National Emergency

[Trebuchet]

It's such an emergency he's having to fly to Florida to play golf.

He probably won't sign it today. It'll take a while for "the best people" to write it up for him.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Relax. Think of it more like a drinking game.

There's not enough alcohol.

 

[SumDooder]

His response to the NBC question about his failure to take a better deal before the shutdown was the most nonsensical answer among thousands of nonsensical answers. He just word vomits instead of answering tough questions. Amazing to behold.

Got a link for that? Sounds HILARIOUS.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Isn't saying "I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster." admitting there isn't actually an emergency?

 

[3point14]

I was hoping for a National Emergency that will force all Republicans to walk around with their pants around their ankles on fire.

FTFY

 

[dmaker]

This is great news! This means that the Democrats can finally get things done on climate change when a Democratic president is elected in 2020. She will simply declare a national emergency and get all the funding for Medicare for all and climate change policies.

Hopefully, she will steal any funds remaining for the wall when she does so.

 

[chrispy]

Got a link for that? Sounds HILARIOUS.

Was watching live. You'll have to lose a few brain cells and watch the whole thing. Sorry.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Isn't saying "I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster." admitting there isn't actually an emergency?

Trump and the lawyers who will have to defend this in court working together, hand in glove. Surely such a comment won't completely undermine any legal defense they might offer.

 

[alfaniner]

That was, without a doubt, the worst speech I have ever seen.

Has he signed the bill from last night already?

 

[3point14]

That was, without a doubt, the worst speech I have ever seen.

Has he signed the bill from last night already?

No wonder he hates Obama. Barrak was damn good at them.

 

[AnonyMoose]

Who needs a congress?

Total waste of money. All you need is a singular king to declare national emergencies and push money around where he wants it to go. Then the king sits back and waits for it to bounce around the courts until he gets his way. Easy peezy.

Welcome to the new monarchy.

#gawdsavetheking

 

[Lambchops]

Who needs a congress?

Total waste of money. All you need is a singular king to declare national emergencies and push money around where he wants it to go. Then the king sits back and waits for it to bounce around the courts until he gets his way. Easy peezy.

Welcome to the new monarchy.

#gawdsavetheking

Ahem, that's "God Emperor" to you, bucko.

 

[sadhatter]

@Meadmaker


Pelosi didn't say "we're going to do an end-run ...", she said that, with this precedent, a Democratic President could do that - on guns, or climate change, or health-care or whatever. A perfectly good point to make. It's not as if she's saying "We will allow Trump to establish this precedent so we can take advantage of it", is it? If it is allowed, it'll be Republicans who allow it, and they can hardly now claim ignorance of the potential consequences.

Kind of like in an MMA match when one guy throws a low blow and the other guy gets to do that from that point on in the match.

Oh wait that would be a horrible dishonorable action to take during a televised bit of violence. If only political discourse could try to at least jump over that bar we would be on our way to some progress.

 

[Lambchops]

Hey guys, let's ignore what the current POTUS is doing, and talk about a future POTUS hypothetically doing the same thing instead.

 

[CapelDodger]

Okay we've established perfectly what Trump, McConnell, the Senate, the Republican Party, and the Supreme Court can't do.

Any plans on what to do when they go ahead and do it anyway?

Call in the 2nd Amendment people.

 

[Upchurch]

Hey guys, let's ignore what the current POTUS is doing, and talk about a future POTUS hypothetically doing the same thing instead.

Can we talk about what the current POTUS might hypothetically be doing in the future? Is Trump possibly losing reelection a national emergency?

 

[Dr. Keith]

Hey guys, let's ignore what the current POTUS is doing, and talk about a future POTUS hypothetically doing the same thing instead.

The fact that this action could set a very bad precedent seems relevant to a discussion of this action.

But then, I haven't read al the posts you are complaining of.

 

[Lambchops]

Can we talk about what the current POTUS might hypothetically be doing in the future? Is Trump possibly losing reelection a national emergency?

OK, now we're really asking the important questions.

 

[AnonyMoose]

Can we talk about what the current POTUS might hypothetically be doing in the future? Is Trump possibly losing reelection a national emergency?

No. That would be declared a national holiday.

A national emergency is something you declare when you want to build something faster... after it bounces around in courts for months and months and months.

 

[sadhatter]

Ahem, that's "God Emperor" to you, bucko.

Big E was only unsuccessful due to his subordinates, and sacrificed himself to build his wall.

Trump on the other hand would sell the states in a second, and wouldn't spend a penny, let alone actually do any work for his wall.

Big E is the opposite of trump. He represents the idea of someone being a dictator but actually being right, trump on the other hand is what happens when you give a ten year old billions of dollars and the presidency.