• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump just killed the emergency act move

Mycroft said:
sigh...

Guns again.

I keep asking people to tell me...and nobody has yet...what laws that are affected by the National Emergencies Act could possibly be used to confiscate guns, limit gun sales or do any of the other things that gun banners want to do? I mean, seriously, do you think the Act is a blank check? Do you think it's martial law?

It's not.

Perhaps you should bone up on exactly WHAT the National Emergencies Act is.

It most certainly isn't a "power grab".
Click to expand...
The National Emergencies Act was passed to limit presidential use of emergency power (though most would say it hasn't been very effective). Nothing in the act grants a president the power to unilaterally construct a border wall that Congress expressly refused to fund (nor does the statute Trump will likely rely on to build the wall after declaring an emergency).

And ironically, you make my point. The Act is not a blank check. But using the act to build a wall turns it into one. If that is okay, then so are a whole host of other unilateral actions. But you support the policy goal of a wall, so you are blind to how building it through this means constitutes a blank check. Try to have a little foresight.
 
azgreg said:
The modern GOP ladies and gentlemen. The rule of law means jack and squat tho them.
Click to expand...

Damn, I missed that post.

And some Republicans are confused why it's being said that their party is hurtling toward fascism.
 
Cardinal said:
There was a 75% chance that an injunction against a national emergency would be upheld. After Trump's little impromptu speech those odds just rose to 100%.
Click to expand...

"I didn't have to snort all this Adderall. I just wanted to make my public meltdown go faster."
 
bullseyelqcs said:
Whats to twist? He said it wasn't an actual emergency, he just wanted to get it done faster.

Could you be any less intellectually honest?
Click to expand...

You're twisting his words into a pretzel to suit you're own narrative and you are calling out me? Too funny!
He's doing it quickly and taking this route because it is a national emergency and he will get it done faster by using the powers of the National Emergency Act.
 
trixare4kids said:
He's doing it quickly and taking this route because it is a national emergency
Click to expand...
There is no evidence to support this statement. There is copious amounts of evidence to refute it.
 
trixare4kids said:
You're twisting his words into a pretzel to suit you're own narrative and you are calling out me? Too funny!
He's doing it quickly and taking this route because it is a national emergency and he will get it done faster by using the powers of the National Emergency Act.
Click to expand...

I didn't twist anything. Couple of questions for ya....lets see if you can be the least bit honest in answering them:

1. Did he or did he not actually say he didn't need to do this?

2. If he didn't actually need to do this, then is it actually an emergency?

3. If its not an actual emergency, then wouldn't this actually amount to an executive overreach the likes we have never seen before?
 
Lakryte said:
The National Emergencies Act was passed to limit presidential use of emergency power (though most would say it hasn't been very effective). Nothing in the act grants a president the power to unilaterally construct a border wall that Congress expressly refused to fund (nor does the statute Trump will likely rely on to build the wall after declaring an emergency).

And ironically, you make my point. The Act is not a blank check. But using the act to build a wall turns it into one. If that is okay, then so are a whole host of other unilateral actions. But you support the policy goal of a wall, so you are blind to how building it through this means constitutes a blank check. Try to have a little foresight.
Click to expand...

You are correct. The Act doesn't grant any President unilateral power...not even for things having to do with guns.

The Act only allows provisions in various existing laws that have to do with emergencies to be utilized. Those provisions...enacted by Congress and Presidents...are the tools Trump will use to deal with the crisis on our southern border. He will be following laws...not acting unilaterally.

So again, I ask: What laws that are affected by the National Emergencies Act could possibly be used to confiscate guns, limit gun sales or do any of the other things that gun banners want to do?

If you can't find any, then your threats of using the National Emergencies Act to do those things...or any of the other things you are threatening...are nothing but nonsense.
 
trixare4kids said:
You're twisting his words into a pretzel to suit you're own narrative and you are calling out me? Too funny!
He's doing it quickly and taking this route because it is a national emergency and he will get it done faster by using the powers of the National Emergency Act.
Click to expand...

No, what he actually said was, "I don't need to do this."

IOW, there is no emergency.

Words: learn them is good!
 
bullseyelqcs said:
The least of which are the Presidents own words that he didn't actually need to declare an emergency.
Click to expand...
Yup.
Tanngrisnir said:
Amazing how self-described 'conservatives' are A-OK with Trump using military and FEMA budgets as his personal slush funds.

