[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/news/ - Current News

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 28 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks Make sure to check your spam box!



https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/senate-vote-trump-national-emergency-declaration-resolution/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+CNN+-+Top+Stories%29

>Washington (CNN)The Senate delivered a high-profile rebuke to President Donald Trump over his signature agenda issue Thursday when 12 Republicans joined Democrats to overturn the President's national emergency border declaration.

>The vote was 59-41, an overwhelming vote against the President's executive action.

>Lawmakers don't have enough votes, however, to override a certain veto from the President, but passage of the resolution in the Senate after it passed the House last month is nevertheless an embarrassing blow to Trump delivered by his own party over the President's top campaign pledge of a wall at the US-Mexico border.

>The 12 Senate Republicans who voted in support of the resolution were: Roger Wicker of Mississippi, Marco Rubio of Florida, Rob Portman of Ohio, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Roy Blunt of Missouri, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Mitt Romney of Utah, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Jerry Moran of Kansas and Mike Lee of Utah.

>The setback for the President also comes on the heels of another high-profile break with his administration after the Senate voted just one day earlier to curtail US military support for a Saudi-led war in Yemen, which has created a humanitarian crisis in that country.

>Senate Republicans have struggled for weeks over how to vote on the resolution to overturn the national emergency.

>The vote forced many to choose between loyalty to a President unafraid to attack members of his party who defy him and an emergency declaration that conservative critics describe as executive overreach and warn could set a precedent used by Democratic presidents to declare emergencies over liberal priorities such as action on climate change.
>>
>"Declaring a national emergency to access different funds sets a dangerous new precedent," GOP Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio warned in remarks on the Senate floor ahead of the vote. "It opens the door for future presidents to implement just about any policy they want."

>The senator went on to say, "a future President could seize industries ... a future President may well say that climate change is a national emergency and use emergency authorities to implement the Green New Deal," referencing a sweeping progressive policy proposal to tackle global warming.

>Portman announced during his remarks that he would support the resolution, but made a point to say -- as have many other Republicans -- that he believes "President Trump is right about the crisis at the border."

>Republicans had to take a tough vote on the border declaration after House Democrats pushed for a resolution to terminate the national emergency that the President announced last month in an effort to unlock money for wall construction at the southern border.

>The President declared an emergency when it became clear that Congress would not meet his demand for more than $5 billion in border wall funding. The resolution is privileged, which means that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell could not block it from coming to the floor for a vote.

>Enough Republican senators had already stated their support for the resolution ahead of Thursday's vote to guarantee it would pass. But the President continued to publicly pressure Republicans to vote against the resolution in the hours leading up to the vote, framing the vote as a choice between supporting border security or siding with liberal Democrats on immigration.

>A number of GOP senators announced ahead of the vote on Thursday that they would vote in favor of the resolution, including Mitt Romney, Lamar Alexander and Pat Toomey.
>>
>Prior to the day of the vote, GOP Senators Rand Paul, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Thom Tillis had said they planned to vote for the resolution.

>In an apparent last-minute reversal, however, Tillis announced just ahead of the vote on Thursday that he would vote against the resolution, despite previously saying he would vote in favor in a Washington Post op-ed.

>"Today, I come to the floor to say that I do not intend to vote for the resolution of disapproval," the senator said, adding "The White House has been very gracious and I should say very patient given my initial position in working with us."

>This story has been updated with additional developments Thursday.

They almost got it veto-proofed
>>
>They almost got it veto-proofed

Almost buddy, almost :)
>>
>>368125
Wait Marco and fucking Mitt signed up
>>
Eh, I don't really care what it is, as long as millions of Democrats die I'm all for it.
>>
Lol enjoy the veto
>>
>>368127
>They almost got it veto-proofed

59 out of 100 was way better than I expected (I expected it to fail), but it's still 8 short of a 2/3 majority. While that seems like a small number, it's a lot in the world of the Senate.

>>368139
It's likely they're doing this as a defensive move to protect Congressional power. The big concern about this emergency is that it can override Congress's power of the purse, which could cause massive executive overreach as they cannibalize the budget to do whatever the hell they want. Senators thinking long term know this won't end well as at some point a president less agreeable to their politics will take power, and lord knows the sort of wild shit they will do if they can just vaguely justify a national emergency to siphon billions of funding.
>>
>>368148
>Senators thinking long term know this won't end well as at some point a president less agreeable to their politics will take power, and lord knows the sort of wild shit they will do if they can just vaguely justify a national emergency to siphon billions of funding.

like democrats give a shit about constitutional law. the second they get into power again as the leftists become more radical they won't give a shit
>>
>>368140
Tell us again how your side are the victims again,terrorist.
>>
>>368143
Lol, enjoy climate change and gun violence being declared national emergencies the next time a Democrat is elected President.
>>
>>368140
Behold, the average Republican.
>>
>>368188
Except those aren't national emergencies.
Plz come and take it faggot
>>
>>368194
>Except those aren't national emergencies.
Not yet, because there isn't a Democrat in the White House yet.
>Plz come and take it faggot
From your cold, dead hands.
>>
>>368188
>Implying that wouldn't happen anyway
Who are you trying to fool? The democrats are pretty clear about believing the constitution is an evil document made by racist slavers whenever it gets in the way of building their gay brown dystopia.
>>
>>368182
>radical
>leftist

Yup. All the buzzwords were there. A+ post, buddy.
>>
>>368219
We've gotten to a place in our country where even doubting for a moment that a bunch of disease ridden slave owners from the 1700's created the perfect government makes one a "radical leftist". Conservatives have a very troubling, unwavering devotion to the constitution despite the fact that, 300 years later, we're constantly discovering that the founding fathers weren't very smart or good people.
>>
>>368224
No we haven't shit for brains.conservatives like Calvin Coolidge or eisenhower or Nixon?what are you gay or just stupid?
>>
>>368182
>>368219
>trump trashes the constitution
>"Yeah, well, look at this imaginary alternate reality I made up where the Democrats did it. What do you have to say about that, hmm?"
>>
>>368219
that's a straw man argument.try harder,try as hard as your mom did when she shat you out into this world.
>>
>>368138
The fact you had over a 5th of the Republicans in the Senate turn on the president when they pride themselves on blind loyalty is a massive defeat.
Democrats can both beat those who voted in against the resolution as those who betray their vow to the Constitution because they are voting in favor of letting Trump be a dictator.
>>
>>368226
Come on, it's not as though we didn't just have partisan hacks decide that gay marriage was always the law of the land, it's just that no one noticed for 200 years. Stuff like gun control gets blocked because there are enough elected officials who know their reelection (and thus their place at the corruption trough) depends on blocking it, not because gun grabbers ever respected that old horrible racist piece of paper.
>>
>>368239
Why do you even care about guns anymore? Didn't Obama take all of them?
>>
>>368226
>Trump uses the powers given to the office of the President by the very body that is bitching about it.

Jesus Christ, it takes 10 seconds on Wikipedia to find the Congressionally approved powers Trump is using (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/2808)

>>368228
No, it isn't. These are mostly Senators from purple states (and Paul, who can always be counted on for this sort of shit) who voted in a safe veto margain without the House being a risk, either.

This entire thing is a charade the media parrots unquestioningly.
>>
>>368244
One of the main arguments people are making against using a national emergency to get the wall is that it would allow dems would use the same technique to get gun control. It's a silly argument, because the wall has no effect whatsoever on whether a national emergency can be used for gun control.
>>
>>368249
It enables the President to hijack Congress's spending power. The policy itself it's used for is irrelevant. The issue is the effect on checks and balances.
>>
>>368254
Honestly, that doesn't bother me too much. This setting a precedent that might let the democrats build a railway or a solar power station rather than having funding for anything that isn't a war or a handout for billionaires blocked by the kochsucker wing of the republican party is a side bonus as far as I'm concerned.
>>
>>368262
>a war or a handout for billionaires
Trump is creating a precedent that will allow Republican presidents to do this all day, every day.
>>
>>368281
It's not like congress has ever put up the slightest resistance to either of those things.
>>
>>368254
You can't hijack something that is given to you. As long as Trump uses the building funds allocated to the DOD by Congress, using the DOD to build the wall there is no legal conflict. It would just be Congress bitching about this specific use of the powers, not the process.
>>
>>368247
Legitimate power used illegitimately. Also, mass shootings and climate change are true national and global emergencies. Furthermore, British parliament’s existence and legitimacy comes from controlling funds, same as any legislative body.
>>
>>368339
I want to slap the idiot that made Congress's refusal to authorize an emergency subject to the President's veto.
>>
>>368342
>Congress passes National Emergency Act
>Congress passes amendements to NEA that outline how military construction funds can be used in an emergency
>Trump follows these guidelines
>Congress gets upset about what qualifies as a national emergency not being specifically spelled out


It is almost as if the entire Congressional argument is that they don't like the wall. Take a look at the list of past national emergencies. If almost 1 million illegal crossings in a year doesn't count as an emergency, neither do the dozens of bullshit foreign policy emergencies.

