Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
National Emergencies
Comments
-
but still
-
That's a different point than saying I posted bullshit. I posted the actual evidence of the national emergencies. The reader can decideApostleofGrief said:
You don't have to read much of the article. The main point is that prior presidents did not declare national emergencies for projects Congress won't fund. There is no precedent for that, and it's a flagrant constitutional violation.RaceBannon said:
What bullshitApostleofGrief said:This is the fact check on prior use of emergencies. Contrary to the bullshit argued above by Race and others, there is no similar precedent in the US.
https://apnews.com/03d60f47b89d49139d948fec0deeadaf
I listed the 28 active ones from CNN
Take it up with them
As anyone with half a brain can see.
-
You're hairsplitting. By posting that list, you implied "everybody is doing it" and national emergencies are the norm.RaceBannon said:
That's a different point than saying I posted bullshit. I posted the actual evidence of the national emergencies. The reader can decideApostleofGrief said:
You don't have to read much of the article. The main point is that prior presidents did not declare national emergencies for projects Congress won't fund. There is no precedent for that, and it's a flagrant constitutional violation.RaceBannon said:
What bullshitApostleofGrief said:This is the fact check on prior use of emergencies. Contrary to the bullshit argued above by Race and others, there is no similar precedent in the US.
https://apnews.com/03d60f47b89d49139d948fec0deeadaf
I listed the 28 active ones from CNN
Take it up with them
As anyone with half a brain can see. -
huh?Dude61 said:
Since 2001 POTUS have used NE to appropriate funds 18 times.ApostleofGrief said:
You don't have to read much of the article. The main point is that prior presidents did not declare national emergencies for projects Congress won't fund. There is no precedent for that, and it's a flagrant constitutional violation.RaceBannon said:
What bullshitApostleofGrief said:This is the fact check on prior use of emergencies. Contrary to the bullshit argued above by Race and others, there is no similar precedent in the US.
https://apnews.com/03d60f47b89d49139d948fec0deeadaf
I listed the 28 active ones from CNN
Take it up with them
As anyone with half a brain can see. -
We’ve got an open border? Tell us another one.RaceBannon said:An open border certainly qualifies to people that love the country
So not you H -
Yes and which one of those in equivalent or setting precedent to what Trump is doing now?RaceBannon said:
That's a different point than saying I posted bullshit. I posted the actual evidence of the national emergencies. The reader can decideApostleofGrief said:
You don't have to read much of the article. The main point is that prior presidents did not declare national emergencies for projects Congress won't fund. There is no precedent for that, and it's a flagrant constitutional violation.RaceBannon said:
What bullshitApostleofGrief said:This is the fact check on prior use of emergencies. Contrary to the bullshit argued above by Race and others, there is no similar precedent in the US.
https://apnews.com/03d60f47b89d49139d948fec0deeadaf
I listed the 28 active ones from CNN
Take it up with them
As anyone with half a brain can see. -
We’ve never had a Government Coup taking down an elected President before now, either.
-
I didn't imply anything. You seem upset. Were you this upset about the other 31?ApostleofGrief said:
You're hairsplitting. By posting that list, you implied "everybody is doing it" and national emergencies are the norm.RaceBannon said:
That's a different point than saying I posted bullshit. I posted the actual evidence of the national emergencies. The reader can decideApostleofGrief said:
You don't have to read much of the article. The main point is that prior presidents did not declare national emergencies for projects Congress won't fund. There is no precedent for that, and it's a flagrant constitutional violation.RaceBannon said:
What bullshitApostleofGrief said:This is the fact check on prior use of emergencies. Contrary to the bullshit argued above by Race and others, there is no similar precedent in the US.
https://apnews.com/03d60f47b89d49139d948fec0deeadaf
I listed the 28 active ones from CNN
Take it up with them
As anyone with half a brain can see. -
Do you remembersarktastic said:We’ve never had a Government Coup taking down an elected President before now, either.
Your President Nixon -
And what was the precedent for the other 31?2001400ex said:
Yes and which one of those in equivalent or setting precedent to what Trump is doing now?RaceBannon said:
That's a different point than saying I posted bullshit. I posted the actual evidence of the national emergencies. The reader can decideApostleofGrief said:
You don't have to read much of the article. The main point is that prior presidents did not declare national emergencies for projects Congress won't fund. There is no precedent for that, and it's a flagrant constitutional violation.RaceBannon said:
What bullshitApostleofGrief said:This is the fact check on prior use of emergencies. Contrary to the bullshit argued above by Race and others, there is no similar precedent in the US.
https://apnews.com/03d60f47b89d49139d948fec0deeadaf
I listed the 28 active ones from CNN
Take it up with them
As anyone with half a brain can see.
Who cares? You don't want a wall. I do. Cry some more -
IDRGAF about the wall. the $ is irrelevant. the rhetoric for it is a bit unfortunate and overblown, but if it makes people happy, fucking build it so we? can move on.sarktastic said:We’ve never had a Government Coup taking down an elected President before now, either.
but this is a quick dodge. there's no fucking coup; that's about as dramatic as people threatening to leave the country if Trump's election stood up. and, it's not relevant to the issue being discussed. I thought we? didn't like but but but. that's a but but but of the first order. -
Fat people are the emergency
-
Congress has specifically granted the President express statutory authority to make this declaration.
-
Sounds like an emergency.Dude61 said:Congress has specifically granted the President express statutory authority to make this declaration.
-
creepycoug said:
IDRGAF about the wall. the $ is irrelevant. the rhetoric for it is a bit unfortunate and overblown, but if it makes people happy, fucking build it so we? can move on.sarktastic said:We’ve never had a Government Coup taking down an elected President before now, either.
but this is a quick dodge. there's no fucking coup; that's about as dramatic as people threatening to leave the country if Trump's election stood up. and, it's not relevant to the issue being discussed. I thought we? didn't like but but but. that's a but but but of the first order.Nailed it -
it may be a dodge but McCabe admitted the coup to sell a bookcreepycoug said:
IDRGAF about the wall. the $ is irrelevant. the rhetoric for it is a bit unfortunate and overblown, but if it makes people happy, fucking build it so we? can move on.sarktastic said:We’ve never had a Government Coup taking down an elected President before now, either.
but this is a quick dodge. there's no fucking coup; that's about as dramatic as people threatening to leave the country if Trump's election stood up. and, it's not relevant to the issue being discussed. I thought we? didn't like but but but. that's a but but but of the first order.
Trust me if it was anyone other than Trump the left and "moderates" like you would be up in arms
-
Wut?sarktastic said:We’ve never had a Government Coup taking down an elected President before now, either.
Here’s John Boehner, the likely speaker if Republicans take the House, offering his plans for Obama’s agenda: “We're going to do everything — and I mean everything we can do — to kill it, stop it, slow it down, whatever we can.”
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” -
Obtuse, a liar and stupid.
Got it! -
Join me in the call for hondo's stupid friends to post here instead
-
CONCORD, N.H. -- Democratic presidential contender Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand says she could possibly support a call by former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas to tear down parts of the existing U.S.-Mexico border wall.HHusky said:
We’ve got an open border? Tell us another one.RaceBannon said:An open border certainly qualifies to people that love the country
So not you H
“I’d have to ask folks in that part of the country to see whether the fencing that exists today is helpful or unhelpful,” the senator from New York told Fox News on Friday, as she was campaigning in the first-in-the-nation presidential primary state of New Hampshire.
“I could look at it and see which part he means and why, and if it makes sense, I could support it,” Gillibrand added.
O'ROURKE CALLS FOR TEARING DOWN WALL
O’Rourke, who’s seriously mulling a White House bid of his own, said Thursday in an interview with NBC News that he’d “absolutely … take the wall down," referring to the barrier by El Paso, Texas.
O’Rourke, who came close to upsetting GOP Sen. Ted Cruz in last November’s Senate election in Texas, argued that the existing 600 miles of wall and fencing along the 2,000-mile border have “not in any demonstrable way made us safer.” -
I guess you think this is somehow supportive of your false claim that we have open borders (?).RaceBannon said:
CONCORD, N.H. -- Democratic presidential contender Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand says she could possibly support a call by former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas to tear down parts of the existing U.S.-Mexico border wall.HHusky said:
We’ve got an open border? Tell us another one.RaceBannon said:An open border certainly qualifies to people that love the country
So not you H
“I’d have to ask folks in that part of the country to see whether the fencing that exists today is helpful or unhelpful,” the senator from New York told Fox News on Friday, as she was campaigning in the first-in-the-nation presidential primary state of New Hampshire.
“I could look at it and see which part he means and why, and if it makes sense, I could support it,” Gillibrand added.
O'ROURKE CALLS FOR TEARING DOWN WALL
O’Rourke, who’s seriously mulling a White House bid of his own, said Thursday in an interview with NBC News that he’d “absolutely … take the wall down," referring to the barrier by El Paso, Texas.
O’Rourke, who came close to upsetting GOP Sen. Ted Cruz in last November’s Senate election in Texas, argued that the existing 600 miles of wall and fencing along the 2,000-mile border have “not in any demonstrable way made us safer.” -
Of course it is. Democrats want to tear down what is there and they blocked finishing security along the whole border.
Stop lying your team is now quite open about wanting to continue open borders
-
Why are Democrats afraid to own their desire for Open Borders?
-
Same reason hondo wont own the GND. They liesarktastic said:Why are Democrats afraid to own their desire for Open Borders?
If it's so popular you don't have to lie -
Who is lying?RaceBannon said:
Same reason hondo wont own the GND. They liesarktastic said:Why are Democrats afraid to own their desire for Open Borders?
If it's so popular you don't have to lie -
Perhaps the problem is that you don’t know what “open borders” means.RaceBannon said:Of course it is. Democrats want to tear down what is there and they blocked finishing security along the whole border.
Stop lying your team is now quite open about wanting to continue open borders -
And calling you out for lying about the GND is not not owning it. HTHRaceBannon said:
Same reason hondo wont own the GND. They liesarktastic said:Why are Democrats afraid to own their desire for Open Borders?
If it's so popular you don't have to lie -
sarktastic said:
Why are Democrats afraid to own their desire for Open Borders?
Why are rock ribbed “conservatives” so fucking stupid, and not conservative to boot? -
You shouldn't have any trouble explaining it and selling it to the masses then.
Why not try?
Why deny? -
You've really gone full-time with this. Predicting what I would or wouldn't do is a fool's errand. I've been waiting to see what, if anything, Bueller has, and I've been guarded in my thoughts on the investigation, saying over and over I don't know what's there. Because, like everyone, I don't.RaceBannon said:
it may be a dodge but McCabe admitted the coup to sell a bookcreepycoug said:
IDRGAF about the wall. the $ is irrelevant. the rhetoric for it is a bit unfortunate and overblown, but if it makes people happy, fucking build it so we? can move on.sarktastic said:We’ve never had a Government Coup taking down an elected President before now, either.
but this is a quick dodge. there's no fucking coup; that's about as dramatic as people threatening to leave the country if Trump's election stood up. and, it's not relevant to the issue being discussed. I thought we? didn't like but but but. that's a but but but of the first order.
Trust me if it was anyone other than Trump the left and "moderates" like you would be up in arms
I've taken an overall pretty even-keel with Donnie, posting where I think he's done well and where I think he's a fish dick. I don't think the wall is a big deal. Build it, don't build it, IDRGAF. I don't like the rhetoric behind it; sue me.
I'm not a political hero fanboy. 85% of the Tug can't get Trumpy's cock out of their mouths. There is nobody of any political stripe that inspires me like that. I supported Romney for sound reasons, not populist hysteria, so if there'd been inquiry into wrongdoing, I'd have LIPO'd all the way. My defenses of Obama been very limited.
So people on the other side of the political spectrum go after your guy and liberals have become sandy and vagy. The House impeached Clinton for lying about stupid, albeit embarrassing, shit.
