"White House seeks to clarify Trump remarks on emergency"

Soundbites, ah, no, right in there with him explaining why he did it



And if you think Trump has somehow outmaneuvered anyone on this you are definitely drunk on the kool aid

 

The 13th Amendment was defeated in the house the first time it came up for vote.

The revisionist never mention that do they ?

 

Why is it important?

 

Why did you quote me here? I was laughing at your theory that obstructionism did not take place during an Obama administration that saw GOP senators vote against hearings for their own judicial nominees just because it meant that Obama could not appoint them.

 

Because it's important that Americans aren't indoctrinated in cultural-marxist revisionist history.

The Civil War was fought to defeat the mental disorder of "Lincoln Derangement Syndrome" (LDS) and end the obstructionism and sedition (resistance) and bring the seceding states in rebellion back into the Union.

 

How many Republican members of Congress refused to attend the inauguration of President Obama ?

How many Republicans refused to attend any of Obama's State of the Union addresses ?

When did the House of Representatives refused to invite President Obama to give his SOTU speech in the House chambers ?

How many Republicans in Congress called for the impeachment of President Obama ?

How many special counsel investigations did the Obama DOJ have to conduct a with hunt looking for crimes committed by Barack Obama ?

How many members of Congress voted against Obama's sequestration ?
Not enough.

 

At no point in your idiotic list did you prove that obstructionism did not take place during Obama's tenure.

 

What a perfect list to prove that Trump is a Major TOOL.

 

National Emergencies do require rapid and complex responses.

 

How many Republicans in Congress were labeled racist ?

Just those who obstructed Obama's policies I suppose.

Obama played the race card so there would be little challenges against his leftist, pro Muslim Brotherhood, Alinskyite, anti cops policies of agitating, causing trouble and dividing America.

 

Wow. I am not specifically referring to impeachment at all. I thought we were talking about the power of legislators to investigate 'crime' or criminal conduct, for any number of purposes consistent with their legislative duties, only one of which is impeachment but that is an obvious one. Anyone can do that, they simply lack the some of the executive tools to do so, and all of the tools to prosecute or punish crime. So you simply refer your findings to the executive branch so they can do the job that you can't. The legislative branch is curtailed from sentencing or punishing or detaining anyone who is not a member of the body. That is what the case you referred to concluded.

Zorro. Dems have lost a lot of elections over the years. This one is not special. Its no different from Humphreys, McGoverns, Carters, Mondales, Dukakis, Kerry, Gore, etc. Trump is a very different character than the others and he presents a different challenge to the country and the party.

 

It's not congress' job to cowtow to trump, he's not a king. The congress DID do their job. If you ask yourself why the wall wasn't a big deal two years. Nah you don't care, do you?

 

Isn't the problem here that the National Emergency Act that Congress passed, provided its own remedy in the statute, which was not a court challenge based on definitions, but a joint resolution passed by both Houses and signed by the President or a supermajority proof override of the specific declaration in question? Its the same process to amend the law or sunset it as it is to nullify a declaration. Congress dug its own grave here. I am not sure the Court will supply a new shovel because the one they bought and put in their shed, is not quite up to the job.

That would leave others to do the heavy lifting with standing to contest this declaration.

 

Well, that's a power they actually have.

And what would be the "legislative duty" investigating these pre-inaugural "crimes" by Trump?

He does possess a different skill set. After 16 years of Dumb and Dumber, we decided to try something other than a politician. in many respects we decided to try the road not traveled when Perot did his in and out dance, taking himself out of contention.

And frankly, so far, so good. Trump's off to a great start.

 

Well that is the easiest question in the world. If they find criminal conduct and understand how it happened , they can find a way to plug a loophole or provide different statutory language to allow better enforcement or fund more resources. Look at all the statutes and changes we got on the books investigating Watergate. They can ALWAYS find a rationale to investigate anything. One of the values of the Mueller investigation should be to learn how the Russians did what they did, so that Congress can look at the systems and the loopholes they exploited but in the social media and the elections systems. I would hope that one impact may be some funding to target those regions which need to modernize their voting systems. State legislatures have done a piss poor job of helping counties upgrade technology and security from hacking

 

Well said and exactly.

 

All the president had to do was to use whatever funds he was allotted and come next election time say he did the best that he could given the funds he had and the fact that Mexico refused to pay for the wall he claimed they would during his election campaign..

 

Congress who are voting as their electoric wants.represents the will of the voters who in the Majority Do not agree with Trumps wall rhetoric

Just because the few who are screaming the Loudest it doesn't change public opinion

 

Anyone who repeatedly asserts that Trump is honest in the face of the blizzard of lies he bellowed just Friday morning is a troll.

There isn't another explanation for it.

 

It would be IMPOSSIBLE to clarify that rambling nonsensical load of crap that came pouring out of Dirty Donalds clap trap!!!

 

That's why the Democrats dislike Trump's NE, it's to aid America.

 

There were National Emergencies in those countries.

It's quite clear to most there isn't one on our Southern Border............... Just one in the White House.

 

Most politicians in washington wet their finger to see which way the wind is blowing before they speak

And then they hold a seance with a pollster and convene a focus group to decide what to say and how to say it

Sometimes that helps the politician protect their back

But it seldom informs the public of whats really going on

 

You think the liberal media, proven to be in bed with the NDP, has shown any desire to report on the significant positive actions and results the current Administration has achieved?

 

You don't speak for every attorney, nor do you know if every attorney in the country believes as you claim. That is an absurd statement, and pure hyperbole. Certainly as an attorney you should know outrageous statements have no place in any rational discussion and destroy your argument.

https://lawyerist.com/hyperbole-will-destroy-case-understatement-will-save/

Why Hyperbole Will Destroy Your Case and Understatement Will Save It

Hyperbole and overstatement do more harm than good. Hyperbole is exaggeration. Overstatement is an attempt to convince your audience by bludgeoning them with facts, arguments, and pleas to get them to accept your assertion.

If you tell your audience what they should think, don’t be surprised if they think the opposite just to spite you.​

My wife believes exactly as I do, so your claim is wrong.

A reasonable person, hearing the statement in the context of both the circumstances, and the declaration, would know exactly what the President was saying.

Your well documented bias and the complete disdain you have for the President, colors your opinion, and in any court of law, would be an impeachable offense if you were on the witness stand.