As for climate change and guns, the NEA would have to have specific language as to what the POTUS can do about those. Since there is none, this whole thing is a lie.
>>
>>368254
>expecting trumptards to be able to think long term instead of demanding instant gratification and ignoring other consequences
>>
>>368661
Dude the highest numbers of crossings was like in 2000 and been in steady decrease since then
>>
>>368785
As has police violence. Why does nobody call Democrats on this during debates when they call the shooting of black unarmed men a crisis
>>
>>368661
>Congress passes amendements to NEA that outline how military construction funds can be used in an emergency
Except it's not supposed to be used for pet projects or fake emergencies. The boarder is a humanitarian crisis that Trump created with his cruel policies.
And true to form, Trump would abuse the powers of what he has.
>>
bump
>>
What libs doing here? I heard its alt right?
>>
>>368821
https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/
>>
DONALD DRUMPF BLOWN THE F-
>veto's it
gosh golly gee darn how does he keep doing this
>>
>>369289
Is he actually going to veto it, or just whine on twitter?

Winning doesn't seem to be his style.
>>
>>369287
https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/aboutthedata/
The data sources seem questionable.
They're using media coverage. If someone is killed by the police in the 90s and they don't post about it on social media or get covered by the media. Did it happen?
>>
>>369301
>Winning doesn't seem to be his style
Hillary Clinton has something important to tell you that I guess your unaware of
>>
>>369442
Wait is this like that proverb about a tree falling in the woods when nobody is around?
>>
These 12 senators are bought and paid for by open border globalist cucks that are funded through human trafficking, drugs and cheap labor. They will not be forgotten when their election comes back around.
>>
Bumping better of two threads.
>>
>>369443
Yeah, he got elected. But just about every other right wing populist on the planet who won an election has gone on to implement far more campaign promises than he has - Salvini, Duterte, Orban and Bolsonaro come to mind. I'd accept excuses about congressional dysfunction getting in the way if he wasn't getting outdone by Filipinos and BRs.

Although it looks like he actually did do the veto, which is a pleasant surprise. I was expecting him to let himself get beaten on the wall again and then run his 2020 campaign with the slogan "I tried, please clap". Maybe he will actually get some results, although he's already wasted half a term so he needs to move a lot faster.
>>
>>369289
Did anyone even say he wasn't going to?
>>
>>368339
>You can't hijack something that is given to you.
Congress explicitly told Trump no, the emergency powers are not intended to be used this way. The emergency powers originally didn't even allow the President to veto a deauthorization and the whole law doesn't even make sense the way it has been implemented as of now.
>>
I'm genuinely amazed that anyone thinks that it's a good idea to let any president do something like this. Have we already forgotten when Obama used executive orders in a similar way and everyone lost their shit?

All American law is based on precedent. If this flies, future presidents will do the same thing and if anyone complains they'll just say "Trump did it, must be legal." It puts too much power into the executive branch to just force major decisions without approval from Congress. This is basic 8th grade U.S. History shit.
>>
>>369576
>Salvini, Duterte, Orban and Bolsonaro
comparing a u.s. president to Mexican dictators and the amount of policy they are able to get done doesn't make sense
>>
>>368182
I think this whole thread misses the point. Someone made a comment sometime within the past 2 weeks on some other thread about how the democrats want open borders and relentless immigration AND no voter ID whatsoever so they they can flood the country with illegals who will outvote native born legal voters and whites so that they can get a majority in the House and the Senate and state legislatures / governorships so that they can enact all the extreme ideological policies that they want and to do things like pack and expand the Supreme Court.. If you doubt that this is just what the dims want all you have to do is observe what they have done to California. It is now effectively a dim controlled soft totalitarian one party state. California is what they want for the whole country.

It is called demographic gerrymandering.

This is their way of cheating to get policies and outcomes that they want whiter, older electorate would never accept.
>>
>>369770
Salvini isn't even prime minister of Italy, let alone dictator. But he made a good faith effort to get things done with the office he did have, and what do you know? Things got done.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.