(01-29-2019, 11:54 AM)IfdB2hibry Wrote:

(01-28-2019, 05:20 PM)jradMITEX Wrote: LOL, what is so hilarious to me is that despite Trump personally saying he would be proud to shut the government down, literally saying he would take the blame, you don't blame him.  Despite the fact he signed nearly exactly the same bill that was offered before Christmas, you blame Pelosi?  Trump shut the government down period.  He didn't care about the workers, the man is nearly devoid of any empathy, wait were the workers for the shutdown or were they mostly democrats as he suggested both ways.   The house passed several bills piecemeal in the first week that would have funded every agency outside of DHS, McConnel didn't even takes those bills up because Trump indicated he wouldn't sign them so who really cared about federal workers?  In fact only after his approval ratings dropped and he disapproval ratings peaked, and the fact that he was taking political heat did he relent, he never cared about the workers, he even suggested that you could get groceries for free because they know you.    Negotiating during a shut down would have set a bad precedent, only encouraging more shut downs when he didn't get what he wanted. 

The SOTU was pure politics it always is, the president doesn't have a constitutional right to address a joint chamber of congress in person only to deliver the message in written form.  The speaker of the house has to put the resolution forward, Pelosi had every right not to, and it hurt Trump where it hurt (his vanity), and she didn't pay a political price for doing it hence making it a shrewd move, seemed to motivate him a little. 

I think you are operating from the assumption that Trump should get what he wants just because he wants it, but there is the legislative branch and they hold the purse strings, they are a coequal branch of government, you have to win them over period.   They have every right not to do so, and judging by the polls they are following the will of the people who elected them.  The onus is on him to get the votes, this isn't a dictatorship, not signing a budget or CR is on him, it has nothing to do with funding the wall.  Another shutdown will be on him.  I bet you were upset when McConnell didn't give Garland a hearing because of the same reason?

Legislative intransigence is not a reason to declare an emergency and because he has taken so long it will only hurt his already very weak argument.  The reason he hasn't declared a national emergency is because they know it will ultimately fail.  There is no emergency, illegal border crossing are at decades old lows.  Does your blind loyalty to him keep you from seeing how bad of a precedent this would be?  It would make an imperial presidency.  

What will happen in 2.5 weeks?  If Trumps wants to take another political beating he can shut down the government again, have at it, he'll get the blame again and I suspect the Senate would eventually go against him.   He's going to either come off something really big like DACA/TPS path to citizenship or sign a CR with increased border security funding and no wall and declare an emergency and get stopped in the courts.  He isn't going to win this one, the public is against him, and Pelosi holds too many of the cards.

The issue is your assumption and blindness to one side in defense of the other. I and many others don't relieve Trump of blame. They are all to blame. The issue is when you illogically assign blame to just him when there are obvious factors in play well before he gets involved. It is also intellectually dishonest to assign blame because of words used in an effort to negotiate. When did words start meaning more than actions? And no the bill signed was not the same as the bill offered in early December. That has been discussed and shown ad nauseum. The original bipartisan bill included $25B and yanked by Schumer. This is how we got in this mess! Trump eventually signing this current CR was not a matter of ratings or ego or whatever smoke and mirror you want to throw out there. It was a frustrated F-you to both sides of the aisle to get paychecks back in the hands of Federal workers. Enough was enough and the opportunity to negotiate and compromise on a bipartisan bill had run its course. Shutdown precedents is a lame excuse. This was not the first shutdown (Jimmy Carter(D), Reagan®, Bush®, Cinton(D), Obama(D), Trump®. Hey look, the only thing bipartisan related to shutdowns!

I agree, Pelosi refusing SOTU was purely political. Nothing of value in that move. She will forever be engrained in history as the first speaker to deny the POTUS a SOTU address in what had become the new norm of upholding the POTUS's constitutional responsibility of addressing Congress. Sure he could submit it in writing but don't you think the American people deserve to be intuned as well? It is one of a few times where all three branches of government are assembled together. Heck, even George Washington delivered his amongst a joint session.

I think you are operating on a strong assumption of your own, like these elected officials are doing the bidding of the American people. As evident on this board, the general public is somewhat clueless as to what is really going on in those chambers outside of what their favorite media outlet tells them. Few tune in to watch floor discussions or votes anymore. Few actually goe and read the Bills full text and amendments. This shutdown was a sad example of blind loyalty to party with a few defectors on both sides. There was blatant ignoring of Department funding requests, committee appropriations submittals/approvals, and executive appropriations reports/requests. All of the previously mentioned had border security funding to include mix methods (including barrier structures). This was not the sole request from the President or his pet project. This was at the request of Border Protection and their parent DHS. This funding request was a continuation from previously approved funding of barriers and sector protections that goes back multiple Presidencies. This is not a popularity issue and is pure obstructionism based on misinformation and partisanship. Probably still people thinking $5B+ is strictly for a wall. Their is no logical defense of how this shutdown occurred and the resist behavior of the House. In my opinion, DHS funding has been steadily rejected due to wanting an increase in ICE operations/funding. The wall is just an emotionally driven excuse. What does a Supreme Court nominee have to do with border security and government funding?

Do you understand that there is already multiple cases of precedents involving declaring a National Emergency in regards to immigration and/or border security? Probably not. The National Emergencies power is given to the President by Congress and there are currently upwards of 30 still in effect! If Congress doesn't want to give the POTUS this broad Constitutional statutory power, then they need to vote to revoke. I think most folks would be suprised to learn just what is available to the President when declaring a National Emergency. Want to scare yourself, you need to research PEADs or Presidential Emergency Action Documents. You might be able to find a few "cleared" archived documents that are usually Close Hold. As far as my blind loyalty, that has been and will be for the United States and the Constitution, not political party or figurehead.

Who holds the cards and who wins or loses is a matter of perspective. Unfortunately, most points of view are politicaly skewed and misinformed. Only the citizens suffer for the broad stupidity. Who would of thought the sovereignty and safety of our citizens was/is debatable?

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/...ection.pdf

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/...202019.pdf

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/up...curity.pdf

If there is such an emergency and such precedent, then what is the hold up?  Why wait if this is so straightforward, common, and pressing?  Every minute of delay just bolsters the argument that there isn't an emergency, if it is so easy why shut down the government for 35+ days?  if what you assert is true then the presidents actions are baffling and illogical.   This board is not a complete reflection of society or the opinion of the country which after numerous polls has shown consistently that a majority of the country are against the wall, pick a time, a year ago, before the shutdown and after, still a majority oppose the wall.   You can blame a lack of an immigration deal on all parties involved, I guess even though republicans have repeatedly been the ones to tank the big bipartisan immigration bills out of appeasement to the base, however, this shutdown was 100% on Trump.  He could have easily of signed the CR in December and continued to make his public push.  He thought the shutdown gave him leverage for some idiotic reason when in fact it has weakened him politically.  Negotiating during a shutdown would have just invited more down the road.   This is 100% about a wall ok maybe just 99%, if he would have dropped the wall pre condition he could easily have gotten the money for other border security measures and investments.  Its quite incredulous to suggest that the wall isn't the crux of the matter, it was heavily sold on the campaign, he repeatedly suggested that without it we will be overrun by drugs and crime.  Build the wall and crime will fall right?  

BTW Pelosi didn't prevent him completely from giving the SOTU, just during the shutdown, and low and behold its back on.  She'll go down in history all right, as the first Speaker to win a shutdown and the one who made Trump cave after the longest shutdown in history.

---