The debate "Trump and the republicans are massive hypocrites for supporting an emergency declaration" was started by
February 15, 2019, 8:52 am.
16 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 7 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
historybuff posted 2 arguments to the agreers part.
historybuff, Nemiroff, finthechat, SMNR and 12 visitors agree.
chrissurvivor and 6 visitors disagree.
Yet the funding would be to enforce laws that exist, it isn't like the funding is to pawn off some vague promise or new policy. Emergency powers have been established to gain funding whether or not we agree on how the approval works, in our conversation about if the wall could be done. Else, what emergency powers would the president have without money?
So going further is a bit of a reach is nothing is legally new. At most you could argue a waste of money. Yet every so often there's bigotry or torture or a nebulous rumor... Funny enough that rumor was also popular among Democrats until the primary was decided. The thing about primaries is everyone tries to kill the horse, then in the general they back it. If such popularity and controversy surrounded a well-off man who respects his foreign background (not birth, wasn't it born in Hawaii, then travelled off), I wouldn't hold it against an investigation as stupid as it might be.
Broken is a strong word, America can be flawed, but broken appears to apply to some other countries better. But I know this paragraph is really about Trump "burning down the system"... so I wonder who our saviors should be, is it the well-endorsed revolution that also claims grassroots that would not be televised? Perhaps from some perspectives it is easier to think dissent is chaos.
I do think this conversation has better faith arguments. Shortsightedness is an opinion, not a prescription, and greed or ineptness are a bit more buzz and flavor even if just for that. Rather vivid image with the "say anything, do anything, hurt anyone" too, I do think it helps the imagination for sure, even if it doesn't seem to be an argument.
Your argument doesn't really make sense. Until trump, no one had ever suggested declaring a national emergency just to force funding through for a campaign promise. It's not like this was something everyone was considering and trump just did it 1st. The reason there were no strict rules around this was because it was assumed that a president would have the ability to work for the public good. But since trump only cares about himself he is willing to destroy the system, and anything else that is in his way, in order to get what he wants.
He rails against fake news and investigations, but it was trump that pushed "birtherism" and actually sent investigators to Hawaii to try to prove his conspiracy theory. He says that Obama massively over reached his authority, only to go way further in using executive authority a few years later.
The american political system is broken, that isn't a secret. But trump is doing nothing to try to fix it. He is just torching the place to get what he wants. He is a massive hypocrite who does a complete 180 on things all the time. He is a con man who will say anything, do anything and hurt anyone to get what he wants.
To be fair, I don't believe it was the wisest decision either, but I don't see a compromise on the cause, as per our other conversation I should leave there. Maybe there's something with budgeting or an obstruction worth mentioning since a deal has to be made, decision or not.
To be a bit unfair, as it would seem, these complaints did not stop expanding powers. The deed is done, so to say, and minimizing power while other hypocrites work might not be possible. There was a point not long ago where blatant disregard for legal immigration processes such as the "sanctuary cities". Four years ago, maybe even two, it would be just a strawman. Certainly this rising disregard for rules, not even reform but disregard would change the political climate in mere years. So what is ideal, Trump gives up his power, for the next Democrat to expand them?
But I think if there needs to be an interpretation on emergency declaration and powers, we can leave that to the supreme Court since it was designed not as lawmakers or Commander in chief, but as law interpreters. Not that we can't have our own opinion, or that less power would hurt, but we would be commenting on the Commander in Chief executive power, which was designed because Congress can be slow to decide against emergencies, war, ect. Depending on the emergency ruling, it might not be as trivial as chocolate water fountains which would certainly be an expansion...But this isn't on my opinion, it's on how close the emergency ruling fits the ideal of swift, necessary action.
There are numerous recordings of virtually all the republican leaders as well as trump saying that allowing the president to use executive authority to go around congress was presidential overreach and violates the constitution. Now a few years later, they are totally OK with a president doing so.
This a tweet from trump. How much more of a hypocrite can you be? He has specifically said that being unable to negotiate with congress is not grounds to use executive authority. And here he is advocating for using executive authority because he is unable to negotiate with congress.
"Repubs must not allow Pres Obama to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit & because he is unable to negotiate w/ Congress."