(02-19-2019, 10:10 AM)Last42min Wrote: 1. It's the housing and construction budget. They are combined. Do we even know how much of this budget is currently unallocated? Technically, this is all he can use. Even if it hasn't, it will ultimately potentially affect military welfare and readiness.

2. I will concede that the National Emergencies Act gives some leverage to Trump. However, it was clearly not designed to be used as a bargaining tool and/or a tool to let the President bypass congressional oversight. There's nothing in our defense strategy about securing the southern border. We are not at war with Mexico. The Mexican government is not sending invaders; people are voluntarily leaving to look for economic opportunity. He's not building a wall on Mexico's soil; He's building it on US soil (negating the foreign aspect). He is deliberately circumventing congress who is expressly opposing funding the wall. Without even trying, I just rattled off 5 potential concerns about the validity of this order (and I could keep going). This will be challenged in the Supreme Court and it SHOULD BE. There are enough questions surrounding this order to challenge it in the court of law. Claiming this is judicial overreach is just a biased opinion. It is the more conservative position to defend against the expansion of federal government and/or threat to separation of powers.

3. See Above. It isn't textualism. It's like, your opinion, man.

4. So what? Dems are gonna Dem,. Do conservatives have to do it, too? Be wary of win at all costs.

5. Eh, not gonna live or die by this specific example. You can have this point if you want.

6. What's this have to do with our discussion? Do I need to bring up every possible issue that is outrageous to be justified? Seems a bit excessive.

7. I agree with the first half of your statement, but the later half is a non sequitur. It's its own issue.

1.) It will not impact welfare and readiness. Nearly all housing is privatized. In addition, any construction goes through a vetting, appropriations, and bidding process well in advance. These funds fall under construction but that money, in most cases, is actually set aside for BRAC and condemned demolition. Lastly, each services Secretary will comb through their budgets to prioritize and set aside. There is zero mission impact as service budget appropriations took place months ago and are completely separate.

2.) This is a Federal issue involving specific power to the POTUS. Immigration is strictly Federal and constitutionally belongs to the President. Supreme Court has upheld this time and time again. Since Trump began his term he has attempted to use all avenues with zero support. Border security systems and courts are overwhelmed at this point. Federal trumps State on immigration, multiple National Emergencies have been declared and upheld for this very situation, all available avenues have been addressed, the National Emergencies Act gives specific power for this situation, Congress has approved numerous statutes for this very situation, funds will be moved from dormant accounts not impacting FY appropriations, environmental concerns have been cleared for specific segments, matter of national security (drug epidemic, increased gang activity, increased trafficking, strain on federal budget, etc.), precedence. No logical challenge. Even more bleak when you consider only two of 16 states challenging share a southern border and nearly all of some form of sanctuary law in place.

3.) Above is not opinion and court, statute, U.S. code black and white documented fact. Like, not my opinion man.

4.) Dems have been overly aggressive at their intentions since gaining house control. They have not attempted to hide their obstruction, resist, government dependency attempts. Conservatives have no choice but to push back with equal aggressiveness supported by law. Amazing how nationalism is so dirty nowadays. How dare we put our people first and attempt to grasp at everything that has made this country prominent and viable. So immoral.

---