Trump has done some crazy things over the past two years, but he's really stepped in it this time.
burrrton wrote:Ayup. And I wouldn't stop at merely "many" conservatives being against him- I think it's most.
Aseahawkfan wrote:This is dumb grandstanding by Trump to hold on to his anti-immigration base and uphold a promise. I think even he knows it won't fly, but he has to look like he's doing everything he can so he can blame the Dems when election time rolls around.
This is political games. I'll worry if the court allows it. That would be a bad precedent. Presidents and politicians doing stupid things with executive orders and things like this is business as usual. Just like our dumbass governor that effectively banned the death penalty in Washington circumventing the vote of the people and manipulating the liberal courts in Washington. This scumbag crap is attempted all the time by politicians to varying success.
RiverDog wrote:Trump's own big mouth is endangering this declaration of his as he admits that he "doesn't have to do this, that he could take his time". That remark alone indicates that it's not really an emergency if he "could take his time."
In my memory, this type of power grab by circumventing another branch of government and re-purposing billions in previously allocated funds has never been attempted by a POTUS, at least not during peacetime. Harry Truman issued an emergency order and tried to take over the steel industry during the Korean War because plants were being idled by strikes but was rebuked. FDR, although not at war, tried to pack the Supreme Court by expanding the number of members of which he would have appointed, but that didn't go anywhere, either. You'd have to go all the way back to Andrew Jackson, who ignored a Supreme Court decision not to evict Cherokee Indians to find a precedent anywhere close to the end run that Trump is attempting.
RiverDog wrote:Trump's own big mouth is endangering this declaration of his as he admits that he "doesn't have to do this, that he could take his time". That remark alone indicates that it's not really an emergency if he "could take his time."
In my memory, this type of power grab by circumventing another branch of government and re-purposing billions in previously allocated funds has never been attempted by a POTUS, at least not during peacetime. Harry Truman issued an emergency order and tried to take over the steel industry during the Korean War because plants were being idled by strikes but was rebuked. FDR, although not at war, tried to pack the Supreme Court by expanding the number of members of which he would have appointed, but that didn't go anywhere, either. You'd have to go all the way back to Andrew Jackson, who ignored a Supreme Court decision not to evict Cherokee Indians to find a precedent anywhere close to the end run that Trump is attempting.
Aseahawkfan wrote:You just named other presidents that unsuccessfully attempted the same thing. Like I said, political grandstanding so he can blame the Dems during the election run if he runs for re-election. He should get the point he's not wanted in D.C. and move on.
By the way, I expect major drug busts to become common place over the next year or more. Why? Because Trump can use those funds to build the wall.
idhawkman wrote:1. He can use the money he can reposition now for building the wall through the end of this year. (If I were him, I'd use this money for those areas that the bill he signed restricted from him or for those areas that would give legal standing to a party wanting to sue for the emergency declaration).
Hawktawk wrote:It wasn't an emergency when the Republicans held power in both chambers and in the SCOTUS. 2 years went by and it wasn't an emergency in terms of building a wall. The only emergency was the separation of children from their families who were primarily from central america seeking asylum to which they had a legitimate claim. Thats been the emergency,the abject cruelty to desperate brown skinned people fleeing chaos and anarchy.
Overall border crossings are near an all time low over decades IN PART DUE TO TRUMP'S DRACONIAN POLICIES. If he had a brain he'd take a victory lap but Oh no after an ass kicking in the midterms, a tongue lashing from the likes of Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity it's now an emergency.
And for all the lemmings saying every president has done it no President has ever challenged the congressional constitutional power of the purse in this manner in terms of grabbing taxpayer funded resources earmarked for other purposes in the immediate aftermath of said congress allocating the amount they deemed appropriate. And this far more bipolar than I and an idiot to boot psycho tried to sell it as a campaign strategy, admit it wasn't necessary but he wanted to do it faster.
As for the Republicans in congress trying to get past their political spina bifida I'm quite sure when it's all said and done and they see the polls showing the ID hawkmen of the world 25% strong Trump approvals threatening their existence in the primaries they will acquiesce and be right on board. Look no farther than Lindsey Graham who about a year ago was a Trump critic whose popularity among Republicans in his state had sunk to about 50% who suddenly came to Jesus and is now one of the most outspoken defenders of the indefensible but viola!!! 72% approval among Republicans and primary proof. Repubs will not provide a veto proof majority to this. No way in hell.
RiverDog wrote:
He's not going to be able to spend anything that has been previously allocated to another purpose unless he wins in the lower courts, which Trump himself admits is unlikely, and the case won't get tossed to SCOTUS for another year.
RiverDog wrote:
All good points. Another fact that Trumpies conveniently ignore is that the majority of illegal aliens in this country do not illegally come across the southern border or through ports. They overstay their visas, and a wall or increased port security isn't going to address that problem.