Reminds me of another republican POTUS.....
Click to expand...
Republicans are neither conservative nor the party of small government. At this point, about the only consistent quality Republicans demonstrate is that they do not care about anything but making Democrats mad. It is literally the only thing of consistency they seem to believe in.
 
trixare4kids said:
You're twisting his words into a pretzel to suit you're own narrative and you are calling out me? Too funny!
He's doing it quickly and taking this route because it is a national emergency and he will get it done faster by using the powers of the National Emergency Act.
Click to expand...

Do you often refer to things that don't need to be done as an "emergency"?
 
bullseyelqcs said:
The least of which are the Presidents own words that he didn't actually need to declare an emergency.
Click to expand...

His incompetence is now on full display. He simply cannot get a deal done with Congress, so he's essentially trying to steal money and wipe his ass with the separation of powers.

The Shart of the Deal is front and center.
 
Him and his supporter are truly the dumbest mofos on the planet. What a complete ****ing moron
 
zimmer said:
The post above illustrates ignorance about the subject.
Click to expand...
Don't you have another propaganda thread about a freshman member of Congress to start? I think you're still a little under your quota for the week.

Also, your link literally says it is for a time of "crisis". This is not a time of crisis by any rational measure. So congratulations on undermining your own argument.
 
Cardinal said:
"Trump, questioned by @PeterAlexander, concedes there’s no national emergency to justify building his wall. “I didn’t need to do this.� “I just want to do it faster.� A gift to all the lawyers preparing to sue him."

Joyce Alene on Twitter: "Trump, questioned by @PeterAlexander, concedes there’s no national emergency to justify building his wall. “I didn’t need to do this.� “I just want to do it faster.� A gift to all the lawyers preparing to sue him."

Trump just had another "I will own the shutdown" moment, guaranteeing that an injunction will be upheld and further illustrating why Presidents use teleprompters.



DoJ lawyers watching [Trump's speech announcing a national emergency] who will have to defend the emergency decree:

OrdinaryThornyBasenji-size_restricted.gif


-Popehat

25thHat on Twitter: "DoJ lawyers watching this who will have to defend the emergency decree:… "
Click to expand...

The guy just does not know when to just STFU.
 
Slyfox696 said:
I'm old enough to remember Republicans pretending to be outraged when Obama talked about having a phone and a pen.
Click to expand...

And we were right to be outraged then. But those of us who were outraged then should be outraged now.

This goes against our basic rule of law, and should not be allowed.
 
Last edited:
Felis Leo said:
And we were right to be outraged then.
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree, but if one was consistent in that belief that at least could be respected.

But those of us who were outraged then should be outraged now.
Click to expand...
If you were outraged then you should be more outraged now.
 
zimmer said:
The post above illustrates your ignorance about the subject.

To help fill in your vast lacunae of this issue:
National Emergencies Act - Wikipedia

You can thank me later.
Click to expand...

bullseyelqcs said:
You just shot holes in your own argument with that link.

Lets see if you are smart enough to figure out why.
Click to expand...

Slyfox696 said:
Don't you have another propaganda thread about a freshman member of Congress to start? I think you're still a little under your quota for the week.

Also, your link literally says it is for a time of "crisis". This is not a time of crisis by any rational measure. So congratulations on undermining your own argument.
Click to expand...

Oh well, looks like someone did your work for you.
 
Slyfox696 said:
Circumvent Constitutionally appointed powers to fulfill half of a campaign promise which the majority of Americans do not want, according to you.
Click to expand...
That's the real hypocrisy here. Trump could never fill even half that campaign promise. That power resides in Palacio Legislativo de San Lázaro. Maybe he should use these self declared emergency powers to invade, march on Mexico City and seize control of Palacio Legislativo de San Lázaro until they vote the funds for the wall. Thus he keeps his promise to his base. They would support him no doubt! So would Mitch - reluctantly
 
justabubba said:
why were the democrats expected to clean up after reagan's massive amnesty mistake

and why did the republicans, owners of the white house, senate, and house of representatives for the past two years not fix the problem reagan created
Click to expand...
A) They were supposed to as part if that deal
B) How many votes do you need to pass a funding bill?
C) How many republican votes were there?
Math is fascinating.
 
AlphaOmega said:
A) They were supposed to as part if that deal
B) How many votes do you need to pass a funding bill?
C) How many republican votes were there?
Math is fascinating.
Click to expand...

Reconciliation would have rendered all of your questions moot. Simple majority would have gotten it done. They just didn't actually care about it until they lost power and could blame someone else for thier ineptitude.

The problem for them is educated people who know that when someone says they didn't have the votes, that that simply isn't true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom