Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

President Trump making major border announcement

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • President Trump making major border announcement


    The president makes an important announcement on border this morning...


    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Trump Says He'll Declare Border Emergency to Free Up Wall Money

    President Donald Trump said Friday hell declare a national emergency on the U.S. southern border in a bid to unlock more money to build his proposed wall, a day after agreeing to sign legislation providing about $1.4 billion for the controversial project.
    In unscripted remarks Friday morning, Trump depicted the declaration as ordinary but also said he expected it to be challenged in court. He predicted hed eventually prevail, but conceded: I didnt need to do this.

    I just want to get it done faster, he said of the wall.

    Combined with spending legislation Trump also intends to sign Friday or Saturday, the move will free up about $8 billion for the wall, Trumps top campaign promise, Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney told reporters in a conference call. He criticized Congress for not providing more money in the spending bill passed on Thursday, enough for about 55 miles of physical barriers.

    I expect to be sued, Trump said, and predicted he may initially lose if the case winds up with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which he has frequently criticized as biased against him.

    He said he expects the Supreme Court to eventually rule on the matter. Happily, well win. I think, he said.

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer promised that Trump can indeed expect a legal fight.


    ....


    https://www.newsmax.com/headline/tru.../15/id/902911/



    Video here

    Trump announces he's signing border bill and declaring national emergency to get wall funding

    ....

    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trum...ry?id=61088949


  • #2
    Chuck & Nancy say;

    [ Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Friday they'll take action "in the Congress, in the Courts, and in the public."

    They say Trump's decision to declare an emergency is unlawful. They say it would "shred the Constitution" by usurping Congress' power to control spending.
    ]

    They didn't seem that excited while Mr. Obama was "shred(ing) the Constitution".. THEY ASSISTED !

    "We have to sign it so you can find out what's in it !"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU

    Do they not have a better defense against putting a stop to an invasion of our country that has ALWAYS been the fault of creeps like themselves in Washington D.C. ?!?!?

    An invasion that has been going on for many decades !!

    No, they don't...

    They argue against walls - and guns - AS THEY USE BOTH FOR THEMSELVES !!!

    Clearly they imagine that they are better, more deserving of such safety enhancements while the people of America AREN'T !

    The arrogance of these people is sickening ...


    ---------------------------------------------------------------

    Trump said he will use executive powers to bypass Congress, which approved far less money for his proposed wall than he had sought. He plans to take billions of dollars from federal military construction and counterdrug efforts for the wall.

    "I am going to be signing a national emergency," Trump said from the Rose Garden, as he claimed illegal immigration marked "an invasion of our country."

    In a rare show of bipartisanship, lawmakers voted Thursday to fund large swaths of the government and avoid a repeat of this winter's debilitating five-week government shutdown. The money in the bill for border barriers, about $1.4 billion, is far below the $5.7 billion Trump said he needed...

    To bridge the gap, Trump announced that he will be spending roughly $8 billion on border barriers combining the money approved by Congress with funding he plans to repurpose through executive actions, including the national emergency. The money is expected to come from funds targeted for military construction and counterdrug efforts, but aides could not immediately specify which military projects would be affected.

    Congress' two top Democrats say they'll use "every remedy available" to oppose President Donald Trump's declaration of an emergency to shift billions of federal dollars into building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Friday they'll take action "in the Congress, in the Courts, and in the public."

    They say Trump's decision to declare an emergency is unlawful. They say it would "shred the Constitution" by usurping Congress' power to control spending.


    https://onenewsnow.com/ap/politics/t...ld-border-wall

    ?


    • #3
      I know someone that will enjoy this : )

      Even though it's by someone they hate.

      But hey, conservatives can turn on their own in the same ways democrats turn on their own.

      Coulter says "Trumps an idiot" on the border wall ....

      That's the National Emergency !! LOL

      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Ann Coulter: Trump's an 'Idiot,' That's the National Emergency

      "Forget the fact that he's digging his own grave. The only national emergency is that our president is an idiot," Coulter said Friday morning on KABC radio in Los Angeles.

      ..

      https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/an.../15/id/902974/

      ?


      • #4
        Despite her prediction that Trump would win, Coulters dismay that Ted Cruz was not nominated is on record, so no surprise she avails herself of this opportunity to disparage him.

        ?


        • #5
          Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
          Despite her prediction that Trump would win, Coulters dismay that Ted Cruz was not nominated is on record, so no surprise she avails herself of this opportunity to disparage him.
          Apparently she wants a wall on the border with Mexico MORE, if we can imagine that, than president Trump !

          Hard to say, but I thought it would be interesting to see reactions to her statement that; ""Trumps an idiot" regarding the border wall

          ?


          • #6
            Wasted no time filing a "lawsuit" against this presidents national emergency declaration.

            The interesting thing about this is;

            ..first, they claim this national emergency declaration will "set a precedent" of some sort..

            "A bad precedent by a bad president" - in their opinion.. the only one that matters..

            There have been a LOT of these declarations by presidents, many to assist other countries !

            We have an emergency here.. and it's somehow NOT ?? Oh, because democrats need new, easy voters because Americans generally reject their foolishness.

            and....

            Second, were this a declaration by a democrat president, REPUBLICANS wouldn't DARE attempt to "file a lawsuit" against it !!!

            There would be HOLY HELL to pay for such a thing !

            But this is president Trump and anything goes when you hate the fact that Trump won the election.

            He wasn't supposed to do that.

            No matter what type of asinine antics the democrats pull off, the "media" will give them all the support they need.

            So, just a few hours in ... we already have a "lawsuit" from these ass-hats LOL

            -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            ..

            Democratic-controlled House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee said it had launched an investigation into the emergency declaration.

            In a letter to Trump, committee Democrats asked him to make available for a hearing White House and Justice Department officials involved in the action. They also requested legal documents on the decision that led to the declaration, setting a deadline of next Friday.

            "We believe your declaration of an emergency shows a reckless disregard for the separation of powers and your own responsibilities under our constitutional system," said the letter signed by Chairman Jerrold Nadler and other top Democrats on the panel.


            ...

            https://www.newsmax.com/politics/tru.../15/id/903006/

            ?


            • #7
              Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
              Wasted no time filing a "lawsuit" against this presidents national emergency declaration.

              The interesting thing about this is;

              ..first, they claim this national emergency declaration will "set a precedent" of some sort..

              "A bad precedent by a bad president" - in their opinion.. the only one that matters..

              There have been a LOT of these declarations by presidents, many to assist other countries !

              We have an emergency here.. and it's somehow NOT ?? Oh, because democrats need new, easy voters because Americans generally reject their foolishness.

              and....

              Second, were this a declaration by a democrat president, REPUBLICANS wouldn't DARE attempt to "file a lawsuit" against it !!!

              There would be HOLY HELL to pay for such a thing !

              But this is president Trump and anything goes when you hate the fact that Trump won the election.

              He wasn't supposed to do that.

              No matter what type of asinine antics the democrats pull off, the "media" will give them all the support they need.

              So, just a few hours in ... we already have a "lawsuit" from these ass-hats LOL

              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              ..

              Democratic-controlled House of Representatives' Judiciary Committee said it had launched an investigation into the emergency declaration.

              In a letter to Trump, committee Democrats asked him to make available for a hearing White House and Justice Department officials involved in the action. They also requested legal documents on the decision that led to the declaration, setting a deadline of next Friday.

              "We believe your declaration of an emergency shows a reckless disregard for the separation of powers and your own responsibilities under our constitutional system," said the letter signed by Chairman Jerrold Nadler and other top Democrats on the panel.


              ...

              https://www.newsmax.com/politics/tru.../15/id/903006/
              Ann Coulter our favorite columnist Ann Coulter calls Trump an idiot. You go go girl. https://www.thewrap.com/ann-coulter-...t-is-an-idiot/

              ?


              • #8
                Originally posted by redrover View Post

                Ann Coulter our favorite columnist Ann Coulter calls Trump an idiot. You go go girl. https://www.thewrap.com/ann-coulter-...t-is-an-idiot/
                I thought you'd like that LOL

                See, conservatives aren't all bad !!

                ?


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                  I thought you'd like that LOL

                  See, conservatives aren't all bad !!
                  Even a blind squirrel gets a nut every once in a while.

                  ?


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by redrover View Post

                    Even a blind squirrel gets a nut every once in a while.
                    and a broken clock is right twice a day LOL

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                      and a broken clock is right twice a day LOL
                      Can you really believe that moron goes out and makes an announcement that there is really no national emergency and he's just trying to speed up progress on his Humpty Dumpty wall.We'll have to see how much support he gets from the hacks he's put on the bench.

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by redrover View Post
                        Can you really believe that moron goes out and makes an announcement that there is really no national emergency and he's just trying to speed up progress on his Humpty Dumpty wall.
                        Yeah, if he said that he IS a moron.

                        Can you link me to where he said that ?

                        Because he just said there WAS, now if he's saying there isn't ... I don't know ?

                        Why would he do that ??

                        Unless he's a moron..

                        Originally posted by redrover View Post
                        We'll have to see how much support he gets from the hacks he's put on the bench.
                        I don't think we'll have much to worry about.

                        He hasn't had the time to replace all of the America hating hacks put on the bench by our high Lord Obama.

                        ... and the supreme court is ... I think it's split 50/50 ... unless Ruth Badgirl Ginsburg has a live mic in her tomb - she very well may ! She'll be offering rulings for a thousand years !!

                        If America lasts that long.

                        Then ??

                        Well who knows ? Maybe she'll die off for real then.

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                          Yeah, if he said that he IS a moron.

                          Can you link me to where he said that ?

                          Because he just said there WAS, now if he's saying there isn't ... I don't know ?

                          Why would he do that ??

