all these beaners are reciting the poem off of the statue of liberty as they hop the fucking fence.

treat the border like a liberal treats a birth canal in a 4th trimester abortion. once they breach it, kill it.



Anonymous said...




Prosecutors said for the first time that they have evidence of Roger Stone communicating with WikiLeaks, according to a new court filing from special counsel prosecutors.


that's nice. too bad that's not a crime.

Commonsense said...

An explanation of where the actual fund are coming from to build the wall by @conncarroll

Some quick notes on early coverage of President Trump's announcement today that pretty much all reporters are missing 1/

The WH did not make one executive action today. In reality they made three, only one of which involved an emergency declaration. 2/

First the WH announced they would be funding $601 million in wall construction from the Treasury Forfeiture Fund, relying on 31 U.S.C. § 9705. This does not require an emergency declaration. 3/

Second, the WH announced they would be funding $2.5 billion in wall construction under 10 U.S.C. § 284 (this is MilCon $ for combating drug trafficking). This does not require an emergency declaration. 4/

Finally, the WH announced they would be funding $3.6 billion under 10 U.S.C. § 2808. This money does require an emergency declaration. 5/

According to the WH this money will be spent sequentially so the § 9705 money will be spent first then the § 284 money then the § 2808 money. 6/

So depending on how fast they can begin construction, they will have to spend over $5 billion (including the $1.3 billion in fencing appropriations) before any of the emergency money is ever tapped 7/



anonymous said...

International "fake news" committee to demand testimony from tech giants

No réponse on this POS yesterday so you are trolling it again today....must be a slow day in crampsville....LOLOLOL

anonymous said...

Commonsense said...
An explanation of where the actual funds where trump is illegally taking them from....

Fixed it for you cramps...

anonymous said...

. too bad that's not a crime.

But lying about it and conspiracy is.....BWAAAAAAAA!!!!!

anonymous said...

Politics
Ann Coulter Hits Back at Trump: ‘The Only National Emergency Is That Our President Is an Idiot’

The adams apple bitch has a bigger set than big hands donnie....BWAAAA!!!!

Commonsense said...

ternational "fake news" committee to demand testimony from tech giants
No réponse on this POS yesterday so you are trolling it again today....


Congratulations Dennis, I have no fucking idea what you are talking about and neither does anybody else. You just won a free night in the padded room of your choice.

Commonsense said...

An explanation of where the actual funds where trump is illegally taking them from....
Fixed it for you cramps...


Sorry to bust your fantasy there sport but it's all legal.

And when SCOTUS finally says so you're going to need and unbrella to shield yourself from all the exploding heads.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 246 of 246   Newer› Newest»