The only valid argument that I can see for the courts allowing this declaration to stand would be that they may be reluctant to substitute their judgment for that of the POTUS on what defines an emergency. It's here where Trump's big mouth and seat of his pants winging it might torpedo his chances as he openly admitted that he "didn't have to do this".
idhawkman wrote:God love ya river but this is just an ignorant statement. You do reàlize that his plan had other aspects to it right? Like ICE enforcement, more agents IT upgrades for tracking, etc. You want to throw up all over this forum just the Dems talking points and not the actual full plan though. So let's go with just the wall argument. With a wall in place, how many more agents will be freed up to track down the visa overstayers? Conveniently this is left out of the Dems talking points.
Nope he didn't have to "IF" he didn't care about 70000 people dying every year from opioids and now meth is up over 500% this year already. Not to mention the thousands of kids being sold into sex slavery (did you know the U.S. is the #1market for child pornography and prostitution), add in the angel moms, violent crime attacks and so much more. No he could turn a blind eye to it all like Obama did just to bolster his voting block. Problem is, with more people dying every year from drug ODs than all the deaths during theVie5 Nam war over a decade and it won't be long before the drug problem touches every single American family.
This move will be upheld by the courts. If the 9th circus blocks him again I believe the SCOTUS will put a stop to the 9th circus. One federal judge will not be allowed to continually block the actions of an elected president and that's something the Dems have not counted on.
idhawkman wrote:You do reàlize that his plan had other aspects to it right? Like ICE enforcement, more agents IT upgrades for tracking, etc. You want to throw up all over this forum just the Dems talking points and not the actual full plan though. So let's go with just the wall argument. With a wall in place, how many more agents will be freed up to track down the visa overstayers? Conveniently this is left out of the Dems talking points.
idhawkman wrote:Nope he didn't have to "IF" he didn't care about 70000 people dying every year from opioids and now meth is up over 500% this year already. Not to mention the thousands of kids being sold into sex slavery (did you know the U.S. is the #1market for child pornography and prostitution), add in the angel moms, violent crime attacks and so much more. No he could turn a blind eye to it all like Obama did just to bolster his voting block. Problem is, with more people dying every year from drug ODs than all the deaths during theVie5 Nam war over a decade and it won't be long before the drug problem touches every single American family.
idhawkman wrote:This move will be upheld by the courts. If the 9th circus blocks him again I believe the SCOTUS will put a stop to the 9th circus. One federal judge will not be allowed to continually block the actions of an elected president and that's something the Dems have not counted on.
Aseahawkfan wrote:
This is true as well. But Trump focused on the wall, so the Dems are focusing on the wall. Now everyone is focused on the idea of a wall. The wall idea Trump built up has now become a political rallying point for both sides.
I doubt he will prove it's a national emergency. And you should be highly against this. Using your logic, then the president can declare gun violence a national emergency and you want that? You want to see where a president can use a national emergency declaration for gun violence? I don't. Not sure why you do.
I'll bet you right now that isn't upheld. There will be no president declaring a national emergency for some stupid crap or our system has failed and we are in a lot of trouble because as soon as some leftist president gets in office, a very, very bad precedent will be set.
RiverDog wrote:
Yes, I realize that Trump had tossed in a couple of bones to try to entice the Dems and moderate R's to sign off on his wall funding.
I do not see any security crisis rising to the level of a national emergency related to visa overstayers. Do you?
And a wall will do next to nothing to stop the flow of illicit drugs coming into this country.
Another one of your predictions? What's your batting average? Is this another "They won't convict Manafort of anything" or "The Republicans will hold onto the House" forecasts? We all can take comfort in your prediction that Trump will win on this one.
My only suggestion for you is to be careful what you wish for: You might get it!
idhawkman wrote:17,500 children are trafficked across the southern border every year for Sex. If for no other reason, the wall should be built for them.
I know most of you won't take the time to watch this, but let this under cover DHS border patrol agent explain what the problem is. The video takes a minute to frame the issue but please watch what the border agent has to say about how these kids are violated 30-50 times a day here in America. I have two daughters so I might be a bit more sensitive to this issue but if for no other reason, this is an emergency all on its own regardless of the other crimes and drugs that come from the border.
https://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=5997200457001&w=466&h=263
idhawkman wrote:17,500 children are trafficked across the southern border every year for Sex. If for no other reason, the wall should be built for them.
I know most of you won't take the time to watch this, but let this under cover DHS border patrol agent explain what the problem is. The video takes a minute to frame the issue but please watch what the border agent has to say about how these kids are violated 30-50 times a day here in America. I have two daughters so I might be a bit more sensitive to this issue but if for no other reason, this is an emergency all on its own regardless of the other crimes and drugs that come from the border.
https://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=5997200457001&w=466&h=263
JUST IN CASE YOU DON'T THINK THIS IS REAL: This just in today, Robert Kraft, owner of the NE Patriots is now charged with 2 counts of soliciting prostitution in Jupiter Florida as a result of a human trafficking investigation. The police chief is also stating something about money laundering but it is not clear if that involves Kraft or the result of the investigation of the human trafficking companies. It is a problem at all levels of our society as Kraft (and I'm sure Jerruh, too) demonstrate.
idhawkman wrote:JUST IN CASE YOU DON'T THINK THIS IS REAL: This just in today, Robert Kraft, owner of the NE Patriots is now charged with 2 counts of soliciting prostitution in Jupiter Florida as a result of a human trafficking investigation. The police chief is also stating something about money laundering but it is not clear if that involves Kraft or the result of the investigation of the human trafficking companies. It is a problem at all levels of our society as Kraft (and I'm sure Jerruh, too) demonstrate.
RiverDog wrote:
Your link doesn't work.
“Much of it comes — in fact, most of it comes — some people would say almost all of it — from the southern border …” (Trump, Feb. 1 speech on human trafficking)
That conclusion is not supported by several global and local organizations that track data on tens of thousands of human trafficking cases in the country.
Instead, the data show that the majority of victims are born in the U.S.
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/ne ... story.html
Don't believe a single word that comes out of Trump's mouth.
Aseahawkfan wrote:
Human trafficking is so wide spread and varied that a wall isn't going to slow it down at all. Have you done any real research on this or you get some sensationalistic talking point by some rag you read that doesn't fact check either to support his worship of Donald Trump.
What constitutes human trafficking? Parents bringing their kids across the border? That whole thing with people paying kids to come with them to make the border crossing easier? Drug muling? The temporary child prostitution brothels they set up on the border? Coyotes bringing illegals under the age of 18, say 14 to 17 over the border? What is the make up of this number? How does this help the kids if they don't have jobs or can't come across with their parents? Need way more information on this from way more sources.
RiverDog wrote:
Agreed 100%, ALL levels of our society, including the POTUS, who has been proven to have patronized an industry that has been front and center in the promotion of human trafficking.
That's what makes Idahawk's references to human trafficking as it applies to DJT so laughable. Trump has for decades been personally patronizing stars in the adult entertainment industry, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more, and in doing so has supported an industry in which it has been common knowledge for close to 50 years that they have been directly associated with human trafficking, child pornography, and sex slavery. Trump couldn't give two hoots in hell about human trafficking until he realized that he could link it to his wall.
I find it very rich that DJT's supporters would be using human trafficking as a justification for their border wall, for if this issue were truly near and dear to their hearts as they now claim it to be, they wouldn't have touched Trump with a 10' pole.
idhawkman wrote:So you think that Trump with Stormy Daniels is in the same relm as child human trafficking? You are sick!
RiverDog wrote:Stormy Daniels is a prostitute that works in an industry that has been directly linked to child pornography, human trafficking, and sex slaves. Trump's patronization of prostitutes, and paying them huge, 6 figure dollar amounts, creates a demand for these types of crimes. That's one of the main justifications for running stings,ie to nab johns and humiliate them by making their names public so as to reduce the demand.
And in anticipation of ASF's comment (made over in the other forum), I agree wholeheartedly that prostitution should be legal as it would give otherwise law abiding citizens an option and, if properly monitored and regulated, would have the effect of reducing the demand for human trafficking. But that doesn't change Trump's (or Bob Kraft's) culpability.
RiverDog wrote:Stormy Daniels is a prostitute that works in an industry that has been directly linked to child pornography, human trafficking, and sex slaves. Trump's patronization of prostitutes, and paying them huge, 6 figure dollar amounts, creates a demand for these types of crimes. That's one of the main justifications for running stings,ie to nab johns and humiliate them by making their names public so as to reduce the demand.
And in anticipation of ASF's comment (made over in the other forum), I agree wholeheartedly that prostitution should be legal as it would give otherwise law abiding citizens an option and, if properly monitored and regulated, would have the effect of reducing the demand for human trafficking. But that doesn't change Trump's (or Bob Kraft's) culpability.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Exactly. Then the police could focus resources on stopping child prostitution and sex slavery than waste time rounding up willing prostitutes profiting off males willing to pay for sex. It would all be safer and easier to determine the real criminals.
RiverDog wrote:As in the case with Kraft, the police don't really care about arresting 77 year old johns. They are trying to (1) discourage others and thereby reduce demand and (2) use their testimony to help them nab the real criminals, the pimps and traffickers.
Solving the prostitution problem is no different than any other vice, ie drugs, alcohol, and gambling. We saw how much crime resulted when they instituted prohibition and how after its repeal there was virtually no crime associated with booze. The same thing would be true of drugs and prostitution. Legalize it and it will take the profit out of the illegal activities and the crime associated with it will dry up on its own. So long as it doesn't affect me or my family, I couldn't give two hoots in hell what consenting adults do with their bodies.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Exactly. Reducing demand through making it illegal has been as effective as the drug war or prohibition. Just ends up putting more folks in jail unnecessarily rather than focus on the real criminals and more dangerous drugs and behaviors. I hope we get a more intelligent criminal justice system as time goes on focused more serious threats.
RiverDog wrote:I think its moving in that direction as de-criminalization of recreational drugs seems to have bi partisan support. But as far as prostitution goes, I don't see any movement to make it legal.
If Trump really wanted to do something about human trafficking in this country, he'd have been talking about this subject long ago and offered up proposals to help solve it. The only time he's even mentioned it is in relation to his wasteful border wall. Even if one were to accept the theory that a border wall would help reduce human trafficking, it's not a fix all means of solving the problem.
Hawktawk wrote:Might have missed where this may have been posted already but the girls in the spa visited by Kraft and other heavyweights were very young, of chinese origin, do not speak english and are held against their will. They catch naps on the beds they are forced to turn tricks on in between customers, go without adequate nutrition etc. Hygiene in the place was described as nonexistent.
Hawktawk wrote:One, I will never understand why billionaires, In the case of trump with melania in the house and Kraft with a 38 year old blonde girlfriend would ever enter such a world of prostitutes and porn stars. Two, I don't think these chinese girls walked across the southern border![]()
![]()
![]()
Hawktawk wrote:Might have missed where this may have been posted already but the girls in the spa visited by Kraft and other heavyweights were very young, of chinese origin, do not speak english and are held against their will. They catch naps on the beds they are forced to turn tricks on in between customers, go without adequate nutrition etc. Hygiene in the place was described as nonexistent.
A couple of observations here. One, I will never understand why billionaires, In the case of trump with melania in the house and Kraft with a 38 year old blonde girlfriend would ever enter such a world of prostitutes and porn stars. Two, I don't think these chinese girls walked across the southern border![]()
![]()
![]()
Oh and one more thing. At least Kraft got caught on candid camera with prostitutes by florida vice squad, not Vladimir Putin![]()
Aseahawkfan wrote:Looking good and being good in bed are two different things. A woman can look great, be hot, and yet suck in bed, especially once they get married. So these old billionaires hire some girl they pay good money that will make them feel like a man and great inside and out. Really, how attracted can Melania and Kraft's wife really be to them. They are trophy women with a marital contract that worked their way into a marriage with a couple of billionaires. I'd bet money that once the marriage is solid, they go from playing up to the old guy to doing their own thing and only having physical relations on rare occasions. So the old guys go hire someone who will take care of their physical needs and the wives don't care as long as it doesn't make it to the press.
Women like Melania, Hilary Clinton, and Kraft's wife know the deal just like Jackie Kennedy. That whole be faithful to your wife attitude is a teaching for the middle class and poor as well as the truly faithful that believe in it. But the wealthy don't care. They will bang around as their money permits. One of the perks of wealth for many is having access to plenty of hot young woman looking for big gifts in exchange for sexual favors. Oldest profession in history is the common saying.
Aseahawkfan wrote:But the wealthy don't care. They will bang around as their money permits. One of the perks of wealth for many is having access to plenty of hot young woman looking for big gifts in exchange for sexual favors.
Hawktawk wrote:In the case of Kraft his 39 yr old girl;friend recently gave birth to a child he is not the father of so I guess two can play that game. With Trump there is very credible evidence to suggest that beyond his flings with women of zero moral character he also forces himself on women without their consent, as a matter of fact he's on tape admitting it. Theres skunks then there's Trump.
Its reported melania has her own bedroom which causes me to have a bit more respect for her. The thought of that beautiful woman in bed with that fat naked microscopic mushroom equipped slob is a nauseating word picture.
Hawktawk wrote:In the case of Kraft his 39 yr old girl;friend recently gave birth to a child he is not the father of so I guess two can play that game. With Trump there is very credible evidence to suggest that beyond his flings with women of zero moral character he also forces himself on women without their consent, as a matter of fact he's on tape admitting it. Theres skunks then there's Trump.
Its reported melania has her own bedroom which causes me to have a bit more respect for her. The thought of that beautiful woman in bed with that fat naked microscopic mushroom equipped slob is a nauseating word picture.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Why are you conjuring these sick images? Bleh. This is worse than the Trump hate tirades. What horrible imagery.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests