The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on February 25, 2019, 11:06:29 pm
-
Wisconsin governor issues order pulling National Guard troops from border, citing no 'crisis'
By Michael Burke - 02/25/19 05:51 PM EST
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D) on Monday issued an executive order withdrawing the state's National Guard troops from the southern border.
Evers said in a tweet that there is not evidence of a crisis at the border and there is thus "no justification" for having troops there.
"There is simply not ample evidence to support the president’s contention of a national security crisis at our southwestern border. Therefore, there is no justification for the ongoing presence of Wisconsin National Guard personnel at the border," Evers said.
more
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/431499-wisconsin-governor-issues-order-pulling-national-guard-troops-from
-
Can Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker be far behind.
-
If President Obama or President Hillary ordered this, this fanatical Leftist/Communist idiot would send the entire population of his State down there. Just more anti-Trump hysteria from the Dems. If Trump wants it, no matter what it is, we will resist. Anything we can do no matter how small to hinder Trump in anyway, we will do it.
Lots of jokes about Trump demanding medicare for all, free tuition, and open borders. If President Trump wants it, no matter what it is, the Democrats will always oppose it. He really should simply start making fun of these Loony Tune Dem politicians.
-
Tony Evers posting here as @Once-Ler.
-
Tony Evers posting here as @Once-Ler.
lol
-
Democrats' new tactic of ignoring reality and instead ordering you to take a great big bite of their sh*t sandwich is vexing, to say the least.
-
Can Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker be far behind.
They'll dribble out the traitorous Governors one at a time for maximum impact. I'd be surprised if any Rat Governor allow troops for Trump.
-
If President Obama or President Hillary ordered this, this fanatical Leftist/Communist idiot would send the entire population of his State down there.
And, there would be 10 legal scholars on CNN pontificating as to why the Governors couldn't defy Prez Obama or any other Dem in the office.
-
So. He's already declared a national emergency. All he has to do now is Federalize the National Guard units he wants...as is every President's prerogative during times of national emergency... and they become a part of the active army, subject to all orders thereof.
-
The President is well within existing law to both declare an emergency and move money around to fund it.
The only way the Demons can stop this and the wall is to challenge the claim of "emergency" itself.
-
So. He's already declared a national emergency. All he has to do now is Federalize the National Guard units he wants...as is every President's prerogative during times of national emergency... and they become a part of the active army, subject to all orders thereof.
Heck, even before the "national emergency" issue... the Little Rock Nine being a perfect example. It's called the NATIONAL Guard for a reason.
-
How many Guard troops went to Iraq and Afghanistan? They weren't sent by Governors, were they?
-
The President is well within existing law to both declare an emergency and move money around to fund it.
The only way the Demons can stop this and the wall is to challenge the claim of "emergency" itself.
He definitely has the authority to declare a national emergency, but he may not have the authority to re appropriate funds Congress has already approved for other uses?
The bill that he signed allows states to opt out of a barrier -- so they really don't need to challenge him -- he already given in to them.
-
He definitely has the authority to declare a national emergency, but he may not have the authority to re appropriate funds Congress has already approved for other uses?
@libertybele
Trump Is On Solid Legal Ground In Declaring A Border Emergency To Build A Wall
The Federalist, Feb 19, 2019, Sean Davis
[...]
Much news coverage of Trump’s national emergency declaration has suggested that he is unilaterally spending money that has not been appropriated to fund construction of a wall (or fence, or security barrier, or whatever you want to call it) on the U.S. southern border, but that is simply not the case. In fact, the formal declaration of a national emergency on the U.S.-Mexico border cites two specific federal statutes that provide him the legal basis to use emergency funds to secure the border: one authorizing the president to declare national emergencies (50 U.S.C 1601 et. seq.) and the other authorizing the president to reprogram existing federal appropriations in response to an emergency declaration (10 U.S.C. 2808).
Between 2001 and 2014, according to a January 2019 analysis by the Congressional Research Service, Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama used those two laws in tandem 18 separate times to reprogram existing appropriations to address national emergencies, so there’s nothing unusual or unprecedented in Trump using the same authorities to respond to national security threats.
[...]
The president’s authority to declare a national emergency established by statute, let us now turn to what authorities the president is granted once a national emergency is declared. Within the context of the emergency border wall debate, that law is 10 U.S.C. 2808, which delegates to the president, in the event of a national emergency that requires the U.S. military, the authority to reprogram existing appropriations for military construction projects in order to address the ongoing emergency. Here is the text of that particular statute: [...]
There are several important phrases in this particular statute, namely “requires the use of the armed forces,†“military construction projects,†and “necessary to support such use of the armed forces.â€
Who determines whether the use of the armed forces is required during a particular national emergency? The simple answer is that such discretion belongs to the president of the United States in the discharge of his duties as commander-in-chief. As Article II of the U.S. Constitution states, “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States[.]â€
In the absence of federal laws prohibiting the deployment or use of the armed forces (e.g., the Posse Comitatus act prohibits the Army and Navy from engaging in domestic law enforcement), the president’s discretion on whether use of the armed forces is required to secure and defend the United States is absolute.
More: http://thefederalist.com/2019/02/19/trump-solid-legal-ground-declaring-border-emergency-build-wall/ (http://thefederalist.com/2019/02/19/trump-solid-legal-ground-declaring-border-emergency-build-wall/)
-
The bill that he signed allows states to opt out of a barrier -- so they really don't need to challenge him -- he already given in to them.
