59-41, trump crushed

[DBP66]

1 minute ago, zulu1128 said:

Pretty sure I'm on record as repeatedly stating that it's a dumb idea. Unfortunately, he's within his powers to do it. 

Hope this helps. 

..what is he within his powers to do?...he NOT allowed to take money congress has appropriated for something and use it for his wall....that's why he needs to have a "national emergency"..it's not that hard....baaalieve me...

[RedZone]

30 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

It'll be fun  to bump this thread in a month or two. 

Have a great evening, Chipster. ✌️

You are really struggling with this, but whatever. 

Always do!

[zulu1128]

Just now, Horsefly said:

That’s not how it works, there is a thing called the anti deficiency act that restricts funds for what they are appropriated for.  The service has limited ability to reprogram dollars, but if a requirement has not been authorized in the defense budget it can’t be spent for that purpose.  I don’t know if the defense budget has a provision for a wall construction.  If not, that will be a problem they’d need congress approval to reprogram. 

The ADA restricts overspending on appropriations...it doesn't designate what money can be spent on. It's 5-7 billion dollars out of the entire budget...which the administration most certainly has the leeway to reprogram. They're called discretionary funds for a reason. 

[zulu1128]

1 minute ago, RedZone said:

You are really struggling with this, but whatever. 

I'm really not. See ya in a month or two, unless 67 votes happens. ✌️

[DBP66]

3 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

The ADA restricts overspending on appropriations...it doesn't designate what money can be spent on. It's 5-7 billion dollars out of the entire budget...which the administration most certainly has the leeway to reprogram. They're called discretionary funds for a reason. 

please stop embarrassing yourself...."reprogram"?..LOL..sounds like an "alternative fact"...if they have that power why the "national emergency"?

[Bormio]

1 minute ago, zulu1128 said:

I'm really not. See ya in a month or two, unless 67 votes happens. ✌️

And 290 in the House - will NEVER happen

[HSFBfan]

14 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

That’s not how it works, there is a thing called the anti deficiency act that restricts funds for what they are appropriated for.  The service has limited ability to reprogram dollars, but if a requirement has not been authorized in the defense budget it can’t be spent for that purpose.  I don’t know if the defense budget has a provision for a wall construction.  If not, that will be a problem they’d need congress approval to reprogram. 

Isnt this why he signed the omnibus bill for the defense money

[RedZone]

anyways, this is what the 16 states will be arguing. Some of it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/can-trumps-wall-emergency-stand-up-in-court/2019/03/14/29c243cc-46af-11e9-94ab-d2dda3c0df52_story.html?utm_term=.610ada49ea88

2. What are they arguing?

They all claim Trump is acting “ultra vires” -- a Latin phrase that means beyond his legal authority -- and is violating the separation of powers outlined in the U.S. Constitution. They argue that since Congress declined to fund the border wall in 2017 and 2018, Trump may not usurp its power to pursue his own agenda. Article 1 states: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by the Law.” Separately, they could point to the president’s own admission: “I didn’t need to do this. I just wanted to do it faster.” They also allege that Trump improperly invoked the National Emergencies Act which gives the president broad powers during a crisis. “The Mexican army is not trying to infiltrate the United States,” said Michael McConnell, Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School. At least two of the cases lean on the National Environmental Policy Act, alleging the administration has failed to evaluate the environmental impact of a border wall.

[RedZone]

1 minute ago, RedZone said:

anyways, this is what the 16 states will be arguing. Some of it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/can-trumps-wall-emergency-stand-up-in-court/2019/03/14/29c243cc-46af-11e9-94ab-d2dda3c0df52_story.html?utm_term=.610ada49ea88

2. What are they arguing?

They all claim Trump is acting “ultra vires” -- a Latin phrase that means beyond his legal authority -- and is violating the separation of powers outlined in the U.S. Constitution. They argue that since Congress declined to fund the border wall in 2017 and 2018, Trump may not usurp its power to pursue his own agenda. Article 1 states: “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by the Law.” Separately, they could point to the president’s own admission: “I didn’t need to do this. I just wanted to do it faster.” They also allege that Trump improperly invoked the National Emergencies Act which gives the president broad powers during a crisis. “The Mexican army is not trying to infiltrate the United States,” said Michael McConnell, Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School. At least two of the cases lean on the National Environmental Policy Act, alleging the administration has failed to evaluate the environmental impact of a border wall.