                          Unless he's a moron..



                          I don't think we'll have much to worry about.

                          He hasn't had the time to replace all of the America hating hacks put on the bench by our high Lord Obama.

                          ... and the supreme court is ... I think it's split 50/50 ... unless Ruth Badgirl Ginsburg has a live mic in her tomb - she very well may ! She'll be offering rulings for a thousand years !!

                          If America lasts that long.

                          Then ??

                          Well who knows ? Maybe she'll die off for real then.
                          https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...lPz?li=BBnbfcL

                          ?


                          • #14
                            The president didn't actually say; "There is no national emergency."

                            What he said was; ""I didn't need to do this, but I wanted to do it faster""

                            ... because there IS a national emergency, has been for quite awhile.

                            Our "lawmakers" were/are just too stupid to take care of the problem... no surprise, these incompetents ignore trouble all the time.. what was it with the lead in the water somewhere ?? Thousands more examples of government foolishness/incompetence are easy to find...

                            He actually spoke the truth that we have a national emergency on our border with Mexico.

                            A national emergency of our own making !

                            We've been inviting and PAYING people to come to our country illegaly for decades LOL Stupid Americans..

                            How long have we been sucking up the great drugs they bring us ???? Stupid Americans..LOL

                            So they bring us MORE .. money for them...


                            No wonder massive crowds, or columns of invaders keep forming and coming our way ... oops er "Caravans"...

                            The aclu is making itself look supremely stupid with its declaration that;

                            ""There is no emergency. This is an unconstitutional power grab that hurts American communities. We'll see him in court.""

                            There is, it's easy to see. The aclu looses. Ambulance chasers LOL

                            ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                            As I pointed out, this has been a problem for a very long time.

                            Our imbecile politicians have let it keep happening.

                            Why ?

                            Because;

                            1. They're profiting from it somehow

                            or

                            2. They're stupid.

                            Take your pick.

                            ---------------------------------------------------------

                            Miller fiercely defended the emergency declaration as host Chris Wallace challenged him to provide historic precedent, noting that the 59 times the National Emergencies Act was invoked, two were for military construction funds.

                            "This is hardly comparable to either of those," Wallace said of Trumps border wall project.

                            "Can you name one foreign threat in the world today outside this countrys borders that currently kills more Americans than the threats crossing our southern border?" Miller retorted.

                            "You know, the joy of this is I get to ask you questions," Wallace shot back. "You dont get to ask me."

                            Wallace drilled down on whether there's ever been another instance of a president not getting money from Congress and then declaring a national emergency to allow the diversion of federal funding.

                            Answer my question, Wallace insisted after Miller didn't provide a definitive response. Can you name one case where a president has asked Congress for money, Congress has refused, and the president has then invoked national powers to get the money anyway? yes or no, sir.

                            The premise of the question is also false, Miller finally replied.

                            During his defense of the president, Miller also took a hard jab at former President George W. Bush for choosing to ignore this crisis at the border.

                            Let's start with border crossings in the year 2000., Miller argued. As you know, George Bush came into office, illegal immigration doubled from 6 million to 12 million by the time he left office. That represented an astonishing betrayal of the American people.



                            https://www.newsmax.com/politics/mil.../17/id/903115/



                            ?


                            • #15
                              So, a 'National Emergency' it is to be.

                              Well, from the situation at the border, yeah, that kinda applies, though I think the more serious national emergency is the lack of seriousness the Democrats are taking the serious issue of border control, illegal immigration enforcement, and the smuggling of deadly drugs as well as the deadly smuggling of people.

                              Some of the Democrat's 'poison pills' in the signed budget agreement are starting to come to light, demonstrates their lack of seriousness. The worst of which is that this bill contains a blatant amnesty for the worst cartel smugglers: Section 224(a) (that's be the child traffickers - is this now a Democratic constituency and benefactor?)


                              There have been some discussions here in this forum that the right approach to this is to remove the inducement for illegal migrants to illegally cross the border and to work under the table. This bill provides more funding to manage and induce the invasion rather than to deter it, so a greater inducement, not less of one.
                              While offering no new funding for ICE deportation agents or immigration judges to speed up asylum claims, as the president requested, this bill adds another $40 million for the Alternatives to Detention (ATD) program, which moves asylum seekers to facilities in the interior of the country, where they are usually released. Vaughan, who has studied interior immigration enforcement for decades, warned that “this bill will further expand and institutionalize the catch-and-release policies for those arriving illegally at the border from all over the world.”
                              5 insane provisions in the amnesty omnibus bill - Conservative Review

                              The Obvious and Clear Conclusions:
                              • Democrats want open borders.
                              • Democrats don't want any immigration enforcement (When they flapped their lips making noises that they did, they were lying to the electorate - clearly)
                              • Democrats don't care if illegal aliens commit crimes against US citizens, and are then released back into society (prioritizing the welfare of illegal aliens above those of their own US citizens)

                              ?

                              Working...
                              X