The Trump Presidency...

Indeed, bit like Obama was wrong to use Executive Orders to evade Constitutional Proceedures.

But he did, and nobody stopped him, so now Trump is free to do the same isn’t he?

I mean, that’s exactly the argument the Democrats are making after all - that once one president does it, all the others can, so why shouldn’t Trump benefit from this rule?
 
But he did, and nobody stopped him, so now Trump is free to do the same isn’t he?

I mean, that’s exactly the argument the Democrats are making after all - that once one president does it, all the others can, so why shouldn’t Trump benefit from this rule?
Obama wasn't the first to use executive orders. Many have before.

The question is, how many have called for a state of emergency to be called, even when saying that he doesn't need to, in a blatant way to bypass Congress? This I believe is new, and he will be seen as the one with the can opener in hand and worms everywhere. The Republicans are going to rue the day.
 

Pob02

LE
Book Reviewer
But he did, and nobody stopped him, so now Trump is free to do the same isn’t he?

I mean, that’s exactly the argument the Democrats are making after all - that once one president does it, all the others can, so why shouldn’t Trump benefit from this rule?
Already answered.

You really are a loon.
 
Obama wasn't the first to use executive orders. Many have before.

The question is, how many have called for a state of emergency to be called, even when saying that he doesn't need to, in a blatant way to bypass Congress? This I believe is new, and he will be seen as the one with the can opener in hand and worms everywhere. The Republicans are going to rue the day.
How can it be a way to bypass congress when congress can vote to rescind/overturn it?
 
But he did, and nobody stopped him, so now Trump is free to do the same isn’t he?

I mean, that’s exactly the argument the Democrats are making after all - that once one president does it, all the others can, so why shouldn’t Trump benefit from this rule?
Makes a lot of people wrong then, not one right doesn't it?

Of course, I am merely being mischievous pointing out the Orange one has no stable ideology.

Which is polite than the reminder he (and his underlings) cannot keep their stories straight either.

He appears an empty vessel, I cannot remember which French king it was; but was it not once said the two most powerful people in France were the king and the last person he had talked to?

Oh, and they tried building a wall once as well. That didn't work out either.
 
China has it's wall, Russia had it's "Curtain"..... I hear shutters are "in" this year.
I never thought of that, maybe That's where he got the idea from.

During one of those nice chats (without a terp or adult present) maybe Vlad spun some dits about his days as KGB in East Germany and the good old wall.
 

Pob02

LE
Book Reviewer
His veto can be overturned with a supermajority vote from Congress.

Sent from my Lenovo TB2-X30F using Tapatalk
True.

First they have to vote to reverse the decision. Then the president can veto, then it goes back as “contested” and needs a 2/3 majority in each house.

However I would opine that this is not what The Rat was attempting to articulate.
 
Last edited:
True.

First they have to vote to reverse the decision. Then the president can veto, then it goes back as “contested” and needs a 2/3 majority in each house.

However I would opine that this is not what The Rat was attempting to articulate.
There’s a clear mechanism by which congress get the final say, so how can anyone claim that using the power to declare an emergency bypasses congress?

It’s the same type of utter drivel that the pathetic lefties say here when they claim that parliament is undemocratic because the House of Lords is unelected - ignoring the fact that the commons can push legislation through via the Parliament Act
 

Pob02

LE
Book Reviewer
There’s a clear mechanism by which congress get the final say, so how can anyone claim that using the power to declare an emergency bypasses congress?

It’s the same type of utter drivel that the pathetic lefties say here when they claim that parliament is undemocratic because the House of Lords is unelected - ignoring the fact that the commons can push legislation through via the Parliament Act
Because the power to “declare” does.

The ability to reverse that declaration remains with Congress, but not by a simple majority vote.

The clue is in the word “declare”.
 
Because the power to “declare” does.

The ability to reverse that declaration remains with Congress, but not by a simple majority vote.

The clue is in the word “declare”.
The power to “declare” particular things goes with the office of president

It’s not “bypassing” Congress, it’s using the powers that congress gave to the president
 

Pob02

LE
Book Reviewer
The power to “declare” particular things goes with the office of president

It’s not “bypassing” Congress, it’s using the powers that congress gave to the president
But not for the purpose this particular president is using them......he is using a technicality to attempt to bypass Congress, because he is not the great deal-maker he claims to be and cannot get his own way via the normal channels.
 
Well fellas it's official, President Fat Cnut really is a Fat Cnut according to his Doc who released fatty's medical report today Fatso has surpassed the American Standard of Obesity. The good news is being a fat oinking porker chubby now gets to tell porkies instead of telling the truth all the time.
Stop making him sound like Cartman.
 
But not for the purpose this particular president is using them......
That’s simply not true

The text of the national emergencies act 1976 places no restrictions whatsoever on the purpose or aims of the president in declaring a national emergency. The president has absolute leeway to decide what is and isn’t an emergency because, well, you guessed it, he’s the president. There is no ‘orange man bad’ clause, the check and balance to presidential power is set out in the act, if congress doesn’t like it they have a mechanism to call the decision back in.

That’s the system working as it’s supposed to, it’s not the president ‘bypassing’ anyone, least of all congress. The fact that the democrats are extremely unlikely to ever muster 2/3 majority in either the house or the senate to overthrow the declaration isn’t his problem, it’s theirs.
 
Last edited:

Helm

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
That’s simply not true

The text of the national emergencies act 1976 places no restrictions whatsoever on the purpose or aims of the president in declaring a national emergency. The president has absolute leeway to decide what is and isn’t an emergency because, well, you guessed it, he’s the president. There is no ‘orange man bad’ clause, the check and balance to presidential power is set out in the act, if congress doesn’t like it they have a mechanism to call the decision back in.

That’s the system working as it’s supposed to, it’s not the president ‘bypassing’ anyone, least of all congress. The fact that the democrats don’t control the senate isn’t his problem, it’s theirs.
There's so much wrong with that post, it's beyond parody
 
There's so much wrong with that post, it's beyond parody
Yet, strangely, you have failed to actually point out anything incorrect

(You’ll note that I’ve expanded my comment on the senate too)

Here’s how the conversation goes now:

You: “It’s wrong”
Me: “which bit?”
You: “it doesn’t matter which bit, it’s just wrong”
Me: “so, what’s wrong about it?”
You: “erm, all of it”
Me: “no, exactly what have I written that is wrong? Show your working, prove me wrong”
You: “it’s just wrong”

And round and around we’ll go... with you utterly unable to muster any coherent argument against it, other than ‘orange man bad’
 
Last edited:

Helm

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
Yet, strangely, you have failed to actually point out anything incorrect

(You’ll note that I’ve expanded my comment on the senate too)
Lets just go with all of it's wrong and you pick out the right bits then. Yes I noticed your rapid back tracking as well.
 
There’s a clear mechanism by which congress get the final say, so how can anyone claim that using the power to declare an emergency bypasses congress?

It’s the same type of utter drivel that the pathetic lefties say here when they claim that parliament is undemocratic because the House of Lords is unelected - ignoring the fact that the commons can push legislation through via the Parliament Act
So, the great negotiator, the best, could not get what's left of the promise through a negotiation. Remember this is a problem of his own making. He promised to build a wall. He promised that the Mexicans would pay for it. He decided that he'd probably pushed too far and he could never get any money from Mexico (go figure!). He's the one who is trying to get money from Congress after he lost the majority, not before.

His first attempt of bullying Congress and the American people by shutting down the government (again suggested by and owned by him) went spectacularly wrong. So yes, this is his second attempt to force Congress' hand. It's not a normal move, it's not in any normal president's playbook and it won't work. But he will at least have been seen, by his thick a mince supporters, to have done everything to fulfil his promise and to have been thwarted by those pesky Dems.

In his mind it will be a win. In reality it shows that his inflated opinion of his own negotiating abilities is based on a lifetime of getting what he wants by threatening those with less money and more to lose. If he's not negotiating from a position of strength, he's useless. This also explains the fact that he talks big until he is in the presence of equals or those he fears. That's not negotiation. He is however trying to bypass (or look as if he is) Congress.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top