Damn, I'm smart.  

It's all common sense and right there for everyone to see.

 

[Horsefly]

3 minutes ago, zulu1128 said:

The ADA restricts overspending on appropriations...it doesn't designate what money can be spent on. It's 5-7 billion dollars out of the entire budget...which the administration most certainly has the leeway to reprogram. They're called discretionary funds for a reason. 

 You can’t spend money on what is not authorized in the budget, (if you do that is an ADA violation.). authorizations occur before funds are appropriated.  If the DoD doesn’t have such an authorization to spend on a wall, an already approved line item, then they can’t spend the $$ directly. Congress would have to approve funds be reprogrammed to Homeland securitie’s budget.    If DoD has that authorization, then there is no ADA issue.  

[Horsefly]

5 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

Isnt this why he signed the omnibus bill for the defense money

It was a bill to build a wall under homeland security not to exceed ~$1.5B

[zulu1128]

1 minute ago, Horsefly said:

 You can’t spend money on what is not authorized in the budget, (if you do that is an ADA violation.). authorizations occur before funds are appropriated.  If the DoD doesn’t have such an authorization to spend on a wall, an already approved line item, then they can’t spend the $$ directly. Congress would have to approve funds be reprogrammed to Homeland securitie’s budget.    If DoD has that authorization, then there is no ADA issue.  

Agree to disagree. I guess we'll see if/when the veto holds. 

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, Horsefly said:

It was a bill to build a wall under homeland security not to exceed ~$1.5B

So he has that money. 

Hes gonna veto the vote today. And than I guess he gets the 8 billion hes asking for

[HSFBfan]

1 minute ago, zulu1128 said:

Agree to disagree. I guess we'll see if/when the veto holds. 

Veto holds. Doesnt have 66 senators to override it. Political suicide 

[RedZone]

manadirt will DIE is prison before this wall is completed.

[Horsefly]

13 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

So he has that money. 

Hes gonna veto the vote today. And than I guess he gets the 8 billion hes asking for

Not yet, it will go to the courts who I think will side with him, then he can proceed with reprogramming funds from other DoD MILCON projects.  I will withhold judgement until I see what projects DoD will sacrifice. . 

[RedZone]

23 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

Not yet, it will go to the courts who I think will side with him, then he can proceed with reprogramming funds from other DoD MILCON projects.  I will withhold judgement until I see what projects DoD will sacrifice. . 

They probably will eventually, but trump's big mouth might be his downfall....

[Horsefly]

1 minute ago, RedZone said:

They probably will eventually, but trump's big mouth might be his downfall....

That’s a possibility as well.  

[HSFBfan]

39 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

Not yet, it will go to the courts who I think will side with him, then he can proceed with reprogramming funds from other DoD MILCON projects.  I will withhold judgement until I see what projects DoD will sacrifice. . 

Sounds good. Thank you for the clarification. I like you believe the courts will side with him. 

[concha]

2 hours ago, zulu1128 said:

I'm really not. See ya in a month or two, unless 67 votes happens. ✌️

Funny to see ChipTard the WonderRacist accuse you of struggling.

Jumbo-sized projection.

🤣

[concha]

2 hours ago, Horsefly said:

 You can’t spend money on what is not authorized in the budget, (if you do that is an ADA violation.). authorizations occur before funds are appropriated.  If the DoD doesn’t have such an authorization to spend on a wall, an already approved line item, then they can’t spend the $$ directly. Congress would have to approve funds be reprogrammed to Homeland securitie’s budget.    If DoD has that authorization, then there is no ADA issue.  

The whole idea behind an emergency spending bill is exactly so that funds can be repurposed.  Otherwise, it is useless. The bill states that DoD construction $$$ already appropriated can be repurposed to other construction

. 

[Horsefly]

1 hour ago, concha said:

The whole idea behind an emergency spending bill is exactly so that funds can be repurposed.  Otherwise, it is useless. The bill states that DoD construction $$$ already appropriated can be repurposed to other construction

. 

The sad part is when trump was briefed on MILCON projects that would be deferred he stated they didn’t “sound” very important to him. I’d be curious to see what these are as these projects are typically programmed many years in advance.  

[concha]

7 hours ago, Horsefly said:

The sad part is when trump was briefed on MILCON projects that would be deferred he stated they didn’t “sound” very important to him. I’d be curious to see what these are as these projects are typically programmed many years in advance.  

Interesting that you see his comments as sad even as you admit that he was briefed on what the projects were and you admit to not knowing. "Orange Man Bad".

 

What is truly sad is that we have a party that puts their dislike of Bad Orange Man ahead of border security and our sovereignty and law.  We have a party that represents Mexicans and Central Americans before their own fellow citizens. We have a party that lies to America about wanting to protect our borders while at the same time promoting sanctuaries to draw illegals in and actively protect them from law enforcement. This same party is so brazenly dishonest that they claim walls and barriers don't work as effective deterrents 🤣👍 . Shameless absurdity.

[Horsefly]

46 minutes ago, concha said:

Interesting that you see his comments as sad even as you admit that he was briefed on what the projects were and you admit to not knowing. "Orange Man Bad".

 

What is truly sad is that we have a party that puts their dislike of Bad Orange Man ahead of border security and our sovereignty and law.  We have a party that represents Mexicans and Central Americans before their own fellow citizens. We have a party that lies to America about wanting to protect our borders while at the same time promoting sanctuaries to draw illegals in and actively protect them from law enforcement. This same party is so brazenly dishonest that they claim walls and barriers don't work as effective deterrents 🤣👍 . Shameless absurdity.

I put in quotes that he stated they don’t “sound” important.  The project deferments and cancellations should be based on solid assessment of their benefits or lack thereof.  But of course your president couldn’t articulate that.  Bottomline, he doesn’t KNOW their impact.  

the national emergency is a scam.  He’s been in office for 2 years and had a republican controlled congress and couldn’t get it funded. So why wasn’t an emergency declared then?  The “crisis” didn’t change in that span only a lack of funding. (Illegal entry from Mexico has steadily fallen since 2000)  

 

 

   

[concha]

17 minutes ago, Horsefly said:

I put in quotes that he stated they don’t “sound” important.  The project deferments and cancellations should be based on solid assessment of their benefits or lack thereof.  But of course your president couldn’t articulate that.  Bottomline, he doesn’t KNOW their impact.  

the national emergency is a scam.  He’s been in office for 2 years and had a republican controlled congress and couldn’t get it funded. So why wasn’t an emergency declared then?  The “crisis” didn’t change in that span only a lack of funding.  

 

 

You don't know what he was briefed.

We DO know that tens of thousands are pouring over our Southern border illegally every month.  We DO know there is a drug problem on our Southern border. And a human trafficking one. And a gang one. And we know it's not only illegal aliens who suffer from these problems, but large numbers of actual American citizens.

 

The scam is not that there are multiple serious issues with our border with Mexico. It's that the Democratic Party and the rest of the left won't admit that they have no serious intention of limiting border crossings because they see future Dem voters.

How laughably dishonest is a group of people that claim they want security for their home, but won't put up a wall around their property and then tell potential home invaders that they will protect them from the cops once they get in the front door or side window? 🤣