Pelosi, Schumer slam Trump for national emergency declaration: 'Congress cannot let the president sh

[mystery-ak]

Pelosi, Schumer slam Trump for national emergency declaration: 'Congress cannot let the president shred the Constitution'
by Naomi Lim
 | February 15, 2019 11:33 AM



House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on Friday ripped President Trump over his declaration of a national emergency to finish building his proposed southern border wall.

“The President’s unlawful declaration over a crisis that does not exist does great violence to our Constitution and makes America less safe, stealing from urgently needed defense funds for the security of our military and our nation," the top congressional Democrats wrote in a statement. "This is plainly a power grab by a disappointed President, who has gone outside the bounds of the law to try to get what he failed to achieve in the constitutional legislative process."

“The President is not above the law. The Congress cannot let the President shred the Constitution," they said.

Pelosi and Schumer vowed to use "every remedy available," whether through Congress or the courts, to defend the legislative body's power to control government spending. The pair called on Republican lawmakers to join their efforts.

more
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/pelosi-schumer-slam-trump-for-national-emergency-declaration-congress-cannot-let-the-president-shred-the-constitution

[aligncare]

This just might be partisan hyperbole. Call it a hunch.

[libertybele]

Trump has the authority to declare a national emergency, but Congress still has the right to vote against that declaration. 

Also, he is moving funds around --- that is what I think is going to be in question. I believe we have a national emergency on our hands and a crisis at the border and give Trump a pat on the back for doing what he can to remedy this situation, but the Constitution states:

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."

So, if monies have been appropriated by law to be used for other means, does he have the authority to do so?

This I believe is what the courts are going to have to decide.

[240B]

But they CAN allow the Shi'ite Muslim Hussein Obama with help from his Iranian 'assistant' Jarrett to simply give Iran $150 billion dollars in pallets of cash with no approval from anyone other than themselves. This is considered by Democrats to be perfectly 'legal'.

According to Democrats, funding Iranian terrorism is perfectly legal. While funding a border wall with 1/30th of what we gave to Iran to help boost the Iranian nuclear program, is somehow 'illegal'.

This is national suicide. And 'national suicide' seems to be exactly what the Democrats are fanatically persuing.

[240B]

Watching the Democrats squawking like a yard full of chickens over "The Constitution" which they have avowed that they hate, is an irony which I never thought I would live to see. Kind of like Pelosi citing Jesus and the Bible to justify abortion.

They disavow a document as meaningless and even dangerous, then they use the very same document that they declared has no authority to justify their own authority. We live in interesting times.

[libertybele]

Watching the Democrats squawking like a yard full of chickens over "The Constitution" which they have avowed that they hate, is an irony which I never thought I would live to see. Kind of like Pelosi siting Jesus and the Bible to justify abortion.

They disavow a document as meaningless and even dangerous, then they use the very same document that they declared has no authority to justify their own authority. We live in interesting times.

The DEMS will only recognize the Constitution when they feel it is to their advantage to do so. 

[Jazzhead]

If anyone "shredded the Constitution", it's the Congress that delegated to the President the authority to declare and address an emergency from unappropriated funds.    Where was Schumer's objection to the shredding of the Constitution or Congress's prerogatives when Obama declared a national emergency on approximately a dozen occasions?

Of course this is all partisan hyperbole.   

A mechanism exists under the NEA for Congress to "undo" the emergency declaration and the Dems are welcome to try to convince Congress to exercise that right.   But there is no Constitutional crisis here - the President is using authority Congress gave him. 

[libertybele]

If anyone "shredded the Constitution", it's the Congress that delegated to the President the authority to declare and address an emergency from unappropriated funds.    Where was Schumer's objection to the shredding of the Constitution or Congress's prerogatives when Obama declared a national emergency on approximately a dozen occasions?

Of course this is all partisan hyperbole.   

A mechanism exists under the NEA for Congress to "undo" the emergency declaration and the Dems are welcome to try to convince Congress to exercise that right.   But there is no Constitutional crisis here - the President is using authority Congress gave him.

Exactly.  The question in my mind though, is; does he have the authority to use funds for other purposes other than what they were intended for?

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."

[jafo2010]

Trump will not win this fight.  He cannot count on John Roberts to support his position.  He loses 5-4 in the Supreme Court, then loses in 2020.  This is all choreographed by the Never Trumpers.

Trump NEVER had Republican Congressional support, only the voters.