Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
divad
Trad climber
wmass
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 15, 2019 - 03:21pm PT
|
POMPOUS
adjective
Affectedly and irritatingly grand, solemn, or self-important.
"A pompous ass who pretends he knows everything."
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2019 - 03:23pm PT
|
Oh for fcuks sake.
You, idiots, think you know everything too.
You're even dumber than Trump .....
|
|
divad
Trad climber
wmass
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 15, 2019 - 03:29pm PT
|
You, idiots, think you know everything too.
You know a chipmunk who knows more than you do..
|
|
10b4me
Social climber
Lida Junction
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2019 - 04:00pm PT
|
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2019 - 04:04pm PT
|
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
StahlBro
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2019 - 05:37pm PT
|
Fake President uses Fake Crisis to declare Fake Emergency...
MAGA
|
|
Happiegrrrl2
Trad climber
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2019 - 06:42pm PT
|
Manaforts Suggested Serving is 19 to 24 years.
That's gotta be tough to digest for him.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2019 - 06:47pm PT
|
Man O Fort
I think all his cases are federal
Trump demands loyalty
But does not reward it
If there is any downside to giving Manafort a pardon then Manny is toast
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Feb 15, 2019 - 07:01pm PT
|
Here's an arch-Conservative that believes Trump's NE declaration is a really bad idea that any reasonably intelligent court is going to have big problems with:
Trump’s Emergency Declaration Is Contemptuous of the Rule of Law
By DAVID FRENCH
February 15, 2019 6:29 PM
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/trump-emergency-declaration-contemptuous-of-rule-of-law/
This is no Trump v. Hawaii; the president’s discretion is dramatically limited.
(Excerpts)
One thing that is abundantly clear from reading the full text of President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency on the southern border — he’s barely even deigning to explain why there is a particular crisis today, or why that crisis is so grave that it requires the military to combat it. At its heart it’s a contemptuous document. It’s the proclamation of a monarch, not an argument by a president. And it should fail in court.
***
First, let’s consider whether Trump’s national emergency actually “requires the use of the armed forces.” In this regard, the declaration itself damages Trump’s case.
The southern border is a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics. The problem of large-scale unlawful migration through the southern border is long-standing, and despite the executive branch’s exercise of existing statutory authorities, the situation has worsened in certain respects in recent years. In particular, recent years have seen sharp increases in the number of family units entering and seeking entry to the United States and an inability to provide detention space for many of these aliens while their removal proceedings are pending. If not detained, such aliens are often released into the country and are often difficult to remove from the United States because they fail to appear for hearings, do not comply with orders of removal, or are otherwise difficult to locate.
Look at the list carefully. He’s listing criminal challenges. He’s listing humanitarian challenges. He’s listing the problems on the border that have existed for decades and that Congress has enacted comprehensive statutory schemes (including funding civilian wall construction and civilian immigration authorities) to combat. Gang activity and drug-smuggling are grave problems, but they are crimes, not acts of war. The declaration doesn’t even try to argue that there is a precise, unique challenge that only the military can counter — such as a national disaster that would require the use of the military’s unrivaled heavy-lift capabilities or its immediate access to manpower.
Instead, the declaration cites the wasteful 2018 border deployment, but that is only evidence that the military has been used, not that it must be used. If the mere fact of a deployment were proof of the necessity of military intervention, then there would be no limiting principle on a president’s action. The message is clear — the military is “required” simply because he says it is required.
***
We’ve grown sadly accustomed to presidents’ abusing poorly drafted statutes to stretch their power well beyond the Founders’ intent. It’s strangely comforting to read a statute like Section 2808 that’s competently written and precisely drafted. While a court isn’t likely to overturn the emergency declaration itself, it is unlikely to believe the administration’s fiction that a civilian wall is true “military construction” or that it is any way “necessary” to support the use of the armed forces. Indeed Trump’s declaration hardly even tries to make the case.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Feb 16, 2019 - 08:53am PT
|
Congress could certainly try to block it, but I kinda doubt they'd get the 2/3 in the Senate they'd need to override it- too many Republicans have not been willing to go against Trump up to this point. But maybe this will be a turning point.
Trump is likely right that he will lose in lower courts, but could prevail at the SCOTUS level, although the SCOTUS is not likely to be excited about intervening in a matter of Congressional function like that. In any case, that's months or years down the road.
The greatest implication here is that Trump has opened the door to the use of a National Emergency declaration for the purposes of a wide variety of political interests- interests that should be moving through the Legislative branch of government, rather than the Executive branch. It's easy to see a Democratic president declaring a NE for the purposes of climate control, or gun regulation...issues Republicans revile.
Trump has opted to take the short-term political benefit with his base with little regard to the long term harm to the Country and our governmental system. Classic Trump-politics. Perhaps he's doing this because he suspects his time in office won't go beyond 2020, so he figures, 'WTF? This is all about me and my legacy.'
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Feb 16, 2019 - 09:56am PT
|
Interestingly, this perspective is prevalent on both sides of the aisle right now, and left-leaning media like CNN is spouting pieces like that, and so is right-leaning media like National Review.
There seems to be strong sentiment across the board that this NE strategy is a really bad idea for everyone...the only ones that don't really get it are Trump and his base. Status quo.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Social climber
Wilds of New Mexico
|
|
|
Feb 16, 2019 - 04:11pm PT
|
The real problem is if he wins in court, which is possible. If he does, it would be because courts might defer to the executive branch on the question of whether an emergency does in fact exist and say it is Congress that has the power to check the president. However, we have for several generations lived in an era of docile congresses.
Anyway, if he goes through with this and succeeds he will have created a standardless work around to constitution for himself AND his successors.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Feb 16, 2019 - 04:14pm PT
|
Well, of course they did. Trump and Fox are like conjoined twins.
Meanwhile, most of the rest of the body politik, knows that this is a really bad thing.
Edit:
Lower courts will prolly find against him, but the SCOTUS just might defer to his constitutional Executive power. Maybe. Or they might find some sideways decision because they aren’t keen on dabbling in issues that are more in the purview of the Legislative branch.
Either way, it will take time...and if the SCOTUS defers to Executive power, the gates will be open for any POTUS to call anything a NE. Trump has let that genie out of the bottle...mostly for his own selfish interests.
|
|
Jon Beck
Trad climber
Oceanside
|
|
|
Feb 16, 2019 - 04:44pm PT
|
I really do not think SCOTUS will find a way to justify the emergency declaration. There is a reason they are appointed for life, helps to keep politics out of it. None of the justices have anything to gain by kissing Trumps fat azz. Reversing the lower courts on this issue would green light all sorts of emergency declarations for issues like global warming, gun control etc. No SC justice wants that baked into their legacy. They do care about their legacy, and Trump will be gone soon enough. I look at this as a test of our democracy, the system works if we protect it.
|
|
Bad Climber
Trad climber
The Lawless Border Regions
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2019 - 06:59am PT
|
Boy, this is getting interesting! I'll post the link below, but The Hill thinks Trump will prevail. As far as "national emergency" goes, I say damn straight there is--but not really because of hordes of criminal Orcs charging the border, although certainly some criminals do cross--criminals not just for flouting our immigration laws, that is, i.e. gang members, etc. Of course, most illegals are just desperate to escape their crappy situation back home. But who can doubt that our leaky border and sloppy immigration enforcement over these last few decades have NOT cause a national crisis? The numbers vary, but we probably have something like TWENTY MILLION illegal immigrants. WTF? Seriously? How is this NOT a national emergency? It's been one for many years, but the problem serves both parties so well that nothing, absolutely nothing substantive or effective gets done.
It's an effing disgrace for both parties. How many people have died in the desert, how many women raped and molested, how many children carried into sex slavery because of our crappy, crappy immigration policy? For a while there--don't know if this is still true--but Arizona was cautioning folks about the dangers of hiking and traveling in the southern part of the state because of gun and drug toting illegals roaming the lawless border regions. Again, WTF? We also discovered that back country travel in Organ Pipe Nat'l Monument was only allowed with ARMED rangers. Again, WTF? When one your of our own states has these kinds of problems, we've got an emergency.
Here are some interesting stats from The Hill about the current state of affairs caused by business as usual:
**Apprehensions of illegal crossers dropped to 303,916 in fiscal 2017, but they are rising again.
There were 50,998 apprehensions in October 2018; 51,857 in November; 50,749 in December; and 47,893 in January 2019. At this rate, there will be around 806,000 apprehensions in fiscal 2019, which will be two and a half times as many as there were in fiscal 2017.
The immigration courts are overwhelmed by their caseload already. As of Nov. 30, 2018, the courts had a backlog of 809,041 cases. This did not include an additional 330,211 cases that had not been put on the active docket yet, for a total backlog of 1,139,252 cases. The backlog was only 542,411 cases when Trump took office.
The average wait for a hearing is 1,018 days — more than two and a half years.**
Yep, looks like an emergency to me--not to mention the huge numbers of unattended minors attempting to cross. We've all heard lots about that crisis.
I do not think, however, that declaring a "national emergency" to appropriate funds is the way to go for reasons already stated in this thread. I think a rational enforcement of worker eligibility would take care of A LOT of the problem. I guess some states are already doing this. The problem, as I stated above, however, is that neither party wants to solve the problem. Repubs and Dems both get to rally their bases with it. Repubs get to cry about evil MS13 psychos and strained services; Dems get to yell about evil Repubs being mean and evil. Win effin' win. Meanwhile, the tragedies and social and economic costs mount year by year.
Link: https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/430340-national-emergency-declaration-a-legal-fight-trump-is-likely-to-win
Rant off.
So, we're getting a lot of snow in the Sierras this winter, eh?
BAd
|
|
10b4me
Social climber
Lida Junction
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2019 - 09:22am PT
|
I really do not think SCOTUS will find a way to justify the emergency declaration. There is a reason they are appointed for life, helps to keep politics out of it. None of the justices have anything to gain by kissing Trumps fat azz. Reversing the lower courts on this issue would green light all sorts of emergency declarations for issues like global warming, gun control etc. No SC justice wants that baked into their legacy. They do care about their legacy, and Trump will be gone soon enough. I look at this as a test of our democracy, the system works if we protect it.
Listening to NPR this morning, and they interviewed a Georgetown University law professor. He seems to think that trump will prevail in court.
There is no doubt he has the right to call a national emergency, and I am not sure if the court(s) want to get into a pissing match if it's legitimate or not.
The only saving grace is that it gets tied up in the system for awhile. By that time, trump might be out of office.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2019 - 09:30am PT
|
Well, that's one of the key reasons Trump picked Kavanaugh- Kav has well-established history supporting Executive powers- wouldn't be too surprising if Trump did prevail at the SCOTUS level.
But whether Trump 'wins' or not really isn't the point, is it? The fact that Congress has failed to deal with the immigration issue for decades is primarily why Trump was able to use this as a meme to his base in the first place. Our immigration system is f*#ked up and needs attention...and Congress needs to grow a set and do something.
It's more worrying to my eye that Trump's use of a NE to achieve his own political interests is where America 'loses'. There will be more such inappropriate declarations, which isn't what the 1976 statute (I believe) was intended to do.
|
|
Bad Climber
Trad climber
The Lawless Border Regions
|
|
|
Feb 17, 2019 - 10:32am PT
|
Yep, apogee, nailed it.
BAd
|
|
divad
Trad climber
wmass
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 18, 2019 - 05:06pm PT
|
It must be a real national emergency, as Trump was spotted in a bunker at Mar-A-Largo..
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Feb 18, 2019 - 06:26pm PT
|
Here we go....
California leads 16 states in lawsuit against Trump national emergency declaration
“It’s kind of awkward to say that on Presidents’ Day we’re going to be suing the president of the United States,” California’s attorney general says.
By JEREMY B. WHITE 02/18/2019 08:22 PM EST Updated 02/18/2019 08:56 PM EST
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/18/california-leads-16-states-in-lawsuit-against-trump-national-emergency-declaration-1173768
A coalition of 16 states filed suit to block President Donald Trump’s effort to fund his border wall by declaring a national emergency, calling it a “flagrant disregard of fundamental separation of powers principles.”
“Contrary to the will of Congress, the President has used the pretext of a manufactured ‘crisis’ of unlawful immigration to declare a national emergency and redirect federal dollars appropriated for drug interdiction, military construction, and law enforcement initiatives toward building a wall on the United States-Mexico border,” a complaint obtained by POLITICO and filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for Northern California read.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra had been telegraphing for weeks that he was prepared to take swift legal action if Trump followed through on his repeated vows to invoke an immigration emergency to justify diverting wall funding.
“It’s kind of awkward to say that on Presidents’ Day we’re going to be suing the president of the United States, but sometimes that’s what you have to do,” Becerra said during a Monday appearance on CNN.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!