"National Emergency" it is!

[_Kevin Graham]

Exclusive: White House preparing draft national emergency order, has identified $7 billion for wall

What a joke this pathetic little man is.

[_Dr. Shades]

For building a wall?

[_Kevin Graham]

For building a wall?

For breaking the law to satisfy a small number of racist morons.

For lying about a national emergency that doesn't exist.

Texas Border Sheriffs: There is No Crisis and We Don’t Want Trump’s Wall

[_ajax18]

Courts would toss that out as BS in a heartbeat. Which is why he hasn't done it.

Maybe the ninth circuit will deny this but ultimately the Supreme Court will uphold it and fund the wall. Democrats need to get over the fact that the wall is going up. Democrats have been over taken by the extreme left. Not even 10 years ago Obama himself voted for over $50 billion in wall funding.

It's sad that we once laughed at campaign platforms like this only to now see them become the face of the mainstream Democratic party.

[_EAllusion]

It is pretty blatantly against the intent of the law, which was not written so the President could declare anything he wants a national emergency and redirect military funds to construction projects, but I too think there's a decent chance the Supreme Court upholds it. Law and order, right?

[_EAllusion]

Not even 10 years ago Obama himself voted for over $50 billion in wall funding.

https://www.politifact.com/facebook-fac ... rder-fenc/

Does the fact that your preferred sources keep lying to you ever create in even a little doubt in your mind that it might not be a good idea to trust them?

The US-Mexico wall continues to be extremely unpopular in the US incidentally. If opposition to it is "radical leftism" what you are saying is that a solid majority of the country are radical leftists. I don't think that's true, but if it were, it has implications about democratic will that you probably wouldn't like.

[_Kevin Graham]

Courts would toss that out as BS in a heartbeat. Which is why he hasn't done it.

Maybe the ninth circuit will deny this but ultimately the Supreme Court will uphold it and fund the wall.

There is no Constitutional justification for allowing a man-baby to steal money from taxpayers to pay for a personal trophy the majority of Americans don't want and Congress refuses to fund. If he can do this then then next Democrat President has a free ticket to implement nationalized healthcare. Thousands of Americans die each year because they lack coverage. That's more of a national emergency than worrying about rednecks being terrified of brown people who have more work ethic than they.

Democrats need to get over the fact that the wall is going up.

You've been saying this crap for nearly three years now.

Not even 10 years ago Obama himself voted for over $50 billion in wall funding.

No he didn't, you're just regurgitating stupid Facebook memes, probably created by Russians, that have been debunked already. He voted for a fence which took 9 years to complete just 700 miles and it was nowhere near $50 billion. How long do you think it would take to build a 1,200 mile WALL if it takes 9 years to build a friggin fence of just 680 miles?

The next administration would nullify the project in a heartbeat and it would take years of legal battles before Trump could break ground on a foundation for even part of a wall.

Oh, and who gives a crap about what Obama voted for when most Democrats voted against the fence, including Nancy Pelosi. So you're theory that this is a new "radical" Democrat party is wrong. It is the same Democrats who vote against it now who voted against a fence in 2006.

Hows your health these days anyway?

[_Res Ipsa]

It is pretty blatantly against the intent of the law, which was not written so the President could declare anything he wants a national emergency and redirect military funds to construction projects, but I too think there's a decent chance the Supreme Court upholds it. Law and order, right?

I think there’s a decent chance the Supreme Court rules against Trump. Most of the Court will be bothered by the prospect of a president making an end-run around Congress any time he doesn’t get his way. A conservative judicial philosophy doesn’t always align with immediate Conservative goals.

[_Kevin Graham]

It is pretty blatantly against the intent of the law, which was not written so the President could declare anything he wants a national emergency and redirect military funds to construction projects, but I too think there's a decent chance the Supreme Court upholds it. Law and order, right?

I think there’s a decent chance the Supreme Court rules against Trump. Most of the Court will be bothered by the prospect of a president making an end-run around Congress any time he doesn’t get his way. A conservative judicial philosophy doesn’t always align with immediate Conservative goals.

Yes, even with the radical conservatives on the bench, you'd think that this is such an obvious no-brainer that even they couldn't be this stupid.

[_Res Ipsa]

Not even 10 years ago Obama himself voted for over $50 billion in wall funding.

https://www.politifact.com/facebook-fac ... rder-fenc/

Does the fact that your preferred sources keep lying to you ever create in even a little doubt in your mind that it might not be a good idea to trust them?

The US-Mexico wall continues to be extremely unpopular in the US incidentally. If opposition to it is "radical leftism" what you are saying is that a solid majority of the country are radical leftists. I don't think that's true, but if it were, it has implications about democratic will that you probably wouldn't like.

I was wondering how that worked, given that Obama was President 10 years ago and presidents don’t “vote” on bills.