Senate gives Donald's emergency declaration the bigly smackdown

May 2007
3,904
1,831
your place
#91
As far as immigration and the wall, Trump is no more worried about that than he is concerned about the suckers that paid to go to Trump University.

He stood up like an idiot at all those campaign speeches and talked about how big and beautiful the wall was going to be and how he was going to make Mexico pay for it. He also went on about banning Muslims. It’s all just racist shit aimed at dumb asses.

Whenever a lowlife candidate runs on nationalism, they need some foreigners to blame. And since racism is alive and well just like it has been for hundreds of years, there is always a market for that shit.

He was explicit about it and he didn’t have to use “tropes” since his supporters don’t seem upset by racism. His message is that Mexicans are murderers and racists and Muslims are terrorists.
 
Last edited:
Apr 2012
75,778
5,628
#92
There is way too much partisan nonsense about the wall. Is it beyond your comprehension that building or not building a wall are not the only two options to solve illegal immigration problems? Just because someone thinks building a wall is a dumb thing to do, doesn't mean they support open borders. I can't recall other walls ever working in history, so what makes you think this one will work? It sounded good to the Romans and Chinese, too.

The wall works like this. It helps Trump look like he can do something constructive for a change. It doesn't stop illegal immigration that is needed to do jobs most people don't want to do, so it's business as usual and I don't expect any real changes to be done to change it.

In my state, you need proof of citizenship to get a license or state ID as a security check, but I don't see laws designed to make business use that standard in hiring their employees.
Trump wants the wall plus electronic and drones and more law enforcement. Democrats want open borders
 

kmiller1610

Former Staff
Mar 2007
31,952
6,200
#93
This is all good. Trump think's it's an emergency and he's the commander in chief. Let it go to the Scotus.

We shall see, I hope.
 

boontito

Future Staff
Jan 2008
103,237
91,732
Most Insidious
#94
It's not silly to get votes on record, even if you know it will lose. Every person who votes in the House or Senate has people who care about their voting record.
True.

We do way too much pre calculating of votes these days anyway. It's a much better idea to get I Representatives to commit to public record what they stand for and what they support. Regardless of the outcome.
 
Likes: kmiller1610

kmiller1610

Former Staff
Mar 2007
31,952
6,200
#95
As far as immigration and the wall, Trump is no more worried about that than he is concerned about the suckers that paid to go to Trump University.

He stood up like an idiot at all those campaign speeches and talked about how big and beautiful the wall was going to be and how he was going to make Mexico pay for it. He also went on about banning Muslims. It’s all just racist shit aimed at dumb asses.

Whenever a lowlife candidate runs on nationalism, they need some foreigners to blame. And since racism is alive and well just like it has been for hundreds of years, there is always a market for that shit.

He was explicit about it and he didn’t have to use “tropes” since his supporters don’t seem upset by racism. His message is that Mexicans are murderers and racists and Muslims are terrorists.
This is an argument about what the President can or cannot do. It's not about Trump. He was elected President. The job either allows him to do something or it doesn't.
 
Dec 2015
11,262
6,723
From Your Heart!
#96
So according to you it won’t have any impact on how the SCOTUS will view the case when comes before them?
When this case is before them if the Justices think clearly on it they will see what the Republican-led Senate has done and then vote to do the right thing which is to hopefully do away with the Trump emergency declaration which many others and I think will be the way it will go. However, the good side to that is that if they rule in favor of Trump it would set a precedent for a Democratic president to do the very same thing that Trump has done and pass the Democratic agenda that way also So, in that regard the SCOTUS has to think long and hard on whether they want to approve Trump's declaration and risk that happening or turn it down.
 
Dec 2015
11,262
6,723
From Your Heart!
#97
DemoWhip said:


... It still has to go through the courts.
No, it doesn't have to. Saying it "has to" implies that the statute says so.
Those opposed to what Trump has done are not necessarily looking at the statute but rather looking at the reality of the matter that it is a foregone conclusion that the case is going to end up at the Supreme Court. Even Trump has said that it will go all the way up to them and is hoping that they will rule in his favor. However, there is too much at stake if they do as explained previously as to what a Democratic president can then come in and also do to promote the Democratic agenda.