This is about a drumbeat ... that it's not an emergency. They're going to beat this drum all the way to court and try to convince the public along the way.
-
@libertybele
Thanks for the info! :beer:
-
There is no crisis. Actually, illegal immigration has decreased, because living here is less desirable since Trump got elected.
-
There is no crisis. Actually, illegal immigration has decreased, because living here is less desirable since Trump got elected.
Kamala Harris agrees with you.
-
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VRMKPxGtHLk/TlvGBBPf_RI/AAAAAAAABHM/2Qz2tkV5Xzk/s1600/Supertramp-Crisis_What_Crisis_-Frontal.jpg)
-
@Once-Ler What does David Duke agree with @Free Vulcan about? Please be specific.
-
There is no crisis. Actually, illegal immigration has decreased, because living here is less desirable since Trump got elected.
In legal terms, who is authorized to define a "crisis" under the 1976 statute?
Asylum claims are up dramatically, drugs are poring through, and there continues to be a serious threat of terror access through the southern desert areas...I consider that to be a crisis. Perhaps you do not. Perhaps most in congress do not. But the statue allows the president to make that determination. So it doesn't make any legal difference if you...I...or congress think its not a "crisis". Unless, of course, congress votes under the guidelines of the statute to end the emergency...which requires, of course, a 2/3rds majority in order to "pass" into law over a Presidential veto.
So clearly, in the sense of the 1976 congressional statute, its a crisis if the President believes it to be so. Period.
-
I campaigned for David Duke against 'Vote for the crook, it's Important' Edwards back in the day and to this day I don't know that David Duke is for anything other than David Duke.
-
I campaigned for David Duke against 'Vote for the crook, it's Important' Edwards back in the day and to this day I don't know that David Duke is for anything other than David Duke.
Being a white supremacist didn't do him any favors in the public eye, so I suspect he has to believe in that stuff at some level.
-
@Cyber Liberty
Trump Rocks. Illegals are vermin. Godfather 3 was the best Godfather movie.
Isn't it past your troll-time? You usually grace us with your wit in the mornings.
-
I think he does @Sanguine but being a 'so called' White Supremacist almost got him elected Gov of Louisiana in 1990.
He's pretty much poison today in this PC environment with no chance for rehabilitation, IMHO.
-
In legal terms, who is authorized to define a "crisis" under the 1976 statute?
Asylum claims are up dramatically, drugs are poring through, and there continues to be a serious threat of terror access through the southern desert areas...I consider that to be a crisis. Perhaps you do not. Perhaps most in congress do not. But the statue allows the president to make that determination. So it doesn't make any legal difference if you...I...or congress think its not a "crisis". Unless, of course, congress votes under the guidelines of the statute to end the emergency...which requires, of course, a 2/3rds majority in order to "pass" into law over a Presidential veto.
So clearly, in the sense of the 1976 congressional statute, its a crisis if the President believes it to be so. Period.
The good news is illegal immigration is down. The bad news is asylum claims are up 1800 percent.
Roll out the barrel.
-
Isn't it past your troll-time? You usually grace us with your wit in the mornings.
When people here stop responding to his bs he will go away. Trolls can't take being ignored.
-
Some coward sent me this with no return address or way to reply...
If the shoe fits...
So long. :seeya:
Just like that? No phony attempt to sound genial or reasonable?
-
@Cyber Liberty
Trump Rocks. Illegals are vermin. Godfather 3 was the best Godfather movie.
Ah! I see! You have nothing to add to the debate, so you're just flinging poop at other Members.
-
Some coward sent me this with no return address or way to reply...
If the shoe fits...
So long. :seeya:
So Mods are "cowards" these days?
-
Elvis has left the building.
-
David Duke agrees with you.
...and we've resorted to the race card. That didn't take long.
-
Kamala Harris agrees with you.
@Free Vulcan
I sincerely apologize for insinuating you are a racist, and I have removed my offending posts in shame. I was angry at your association of me with Kamala Harris, and also the way the world is. I realize I actually damaged my opinion and reputation with you and most the whole forum by my flippant reply. I should be heartened that being linked to Kamala Harris is so much less offensive than David Duke on this forum.
I had no right to judge you that way. Racism is an easy excuse to complex problems I don't fully understand, and I had a bad day. I do not truly believe you are like David Duke. I take it back, and I hope you will accept my apology.
-
There is no crisis. Actually, illegal immigration has decreased, because living here is less desirable since Trump got elected.
@Once-Ler
Cool! When are you leaving,and what Workers Paradise will you be moving?
-
@Free Vulcan
I sincerely apologize for insinuating you are a racist, and I have removed my offending posts in shame. I was angry at your association of me with Kamala Harris, and also the way the world is. I realize I actually damaged my opinion and reputation with you and most the whole forum by my flippant reply. I should be heartened that being linked to Kamala Harris is so much less offensive than David Duke on this forum.
I had no right to judge you that way. Racism is an easy excuse to complex problems I don't fully understand, and I had a bad day. I do not truly believe you are like David Duke. I take it back, and I hope you will accept my apology.
Apology accepted, and I apologize for comparing you to Kamala Harris.
:beer:
-
@Free Vulcan
I should be heartened that being linked to Kamala Harris is so much less offensive than David Duke on this forum.
@Once-Ler
Say WHAT? Same critter,different fur.