Xtra News Community 2
June 18, 2019, 03:36:43 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to Xtra News Community 2 — please also join our XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP.
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links BITEBACK! XNC2-BACKUP-GROUP Staff List Login Register  

A shitload of chickens are coming home to roost…


Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: A shitload of chickens are coming home to roost…  (Read 62 times)
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 29937


Having fun in the hills!


« on: January 14, 2019, 03:47:56 pm »


from The New York Times…

Trump Confronts the Prospect of a ‘Nonstop Political War’ for Survival

Questions about whether the president is a Russian agent made clear that the government
shutdown may be just the initial skirmish in an all-out battle between him and Congress.


By PETER BAKER | Sunday, January 13, 2019

President Donald J. Trump at the Rio Grande, near McAllen, Texas, on Thursday. — Photograph: Doug Mills/The New York Times.
President Donald J. Trump at the Rio Grande, near McAllen, Texas, on Thursday. — Photograph: Doug Mills/The New York Times.

WASHINGTON D.C. — So it has come to this: The president of the United States was asked over the weekend whether he is a Russian agent. And he refused to directly answer.

The question, which came from a friendly interviewer, not one of the “fake media” journalists he disparages, was “the most insulting thing I've ever been asked,” he declared. But it is a question that has hung over his presidency now for two years.

If the now 23-day government shutdown standoff between Mr. Trump and Congress has seemed ugly, it may eventually seem tame by comparison with what is to come. The border wall fight is just the preliminary skirmish in this new era of divided government. The real battle has yet to begin.

With Democrats now in charge of the House, the special counsel believed to be wrapping up his investigation, news media outlets competing for scoops and the first articles of impeachment already filed, Mr. Trump faces the prospect of an all-out political war for survival that may make the still-unresolved partial government shutdown pale by comparison.

The last few days have offered plenty of foreshadowing. The newly empowered Democrats summoned the president's long-time personal lawyer to testify after he implicated Mr. Trump in an illegal scheme to arrange hush payments before the 2016 election for women who claimed to have had affairs with him. Legal papers disclosed that Mr. Trump's one-time campaign chairman shared polling data with an associate tied by prosecutors to Russian intelligence.

New reports over the weekend added to the sense of siege at the White House. The New York Times reported that after Mr. Trump fired the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, in 2017, the bureau opened an investigation into whether the president was working for the Russians. And The Washington Post reported that Mr. Trump has gone out of his way as president to hide the details of his discussions with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia even from members of his own administration.

What all this adds up to remains unclear. Whether it will lead to a full-blown impeachment inquiry in the House has yet to be decided. But it underscores the chance that with candidates already lining up to take him on in 2020, Washington will spend the months to come debating the future of Mr. Trump's presidency and the direction of the country.

“The reality,” said Andy Surabian, a Republican strategist and former special assistant to Mr. Trump, is “that the next two years are going to be nonstop political war.”

The White House has begun recruiting soldiers. The new White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, has hired 17 new lawyers, according to The Washington Post, as he prepares for a barrage of subpoenas from House Democratic committee chairmen.

But Mr. Trump's inner circle has shrunk, and he has fewer advisers around him whom he trusts. His White House chief of staff is still serving in an acting capacity, and the West Wing is depleted by the shutdown. As he himself wrote on Twitter this weekend, “There's almost nobody in the W.H. but me”.

Mr. Surabian said the rest of the party must recognize the threat and rally behind the president. “Republicans need to understand that Democrats in Congress, beholden to the ‘resistance’, aren't interested in bipartisanship, they're out for blood,” he said. “It's a war we can win,” he added, “but only with fortitude, unity, coherent messaging and a willingness to fight back.”

Democrats, for their part, say they are out for accountability, not blood, intent on forcing a president who went largely unchecked by a Republican Congress during his first two years in office to come clean on the many scandals that have erupted involving his business, taxes, campaign and administration.

They plan to get started in the coming days. On Tuesday, they will grill former Attorney General William P. Barr, who has been nominated by Mr. Trump to assume his old office again, about his approach to the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. Mr. Barr wrote a private memo last year criticizing Mr. Mueller's investigation, and Democrats will use his confirmation hearings to press him on whether the special counsel will be allowed to finish his work and report it to Congress.

Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic minority leader, also plans to force a vote in the Senate this week on the Trump administration's plans to lifts sanctions on the companies of Oleg V. Deripaska, a Russian oligarch close to Mr. Putin's government, if he reduces his ownership stakes. Democrats plan to use the issue to argue that Mr. Trump has been soft on Russia.

Even committees that are not usually in the investigation business are jumping into the fray. Representative Eliot L. Engel, Democrat of New York and the new chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told The New Yorker last week that he was eliminating the subcommittee on terrorism in favor of a subcommittee aimed at investigating Mr. Trump's foreign policy.

Lost in all this may be any chance of bipartisan policymaking. At stake in the current fight is just $5.7 billion for Mr. Trump's promised border wall, roughly one-eighth of one percent of the total federal budget. If one-eighth of one percent of the total budget can prompt the longest government shutdown in American history, then the potential for further clashes over the remaining 99.87 percent seems considerable. On issues like health care, taxes, climate change, guns and national security, the two sides start this era of divided government far apart.

“That's the flashing yellow light here,” said Mayor Rahm Emanuel of Chicago, a former top White House aide to Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. “If you can't do Government 101, what makes you think you're going to do Advanced Placement Government like finding the money for an infrastructure bill?”

Julian Epstein, who was the counsel for Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee during Mr. Clinton's impeachment fight 20 years ago, said big issues like a shrinking middle class largely untrained for the 21st-century economy would go unaddressed during the battles to come.

“The political class is now addicted to Manichaean conflict as a way of life,” Mr. Epstein said. “It's become the mother's milk — for base voters in both parties who together make up a minority share of voters, for cable television and for social media.”

Given the investigations, Mr. Trump may prefer a battle over the wall as more favorable ground to fight even with 800,000 federal workers furloughed or forced to work without pay. Polls suggest he is not winning with the broader public but has rallied his base in the fight.

More Americans blame Mr. Trump for the government shutdown than blame Democrats, and most oppose a border wall, according to a new survey by The Washington Post and ABC News. But support for a wall has grown over the last year from 34 percent to 42 percent, fueled largely by Republicans, while opposition has slipped from 63 percent to 54 percent.

Negotiations have broken down. While Mr. Trump had gambled that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, would back down, she has made clear that she has no interest in compromise, and left town over the weekend. She and Mr. Schumer have insisted that Mr. Trump reopen the government while negotiations over a border wall proceed, which the president has refused to do. Mr. Trump walked out of their talks last week after he asked Ms. Pelosi if she would support his wall if he reopened the government and she said no.

“It's all about their own sense of strength,” said John Feehery, a former senior House Republican aide. “Pelosi wants to be validated. She wants to be seen as a strong leader. Trump feels like he has to govern through strength. This is strength versus strength. Unfortunately, the people in the middle are the government workers who can't afford to lose a paycheck.”

Instead of talks to end the shutdown, the president spent at least part of his weekend defending himself against the suspicions about his affinity for Mr. Putin. He insisted that he has actually been tougher on Russia than his predecessors and that the F.B.I. was led by “losers that tried to do a number on your President”.

He picked up the telephone on Saturday night to call into the Fox News show hosted by Jeanine Pirro, who participated in a campaign rally with him last fall. She asked him about the F.B.I. investigation reported by The New York Times with a tone of scorn.

“I'm going to ask you, are you now or have you ever worked for Russia, Mr. President?” Ms. Pirro asked.

“I think it's the most insulting thing I've ever been asked,” he answered. “I think it's the most insulting article I've ever had written. And if you read the article, you'd see that they found absolutely nothing.”

She then cited The Washington Post article about his efforts to conceal details of his private meetings with Mr. Putin. “We had a great conversation,” he said. “We were talking about Israel and securing Israel and lots of other things, and it was a great conversation. I'm not keeping anything under wraps. I couldn't care less.”

Ms. Pirro expressed sympathy for the battles he was waging.

“You've got such fight in you, it's unbelievable,” she said.

“Well,” he answered, “I guess I have good genes.”


__________________________________________________________________________

Peter Baker is the chief White House correspondent for The New York Times covering President Donald J. Trump. He previously covered the presidencies of Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Mr. Baker joined The Times in 2008 after 20 years at The Washington Post. He began writing about Mr. Obama at the inception of his administration, through health care and economic debates, the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, the re-election campaign and decisions over war and peace in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. During his first tour at the White House, Mr. Baker was a co-author of the original story breaking the Monica Lewinsky scandal and served as The Post's lead writer on the impeachment battle. During his next White House assignment, he covered the travails of Mr. Bush's second term, from the Iraq war and Hurricane Katrina to Supreme Court nomination fights and the economy. In between stints at the White House, Mr. Baker and his wife, Susan Glasser, spent four years as Moscow bureau chiefs, chronicling the rise of Vladimir V. Putin, the rollback of Russian democracy, the second Chechen war and the terrorist attacks on a theater in Moscow and a school in Beslan. Mr. Baker also covered the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He was the first American newspaper journalist to report from rebel-held northern Afghanistan after September 11, 2001, and he spent the next eight months covering the overthrow of the Taliban and the emergence of a new government. He later spent six months in the Middle East, reporting from inside Saddam Hussein's Iraq and around the region before embedding with the United States Marines as they drove toward Baghdad. He is the author of four books, most recently Obama: The Call of History, an illustrated history of the 44th president. A native of the Washington area, Mr. Baker attended Oberlin College.

• A version of this article appears in The New York Times on Monday, January 14, 2019, on Page A5 of the New York print edition with the headline: “Trump Faces Prospect of ‘Nonstop Political War’ for Survival”.

__________________________________________________________________________

Related to this topic:

 • Government Shutdown Across America

 • Democrats Push to Block Sanctions Relief for Russian Oligarch's Companies

 • Trump Tweets Lengthy Attack on F.B.I. Over Inquiry Into Possible Aid to Russia

 • F.B.I. Opened Inquiry Into Whether Trump Was Secretly Working on Behalf of Russia


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/13/us/politics/trump-russia-shutdown.html
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 

Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 29937


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2019, 05:33:55 am »



Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 7833



WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2019, 02:16:30 pm »

 Grin

Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 29937


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2019, 12:04:43 am »


from the print edition of the Los Angeles Times…

Distrust hinders Trump's deal-making

Both political parties have felt duped by the president. That doesn't bode well for his next two years.

By NOAH BIERMAN | Monday, January 21, 2019

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has largely left the shutdown fight to President Donald J. Trump after the president in December rejected a funding bill that the White House had indicated Trump would sign. — Photograph: J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has largely left the shutdown fight to President Donald J. Trump after the president in December rejected a funding bill
 that the White House had indicated Trump would sign. — Photograph: J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press.


WASHINGTON D.C. — Senator Mitch McConnell was jolted with a fresh reminder of President Trump's capriciousness last month: The majority leader persuaded Republican colleagues to take a politically difficult vote to temporarily fund the government, but not a border wall, only to see Trump withdraw support — initiating the longest shutdown in history.

House Republicans learned the same lesson early in Trump's presidency when he rallied them to repeal Obamacare, then described their effort as “mean.”

As Trump reached the halfway mark of his term on Sunday, he has left a trail of negotiating partners from both chambers of Congress, both political parties and countries around the world feeling double-crossed and even lied to.

The result is that the president who campaigned as the world's best deal-maker, vowing that he alone could fix Washington's dysfunction, has been stymied as he looks for achievements before facing the voters again. Two years in, the man who built a political reputation as a guy who tells it like it is has lost the essential ingredients to closing deals: credibility and trust.

“He just undermined the trust and confidence that some Republican members did want to have in him,” said Carlos Curbelo, a Florida Republican who lost his House seat in November, in part because of Trump's unpopularity.

The president's squandered credibility, overlaid with nonstop investigations, is likely to imperil a second-half agenda that includes basic responsibilities — raising the nation's borrowing limit, most essentially — as well as more ambitious goals. Among those are measures to rebuild the nation's infrastructure, win congressional approval of a revised trade deal with Mexico and Canada, overhaul immigration laws and lower the costs of prescription drugs.

Trump's trust deficit was a factor on Saturday in Democrats' quick dismissal of his proposed compromise to end the shutdown, an offer of temporary relief for some immigrants and refugees — relief from deportation threats that stem from his policies — in return for his wall money.

McConnell, having been burned, has largely left the shutdown fight to Trump. House Republicans, having lost their majority in large part because of voters' own dismay with Trump, are now on the sidelines as he must battle House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. And Democrats, following her lead, are emboldened given their experience with the president's unreliability as a negotiating partner.

Trump's tactics were honed over decades. Throughout his business career, he moved from one project to the next — real estate development, sales, casinos and branding — often leaving scorned partners or creditors to deal with the fallout from bankruptcies or deals gone bad.

“This was all to stay ahead of his reputation,” said Michael D'Antonio, author of “The Truth About Trump”. But “in Washington,” he said, “you can't escape who you are for very long. He's proven that he can't keep his word.”

The president has broken records for false statements, according to non-partisan fact checkers. An increasing majority of voters — by 61% to 34% in one recent poll — say he is not honest. The same poll, from Quinnipiac University, found that voters also rated his leadership skills as poor, by 58% to 39%.

Complicating the problem, Trump has churned through staff faster than his predecessors. He has surrounded himself with a collection of temporary officials, family members and inexperienced advisors with little sway on Capitol Hill.

“They're lacking some of the usual negotiating infrastructure,” said John Lawrence, former chief of staff to Pelosi. “In this White House, everything changes the next day: the personnel, the policies, the view of reality.”

Republican lawmakers' criticism is muted, however, because even as Trump has ranked among the least popular presidents in modern history, he has consistently commanded overwhelming support from Republican voters, according to polls.

Still, the mistrust from nearly every quarter of Congress has grown each time he has broken his word, complicating efforts to pass his initiatives, according to former lawmakers, aides and close observers.

“Even things that should on paper be easy, there just always seems to be a way for him to step on his own foot,” said a former aide who requested anonymity to avoid upsetting his current employer. “Sometimes, this is unintentional — he just says stuff.”

The act that precipitated the month-old shutdown, and has come to define it, occurred in December. McConnell received bogus assurances from the White House that Trump would sign a Senate bill to fund and keep the government open to February 8 while negotiations on border money proceeded, according to a person familiar with the discussions.

After senators approved the bill by a voice vote, Trump, egged on by conservative media personalities, rejected the legislation in favor of a fight with Democrats over the wall. Without any bill funding a quarter of the government, a partial shutdown began days later.

McConnell, Republicans' foremost deal-maker, has since stayed in the background. Other Republican senators were left vulnerable to conservatives' charges they were too quick to cave, even as they were stuck answering for the government services unfulfilled and hundreds of thousands of federal employees unpaid, with no sense of how the president intended to win.

“It would have been great if they had told us they wanted this fight, because we would have started working on it,” Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio fumed as the shutdown began, three days before Christmas. “We have to deal with it now.”

Lawmakers have been dealing with Trump's abrupt tactical shifts from his start, and at the White House he leaves the impression with each advisor who talks with him that he shares their point of view, until he doesn't.

“Sonny Perdue's right on that. Oh, no — Mick Mulvaney's right on that,” said one former official, imitating Trump talking about two Cabinet members. The official added, “You sort of feel like you're a little bit of a pinball.”

After Trump seems to have made a decision, he remains “flexible,” as another former aide put it, making it nearly impossible for his staff to craft a strategy to rally Congress or the public. Often, he will hear from far-right lawmakers in the House Freedom Caucus, or from like-minded commentators including Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham or Sean Hannity.

That tendency first became clear in 2017 when Trump initially celebrated, and then denigrated, House Republicans' vote to repeal President Obama's Affordable Care Act.

“The ‘mean’ comment and some other things really pulled the rug out from under” House Republicans, said Matt Gorman, a former communications advisor to them.

Stephen K. Bannon, Trump's former chief strategist, implicitly acknowledged the president's weakness as a legislative deal-maker, arguing that he has been able to fulfill promises where he hasn't needed Congress' approval, including on challenging China over trade.

Echoing some other Trump allies, Bannon argued that Trump, lacking governing experience, “put his trust in” McConnell and former House Speaker Paul D. Ryan to pass his legislative agenda, only to be often disappointed. Trump and his advisors naively believed he could win healthcare, tax and infrastructure legislation in the first year, Bannon said, yet he got only the tax cuts bill, which Trump largely outsourced to Congress.

In Congress, scars from the healthcare debacle have lingered, undermining Trump's influence. Lawmakers are often skeptical when Republican leaders and White House aides lobby them for his bills, according to former aides and lawmakers, demanding to know where the president really stands.

Often, the Trump allies can't answer unequivocally.

“We know he's new at this,” lawmakers would tell Trump advisors, according to Marc Short, former White House director of legislative affairs. But, they'd add, “We can't go back and take tough votes if he's going to call our bill ‘mean’.”

That sentiment was cemented in March last year, as Congress debated another government-funding bill. Then, too, immigration was the issue that set Trump off.

For weeks, his administration supported the $1.3-trillion spending bill, saying it wasn't perfect but would bolster the military, enhance immigration enforcement and keep the government open. Officials had a plan to sell it to the public, enlisting the Defense secretary at the time, James N. Mattis, to highlight pay raises for soldiers and money for new equipment.

But as a bill-signing ceremony approached, Trump “just got madder and madder” — riled by hard-right lawmakers and conservative media figures who complained that the legislation didn't fund a border wall, a former official recounted. Trump tweeted angrily, threatening a veto.

Ultimately, Trump signed the bill, but only after calling the measure “ridiculous” and insisting, “I will never sign another bill like this again.” Even those who had given Trump a pass on earlier betrayals walked away angry.

“What kind of credibility do you have when the president says he supports a bill and then says he doesn't like it anymore?” one of the former officials asked.

Curbelo, who represented a heavily Latino district in South Florida, was an early Trump skeptic. Even so, in June he and a group of California Republicans were counting on the president to follow through on earlier promises and support legislation providing a path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of immigrants who years ago came to the country illegally as children.

The lawmakers had devoted nights and weekends to the compromise effort, along with House Republican leaders and some hard-line immigration hawks. Many conservatives opposed the bill, despite provisions to reduce legal immigration and provide nearly $25 billion over a decade for border security, much of it for Trump's desired wall.

Curbelo and others believed that with Trump's support, the measure could pass in the House and keep negotiations alive in the Senate. They also thought passage might give moderate Republicans like him and the Californians a fighting chance to keep their House seats in districts with Latino voters.

Yet when Trump showed up for a pep talk to House Republicans, he barely mentioned the bill. Instead he ranted about Hillary Clinton, the 2016 election and the Russia investigation. He insulted a popular congressman, Representative Mark Sanford of South Carolina, who had just lost a Republican primary after clashing with Trump.

There were boos, confused faces and murmurs of incredulity. Curbelo said he considered asking Trump about the bill, subtly reminding him why he was there. But a bell summoned lawmakers to the House floor for a vote.

Trump tweeted afterward, insisting he supported the bill but predicting doom in the Senate. The immigration bill fell, 121 to 301.

Curbelo, along with one of the other negotiators, Representative Jeff Denham of Turlock, lost their re-election bids in November. Republicans overall lost a net 40 seats and control of the House.

“He would have had by far one of the biggest wins of his presidency had he been helpful,” Curbelo said.


__________________________________________________________________________

Los Angeles Times staff writers Eli Stokols and Jennifer Haberkorn contributed to this report.

• Noah Bierman covers the White House in Washington, D.C. for the Los Angeles Times. Before joining the newspaper in 2015, he worked for the Boston Globe in both Boston and Washington, covering Congress, politics and transportation in the immediate aftermath of the Big Dig. He has also reported on higher education, crime, politics and local government for the Miami Herald, the Palm Beach Post and the Duluth (Minnesota) News-Tribune. Bierman is a native of Miami who attended Duke University.

https://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_share.aspx?guid=5f8620b0-9e36-45ff-ada2-db1243b8a49b
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 7833



WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2019, 06:30:01 pm »


A shitload of loony-left chickens are running around with their heads cut off Grin

Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 29937


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2019, 01:28:45 pm »


Guess what?

Congress isn't going to give Trump money for his wall.

And if he attempts to declare a state of emergency and misappropriate the military to build his war, the Democrats are going to tie him up in legal restraining orders for so long, that even if Trump ends up winning a second term as president, his wall still won't get built before the next president is sworn in and the handcuffs go onto the wrists of Donald J. Trump.

So hahahaha ... Nancy Pelosi has Trump completely fucked. She is going to continue to spank him and show him up as the LOSER he really is.

Trump can chuck all the childish tantrums he likes ... it isn't going to achieve anything whatsoever apart from making him look like a stupid toddler losing his rag.
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 7833



WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2019, 12:07:09 pm »

he will build the wall they can't stop him

Legal analysts: Trump has the right to declare an emergency and build the wall
by Melissa Quinn
 | January 11, 2019 12:00 AM

President Trump has the constitutional and legal right to invoke his emergency powers to divert funds to build a wall along the southern border without running afoul of the Constitution or the law, according to top legal analysts.

“The short answer to 'Can he do it?' is yes and 'Can he get way with it?' is probably yes, actually,” Kim Lane Scheppele, a professor at Princeton University’s Center for Human Values, told the Washington Examiner.

“We sort of think we live in a constitutional government in which all powers have some kind of legal constraints, but the way that the emergency powers in the U.S. are written and the history of their use indicates that basically, there is not much of a constitutional constraint on the use of presidential emergency powers,” she said.

The president is demanding that legislation to reopen the federal government include $5.7 billion for a wall, a request congressional Democrats oppose, and has indicated he would declare a national emergency if he and Democrats were unable to reach a deal.

“I have the absolute right to declare a national emergency. I haven’t done it yet. I may do it,” Trump told reporters Thursday before his trip to visit the southern border. “If this doesn’t work out, probably I will do it. I would almost say definitely.”

He appears to be right. Congress gave the president the authority to declare a national emergency through the National Emergencies Act of 1976, which requires the president to specify what emergency powers in the U.S. code he is invoking.

“Congress has given the president very broad leeway to declare national emergencies, and Congress could have — but chose not to — impose any restrictions or preconditions on declarations of emergency,” Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at New York University School of Law’s Brennan Center for Justice, told the Washington Examiner. “Congress didn’t even define what an emergency was. The law really leaves that to the president.”

According to the Brennan Center, there are 123 statutory provisions that delegate emergency powers to the president in the time of a national emergency.

Among those laws, the Trump administration could cite at least two in justifying the use of emergency powers to build the wall and circumvent Congress, according to legal scholars.

One of the laws gives the secretary of the Army, upon the declaration of a national emergency, the authority to terminate Army civil works projects and apply those resources, including money and personnel, 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.”

The other law allows the secretary of defense to undertake military construction projects “not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces.”

“The statute is so open-ended about what constitutes an emergency, how we can shift money around, and what the actual construction looks like that it’s plausible he can actually get away with it,” Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law, told the Washington Examiner. “He can thread the needle and get where he needs to go.”

Congress, Blackman said, gave the president this broad power to declare national emergencies.

“Now, he’s using it in ways they didn’t anticipate,” he said.

Like Scheppele, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, agreed that declaring a national emergency to build the wall would not be unconstitutional, noting that Congress gave the president the authority to act unilaterally and take such action in 1976.

“There are compelling arguments against funding the entire wall demanded by Trump, although some added border barriers clearly are warranted,” Turley wrote in an op-ed Tuesday. “However, one can oppose an emergency declaration without claiming that it is facially unconstitutional. It is not.”

Harold Krent, dean of Chicago-Kent College of Law, agreed it’s “absolutely clear” Trump does have the power issue an emergency declaration to redirect funds for the wall, but said the main issue is whether doing so is “an appropriate use of that power.”

“Congress thought it was very important for there to be a mechanism by which the president can use in extraordinary circumstances,” he told the Washington Examiner.

Nevertheless, it won't be a slam dunk for the president, and the issue is likely to be put before the federal courts with a legal battle expected should the president act.

One problem for the Trump administration could be that neither of the statutes it can point to would be a “perfect fit” in authorizing the construction of the wall, Goitein said, as it’s unclear whether they authorize the president to do so.

“If you start to dive into the legal nuances, there are problems with both of them, even as basic as the definition of ‘military construction,’” she said.

Still, Goitein predicted the White House will put forth its “best legal arguments” in favor of pointing to the statutes to move forward with constructing a wall.

“It’s not a frivolous argument that these statutes might apply, so he won’t get laughed out of court,” she said.

Any legal challenge, however, is unlikely to turn on the question of whether there’s an actual emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border, as the president has argued.

“Because Congress didn’t provide any definition of national emergency, it’s very hard for a judge to say this isn’t an emergency, because then, the judge is making up his or her own definition,” Goitein said. “I think a judge is going to be very reluctant to create a definition of emergency when Congress didn’t do it.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/legal-analysts-trump-has-the-right-to-declare-an-emergency-and-build-the-wall
next thing he needs to do is have voter ID to stop the dead and illegal dem voters
« Last Edit: February 06, 2019, 12:18:25 pm by Im2Sexy4MyPants » Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 29937


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2019, 02:09:17 pm »


It isn't going to happen.

The instant Trump declares a state of emergency, he'll get dragged through the courts and it will carry on for at least a decade with a restraining order on him throughout that time.

And Trump will no longer be the president in considerably less than a decade, so HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA SUCKER!!!
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 7833



WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2019, 02:46:37 pm »

the supreme court will overturn any case against Trumps wall and rule in Trumps favour

hahahaha your dreaming again Grin
Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP
Kiwithrottlejockey
Admin Staff
XNC2 GOD
*
Posts: 29937


Having fun in the hills!


« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2019, 04:01:45 pm »


It will take years for it to get as far as the Supreme Court.

And then the Democrats will simply file another lawsuit using another law. And another. And another. And another.

They'll out-last Trump's term or terms as president and the lawsuits will still be making their way through the courts.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ... SUCKER!!!
Report Spam   Logged

If you aren't living life on the edge, you're taking up too much space! 
Im2Sexy4MyPants
Absolutely Fabulously Incredibly Shit-Hot Member
*
Posts: 7833



WWW
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2019, 03:03:18 pm »

Report Spam   Logged

Are you sick of the bullshit from the sewer stream media spewed out from the usual Ken and Barby dickless talking point look a likes.

If you want to know what's going on in the real world...
And the many things that will personally effect you.
Go to
http://www.infowars.com/

AND WAKE THE F_ _K UP

Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Open XNC2 Smileys
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Buy traffic for your forum/website
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy
Page created in 0.078 seconds with 13 queries.