puthath
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 349
|
Post by puthath on Feb 25, 2019 9:32:21 GMT -5
Question: Were you as incensed with executive action and constitutional issues when Obama used his "pen and phone" to implement DACA and DAPA? Just asking for a friend...
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,266
|
Post by SSHoya on Feb 25, 2019 10:07:45 GMT -5
The EOs by Obama weren't based upon lies. The Trump's declaration of a national emergency is.
Accordingly, let the courts determine whether there is executive overreach in all instances. Trump has no respect for facts and the rule of law.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2019 12:17:40 GMT -5
Not apologizing for getting something wrong
Inflammatory rhetoric
Purposely lying...
Another case of Trump having all the facts, and choosing the lie over the facts
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,266
|
Post by SSHoya on Feb 25, 2019 12:58:57 GMT -5
Trump’s action is an affront to all that Republicans stand for. They claim to be pro-military, but Trump’s action would take money away from the defense budget. They claim to be pro-property rights, but Trump’s action would result in the taking of private property along the border. And they claim to be constitutional conservatives, but Trump’s action is an obvious violation of Article I of the Constitution: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” If Republicans support this unconstitutional power grab, they will have completed their transformation from the party of Reagan — a party devoted to conservative principles — to the party of Trump — a party devoted to no principle other than a desperate desire to propitiate a capricious would-be tyrant in the White House. They might as well get rid of the elephant and make their party symbol a curved yellow fruit, because they will have become banana republicans. I am worried about the Democrats’ drift to the left, but I can never imagine voting again for a Republican Party that represents a clear and present danger to democracy in the United States. www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/23/republicans-big-gut-check-vote-tuesday/?utm_term=.291777b108ea
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,266
|
Post by SSHoya on Feb 25, 2019 15:43:09 GMT -5
|
|
puthath
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 349
|
Post by puthath on Feb 25, 2019 16:16:27 GMT -5
Trump’s action is an affront to all that Republicans stand for. They claim to be pro-military, but Trump’s action would take money away from the defense budget. They claim to be pro-property rights, but Trump’s action would result in the taking of private property along the border. And they claim to be constitutional conservatives, but Trump’s action is an obvious violation of Article I of the Constitution: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” If Republicans support this unconstitutional power grab, they will have completed their transformation from the party of Reagan — a party devoted to conservative principles — to the party of Trump — a party devoted to no principle other than a desperate desire to propitiate a capricious would-be tyrant in the White House. They might as well get rid of the elephant and make their party symbol a curved yellow fruit, because they will have become banana republicans. I am worried about the Democrats’ drift to the left, but I can never imagine voting again for a Republican Party that represents a clear and present danger to democracy in the United States. www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/23/republicans-big-gut-check-vote-tuesday/?utm_term=.291777b108eaThe legal problem is that Congress ceded power to the Executive to declare a national emergency and was so sloppy in doing so that it did not even bother to define an "emergency". So without a definition of emergency, what branch of government decides if there is a true emergency? Not Congress, and it will be tricky for the Courts to do so, given the broad deference that it grants to the executive. This is thus a purely political issue, and Trump is the duly-elected President, like it or not. Trump won because Clinton was the worst candidate to run in decades. Perhaps the Democrats can undo their 2016 fiasco in 2020, but until then, you are stuck with this. Obama did the same or worse with DACA and DAPa, and in fact had no statutory authority for either program -- only "my pen and phone". So spare the histrionica about "the rule of law", banana republics, etc. P.S. You actually quote warmongering neocon Max Boot? Puleeze...
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,266
|
Post by SSHoya on Feb 25, 2019 16:49:01 GMT -5
|
|
puthath
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 349
|
Post by puthath on Feb 25, 2019 17:19:49 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,266
|
Post by SSHoya on Feb 25, 2019 18:22:13 GMT -5
You misread my sarcasm. The 9th Circuit read the INA and concluded that the DACA EO comported with the statutory scheme. The SCT is waiting for a circuit split and I agree that it will likely grant cert. this year. The "emergency" is the fact that Trump could not achieve legislatively in order to keep a campaign promise. That circumstance has not been addressed by the SCT but likely will be as well. In any event, I agree both issues will reach the SCT.
And still no rebuttal to Boot's opinion but you will rely upon an ad hominem attack because he's a neocon? Fine.
|
|
puthath
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 349
|
Post by puthath on Feb 25, 2019 18:33:57 GMT -5
You misread my sarcasm. The 9th Circuit read the INA and concluded that the DACA EO comported with the statutory scheme. The SCT is waiting for a circuit split and I agree that it will likely grant cert. this year. The "emergency" is the fact that Trump could not achieve legislatively in order to keep a campaign promise. That circumstance has not been addressed by the SCT but likely will be as well. In any event, I agree both issues will reach the SCT. And still no rebuttal to Boot's opinion but you will rely upon an ad hominem attack because he's a neocon? Fine. As for Boot I believe that his commentary is not fact based and is based upon emotion. Plus I feel that he is chapped because Trump ran and won on the idea of not starting needless wars. But at least your response was reasoned and a true analysis of the facts and law. 😃
|
|
puthath
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 349
|
Post by puthath on Feb 25, 2019 18:38:29 GMT -5
You misread my sarcasm. The 9th Circuit read the INA and concluded that the DACA EO comported with the statutory scheme. The SCT is waiting for a circuit split and I agree that it will likely grant cert. this year. The "emergency" is the fact that Trump could not achieve legislatively in order to keep a campaign promise. That circumstance has not been addressed by the SCT but likely will be as well. In any event, I agree both issues will reach the SCT. And still no rebuttal to Boot's opinion but you will rely upon an ad hominem attack because he's a neocon? Fine. As for Boot I believe that his commentary is not fact based and is based upon emotion. Plus I feel that he is chapped because Trump ran and won on the idea of not starting needless wars. But at least your response was reasoned and a true analysis of the facts and law. Politically, I believe that Trump’s action is simply Obama 2.0 — fulfilling a campaign promise when our dysfunctional Congress fails to act. Obama said many times that he lacked the authority to do what he did on DACA but proceeded anyway, Trump has done the same. To me this is a clear example of the surrender by Congress of its authority. Obama took advantage and his successor has now done so.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,427
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Feb 25, 2019 18:56:42 GMT -5
Puthath, I find it hard to follow what you are quoting and what your present message is. Usually, the quotes are outlined in a white border. You had one reply, which was in the correct format, but several are not. Thanks.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,266
|
Post by SSHoya on Feb 25, 2019 18:59:57 GMT -5
As for Boot I believe that his commentary is not fact based and is based upon emotion. Plus I feel that he is chapped because Trump ran and won on the idea of not starting needless wars. But at least your response was reasoned and a true analysis of the facts and law. Politically, I believe that Trump’s action is simply Obama 2.0 — fulfilling a campaign promise when our dysfunctional Congress fails to act. Obama said many times that he lacked the authority to do what he did on DACA but proceeded anyway, Trump has done the same. To me this is a clear example of the surrender by Congress of its authority. Obama took advantage and his successor has now done so. Obama was called the Deporter-in-Chief and never really tried comprehensive immigration reform in his first term IIRC. We don't disagree on Congressional abdication of its Constitutional authority.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,266
|
Post by SSHoya on Feb 25, 2019 20:22:08 GMT -5
Another Republican Senator who will vote for the resolution against Trump's "emergency". Although Trump certainly has legitimate grievances over congressional Democrats’ obstruction of border-security funding, his national emergency declaration on Feb. 15 was not the right answer. As a U.S. senator, I cannot justify providing the executive with more ways to bypass Congress. As a conservative, I cannot endorse a precedent that I know future left-wing presidents will exploit to advance radical policies that will erode economic and individual freedoms. www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/25/i-support-trumps-vision-border-security-i-would-vote-against-emergency/?utm_term=.7732d3e373ca
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,319
|
Post by tashoya on Feb 25, 2019 20:38:08 GMT -5
As a U.S. senator, I cannot justify providing the executive with more ways to bypass Congress. As a conservative, I cannot endorse a precedent that I know future left-wing presidents will exploit to advance radical policies that will erode economic and individual freedoms. Trump's chocolate cakes aren't this rich. Individual and economic freedoms such as the right to own property and not have the government take it on a whim?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 8:38:59 GMT -5
Two-thirds of the land needed for the wall is owned by states, private property owners or Native American.
Lol.
Everybody knows the most conservative thing to do is to seize private land and build a wall through Presidential decree....
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,319
|
Post by tashoya on Feb 27, 2019 10:55:32 GMT -5
If it's now an emergency, let's reach a compromise. Have the President deliver some paper towels to the border. That should fix it, no?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 11:44:46 GMT -5
They must believe their job is to deceive, rather than inform, the public..
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,266
|
Post by SSHoya on Mar 6, 2019 18:45:11 GMT -5
"They are not cages." -- Undefeated Hoya.
Q: "Are they different than the cage you'd put a dog in?"
A: "They are larger." -- Undefeated Hoya
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 11:13:02 GMT -5
“They’re overwhelmingly not criminals. They’re people coming up here for economic purposes. I don’t blame them for that.” He also calls a full border wall "a waste of money"
|
|