patrick.net

Nancy is bitching because she knows she lost.

Go save the whales.

HEYYOU says

Well, let's do nothing & see what happens.

FortWayneIndiana says

Declare it and try to take them. I dare.

Nancy didn't think this one through.

Every time Dems say something negative about guns, gun manufacturer stocks and sales surge.

Pelosi pays gun dividends

Most idle threat of all time.

I hope Dems do it though. You would see most of them swinging by their necks within 1-2 weeks.

So a Building wall is the same as destroying Second Amendment or any amendments for that matter if your on the left? The left has lost it.

Try to take them. See what happens.
Elgatouno says

Why not just go after bullets?

If corporations are people, why don't they pay their taxes?

Heraclitusstudent says

If corporations are people, why don't they pay their taxes?

Why do you hate SUCCESS?!?!?

“I have stated my concerns with Amazon long before the Election. Unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state & local governments, use our Postal System as their Delivery Boy (causing tremendous loss to the U.S.), and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business!” Trump wrote on Twitter on Thursday morning.

And this time I agree with Trump 100%

A Republican President took the Souths property,slaves,arms & killed a bunch of traitors.

Actually, they were allowed to keep their arms.

This is the 1st quarters "distraction" from the administration to take the publics collective attention away from the economy.

More distractions coming as things slowly go to hell....

She's just trying to change the subject. If they declared a national emergency on botox, we would have to see her face twisted into it's customary mask of evil on a daily basis.

They did not post enough gun-free zone signs at Pratt.

HEYYOU says

HeadSet says

Actually, they were allowed to keep their arms.

I'll give you a few minutes to rethink that.

Why? At the Appomattox surrender, the newly ex-Confederates were allowed to leave with their arms and horses.

Declares emergency even after opening his pie hole that he really didn't have to declare an emergency - go figure.

But the ensuing court drama and upcoming photo op in Vietnam with Kim provides some temporary distractions while Munchkin tries to salvage a face saving trade deal with the Chinese.

Also provides great cover as the economy slowly circles the drain

Should none of the above work - send the Special Forces Unit(s) in from Columbia to "save" Venezuela or fire a few rockets at Iran.

Like they would have done differently anyways

@Booger - kindly refer to the first sentence in comment #21 - even though he will deny ever having said there was "no emergency but I did this anyway to get things sped up" - it is preserved in history on video tape with his mouth open and the empty head uttering - there is no emergency.

Donald Trump’s national emergency announcement on Friday qualified as the most self-negating White House declaration in recent history.

Typically, an emergency is grounded in urgency. Mr Trump seemed in no hurry to roll his out. Typically, a US president would also state that the situation was, in fact, an emergency.

This is particularly so if it is justified on national security grounds. Mr Trump implied quite the opposite. In so doing, he handed the Supreme Court a reason to strike it down. “I didn’t need to do this,” he said of his move to build a US-Mexico border wall with diverted funds. “But I’d rather do it much faster . . . the only reason we are up here talking about this is because of the election.” In sum, therefore, Mr Trump gutted his own case while making it.

Whether Mr Trump’s failure to convince Congress to fund a border wall qualifies as an emergency will be up to the US courts. The underlying case that prompted him to do so is not favourable. Mr Trump talked of an “invasion” of “monstrous caravans” across the US border that only a wall could stop. He also talked of the massive casualties from drugs gangs and human trafficking. In practice, illegal border crossings into the US are running at less than a quarter of their peak at the start of this century.

The crisis ended after the 2008 financial meltdown. Illegal immigration across the US’s southern border peaked at 1.6m in 2000. It is now at its lowest level in nearly 50 years. And the overall numbers of illegal immigrants have actually fallen.

More people have been leaving the US than entering. