(02-15-2019, 02:02 PM)Kane Wrote: [ -> ] (02-15-2019, 01:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I think you're equivocating the terms "emergency" and "national emergency." Not the same thing.
So you're saying what....? That "national emergency" doesn't have to be an actual emergency?
Isn't that the kind of idiotic political rhetoric nonsense we need to get rid of?
Definition of national emergency
: a state of emergency resulting from a danger or threat of danger to a nation from foreign or domestic sources and usually declared to be in existence by governmental authority
Definition of emergency
1: an unforeseen combination of circumstances or the resulting state that calls for immediate action
2: an urgent need for assistance or relief
I think you're arguing semantics and still dodging my point. This was not what Truman had in mind when he invented the "national emergency" declaration.
And every one in my lifetime has used more national emergencies than the guy before him it seems and I think it should be limited to actual emergencies for our nation.
(where a surplus of illegal aliens crossing our border would be more of a threat of danger than pirates in Somalia)
A national emergency is a type of emergency.
Something has to meet the definition of emergency firstf before we consider if it's a national emergency.
Statutes give the President powers to take emergency action in many situations, including situations like Somali piracy that don't rise to the level of national emergency.
However, none of these statutes grant the President power to declare an emergency where there isn't an emergency. Nothing going on at the border was unforeseen. It doesn't call for immediate action, and building a wall isn't immediate action anyways. It takes months.
(02-15-2019, 02:22 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-15-2019, 02:02 PM)Kane Wrote: [ -> ]So you're saying what....? That "national emergency" doesn't have to be an actual emergency?
Isn't that the kind of idiotic political rhetoric nonsense we need to get rid of?
Definition of national emergency
: a state of emergency resulting from a danger or threat of danger to a nation from foreign or domestic sources and usually declared to be in existence by governmental authority
Definition of emergency
1: an unforeseen combination of circumstances or the resulting state that calls for immediate action
2: an urgent need for assistance or relief
I think you're arguing semantics and still dodging my point. This was not what Truman had in mind when he invented the "national emergency" declaration.
And every one in my lifetime has used more national emergencies than the guy before him it seems and I think it should be limited to actual emergencies for our nation.
(where a surplus of illegal aliens crossing our border would be more of a threat of danger than pirates in Somalia)
A national emergency is a type of emergency.
Something has to meet the definition of emergency firstf before we consider if it's a national emergency.
Statutes give the President powers to take emergency action in many situations, including situations like Somali piracy that don't rise to the level of national emergency.
However, none of these statutes grant the President power to declare an emergency where there isn't an emergency. Nothing going on at the border was unforeseen. It doesn't call for immediate action, and building a wall isn't immediate action anyways. It takes months.
The immigration system is overwhelmed and migrants are taking advantage of this fact. That is the emergency. Both Presidents Reagan and Bush implemented national emergencies through Executive Order relating to immigration. It was to control the overwhelming influx of Haitian refugees. Diplomatic efforts also failed to curb the issue much like this one. Domestic and International laws were tested in both situations and courts ruled in favor of the President and specifically stated, "although the human crisis is compelling, there is no solution to be found in a judicial remedy." Trump has allowed the situation to play out while attempting all reasonable measures to curb the issue to no solution. The important part to remember is that the right of migrants to make claims must be weighed against public order within the US. The Immigration and Nationalities Act Section 212 (f) specifically speaks to why the POTUS has every right and backing to declare said emergency and as example, E.O. 12807 was upheld based on this particular U.S. Code...
"
(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President.
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
Contrary to what you believe, declaring a National Emergency does not have to meet any standard of "emergency." It is titled as such because it authorizes certain emergency statutory provisions given to the POTUS. The POTUS will need to state what specific statutes apply and for what length of time and trasnmit to Congress immediately.
(02-15-2019, 03:19 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (02-15-2019, 02:22 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]A national emergency is a type of emergency.
Something has to meet the definition of emergency firstf before we consider if it's a national emergency.
Statutes give the President powers to take emergency action in many situations, including situations like Somali piracy that don't rise to the level of national emergency.
However, none of these statutes grant the President power to declare an emergency where there isn't an emergency. Nothing going on at the border was unforeseen. It doesn't call for immediate action, and building a wall isn't immediate action anyways. It takes months.
The immigration system is overwhelmed and migrants are taking advantage of this fact. That is the emergency. Both Presidents Reagan and Bush implemented national emergencies through Executive Order relating to immigration. It was to control the overwhelming influx of Haitian refugees. Diplomatic efforts also failed to curb the issue much like this one. Domestic and International laws were tested in both situations and courts ruled in favor of the President and specifically stated, "although the human crisis is compelling, there is no solution to be found in a judicial remedy." Trump has allowed the situation to play out while attempting all reasonable measures to curb the issue to no solution. The important part to remember is that the right of migrants to make claims must be weighed against public order within the US. The Immigration and Nationalities Act Section 212 (f) specifically speaks to why the POTUS has every right and backing to declare said emergency and as example, E.O. 12807 was upheld based on this particular U.S. Code...
"(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President.
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
Contrary to what you believe, declaring a National Emergency does not have to meet any standard of "emergency." It is titled as such because it authorizes certain emergency statutory provisions given to the POTUS. The POTUS will need to state what specific statutes apply and for what length of time and trasnmit to Congress immediately.
I don't know if the President is citing this statute in his orders. I don't think he is. That statute doesn't have the word "emergency".
Trump has used this specific authority already, banning immigrants from a few different countries until further notice. It has nothing to do with building a wall.
Pelosi, I have one thing to say.....
Molon Labe
From wiki (national emergencies act 1976)
Congress has delegated at least 136 distinct statutory emergency powers to the President upon the declaration of an emergency. Only 13 require a declaration from Congress; the remainder are invoked by an executive declaration with no Congressional input.[16]
Emergency presidential powers are dramatic, and range from suspending all laws regulating chemical and biological weapons, including the ban on human testing (50 U.S.C. § 1515, passed 1969); to suspending any Clean Air Act implementation plan or excess emissions penalty upon petition of a state governor (42 U.S.C. (f) § 7410 (f), passed 1977); to authorizing and constructing military construction projects (10 U.S.C. (a) § 2808 (a), passed 1982) using any existing defense appropriations for such military constructions ($10.4 billion in FY2018[17]); to drafting any retired Coast Guard officers (14 U.S.C. § 331, passed 1963) or enlisted members (14 U.S.C. § 359, passed 1949) into active duty.
Tens of thousands of unchecked persons cross the border every month. We already have walls / barriers / fences in other locations because we want to curb these crossings.
The Trump administration only need prove that border security falls under his purview (it does) and if an unchecked mass of migrants is an emergency.
We have the TSA checking US citizens because they pose a threat to national security. How can the TSA exist in a world where democrats say unchecked immigrants don't pose a risk to national security?
In addition, the Flores declaration Has had the affect of incentivizing border crossings by family units and the change in demographics of border crossers has created a separate humanitarian crisis. So now we have the Hodge podge of detaining families together but that results in defector catch and release, dreamer status for the kids and an anchor for the parents.
(02-15-2019, 04:04 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (02-15-2019, 03:19 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]The immigration system is overwhelmed and migrants are taking advantage of this fact. That is the emergency. Both Presidents Reagan and Bush implemented national emergencies through Executive Order relating to immigration. It was to control the overwhelming influx of Haitian refugees. Diplomatic efforts also failed to curb the issue much like this one. Domestic and International laws were tested in both situations and courts ruled in favor of the President and specifically stated, "although the human crisis is compelling, there is no solution to be found in a judicial remedy." Trump has allowed the situation to play out while attempting all reasonable measures to curb the issue to no solution. The important part to remember is that the right of migrants to make claims must be weighed against public order within the US. The Immigration and Nationalities Act Section 212 (f) specifically speaks to why the POTUS has every right and backing to declare said emergency and as example, E.O. 12807 was upheld based on this particular U.S. Code...
"(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President.
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
Contrary to what you believe, declaring a National Emergency does not have to meet any standard of "emergency." It is titled as such because it authorizes certain emergency statutory provisions given to the POTUS. The POTUS will need to state what specific statutes apply and for what length of time and trasnmit to Congress immediately.
I don't know if the President is citing this statute in his orders. I don't think he is. That statute doesn't have the word "emergency".
Trump has used this specific authority already, banning immigrants from a few different countries until further notice. It has nothing to do with building a wall.
We won't know what statute or statutes he uses until he formally submits to congress. You should also get away from the word "emergency". It isn't used as justification or explained in whatever provisions are chosen. You would need to research which statutes have been designated by Congress to be used by the POTUS after a declared National Emergency. Congress grant this specific power.
(02-15-2019, 06:11 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]Tens of thousands of unchecked persons cross the border every month. We already have walls / barriers / fences in other locations because we want to curb these crossings.
The Trump administration only need prove that border security falls under his purview (it does) and if an unchecked mass of migrants is an emergency.
We have the TSA checking US citizens because they pose a threat to national security. How can the TSA exist in a world where democrats say unchecked immigrants don't pose a risk to national security?
Do you have a source for the number of unchecked immigrants? I can find apprehensions, not those who get in.
(02-15-2019, 06:11 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]Tens of thousands of unchecked persons cross the border every month. We already have walls / barriers / fences in other locations because we want to curb these crossings.
The Trump administration only need prove that border security falls under his purview (it does) and if an unchecked mass of migrants is an emergency.
We have the TSA checking US citizens because they pose a threat to national security. How can the TSA exist in a world where democrats say unchecked immigrants don't pose a risk to national security?
Well, the TSA shouldn't exist. I mean, that's step one.
How many of those gigantic migrant caravans that Trump loves to bring up every time he needs a PR bump have actually crossed en masse into the US lately?
(02-15-2019, 11:13 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ] (02-15-2019, 06:11 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]Tens of thousands of unchecked persons cross the border every month. We already have walls / barriers / fences in other locations because we want to curb these crossings.
The Trump administration only need prove that border security falls under his purview (it does) and if an unchecked mass of migrants is an emergency.
We have the TSA checking US citizens because they pose a threat to national security. How can the TSA exist in a world where democrats say unchecked immigrants don't pose a risk to national security?
Do you have a source for the number of unchecked immigrants? I can find apprehensions, not those who get in.
Are you asking if there's a source for the number of illegal immigrants that cross without being captured? I don't have that.
Even if we assume the border patrol is effective in capturing 90% of
all illegal immigrants, you're still left with thousands of monthly crossings.
It doesn't matter anyway because the number of captured illegal immigrants is justification enough. Not knowing how many cross undetected is even more ammo for Trump to declare his emergency.
Having no wall is just as smart as building jails with no bars
on another note
this green deal what no planes to travel to bangkok
(02-15-2019, 11:13 PM)rollerjag Wrote: [ -> ] (02-15-2019, 06:11 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]Tens of thousands of unchecked persons cross the border every month. We already have walls / barriers / fences in other locations because we want to curb these crossings.
The Trump administration only need prove that border security falls under his purview (it does) and if an unchecked mass of migrants is an emergency.
We have the TSA checking US citizens because they pose a threat to national security. How can the TSA exist in a world where democrats say unchecked immigrants don't pose a risk to national security?
Do you have a source for the number of unchecked immigrants? I can find apprehensions, not those who get in.
Estimates can be deduced from the same places listing apprehension...CBP report. However, the fact we don’t have exact figures should be a red flag itself. Shouldn’t we know who, what, when, why, and how of any person or thing that enters from another country? Of course we should.
(02-15-2019, 11:15 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (02-15-2019, 06:11 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]Tens of thousands of unchecked persons cross the border every month. We already have walls / barriers / fences in other locations because we want to curb these crossings.
The Trump administration only need prove that border security falls under his purview (it does) and if an unchecked mass of migrants is an emergency.
We have the TSA checking US citizens because they pose a threat to national security. How can the TSA exist in a world where democrats say unchecked immigrants don't pose a risk to national security?
Well, the TSA shouldn't exist. I mean, that's step one.
How many of those gigantic migrant caravans that Trump loves to bring up every time he needs a PR bump have actually crossed en masse into the US lately?
The TSA should not exist? Please explain.
I thought is was hilarious, when reporters asked Trump about where he got his sources for his statistics and they cited actual numbers that he called, "fake news." He got really snippy and when he did attempt to try and answer the question, he wouldn't cite any direct sources. He just kept saying he got his stats from talking to Homeland Security and "a variety of sources" that he refused to name. That tells me he's making things up as he goes along.
(02-16-2019, 10:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]I thought is was hilarious, when reporters asked Trump about where he got his sources for his statistics and they cited actual numbers that he called, "fake news." He got really snippy and when he did attempt to try and answer the question, he wouldn't cite any direct sources. He just kept saying he got his stats from talking to Homeland Security and "a variety of sources" that he refused to name. That tells me he's making things up as he goes along.
Where did the "reporters" get their numbers?
(02-16-2019, 10:12 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (02-15-2019, 11:15 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]Well, the TSA shouldn't exist. I mean, that's step one.
How many of those gigantic migrant caravans that Trump loves to bring up every time he needs a PR bump have actually crossed en masse into the US lately?
The TSA should not exist? Please explain.
I would, but our friendly neighborhood green-blooded hobgoblin would lock the thread.
(02-16-2019, 10:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]I thought is was hilarious, when reporters asked Trump about where he got his sources for his statistics and they cited actual numbers that he called, "fake news." He got really snippy and when he did attempt to try and answer the question, he wouldn't cite any direct sources. He just kept saying he got his stats from talking to Homeland Security and "a variety of sources" that he refused to name. That tells me he's making things up as he goes along.
Pretty sure the POTUS gets his numbers straight from the source. I mean, he is the leader of the free world and has informal daily Presidential briefs with the Office of National Intelligence, National Security Advisor, and Agency Directors. Formal briefs take place at minimum weekly at his prerogative. I would tend to lean on their analytics versus some biased hack. Comical someone would question his sources.
(02-16-2019, 11:34 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (02-16-2019, 10:48 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]I thought is was hilarious, when reporters asked Trump about where he got his sources for his statistics and they cited actual numbers that he called, "fake news." He got really snippy and when he did attempt to try and answer the question, he wouldn't cite any direct sources. He just kept saying he got his stats from talking to Homeland Security and "a variety of sources" that he refused to name. That tells me he's making things up as he goes along.
Pretty sure the POTUS gets his numbers straight from the source. I mean, he is the leader of the free world and has informal daily Presidential briefs with the Office of National Intelligence, National Security Advisor, and Agency Directors. Formal briefs take place at minimum weekly at his prerogative. I would tend to lean on their analytics versus some biased hack. Comical someone would question his sources.
You haven't been paying attention then. Trump hears statistics and if they don't match up with what he wants to hear, he throws them out and makes up his own version of what the "truth" is. He's always done this, even before he was president.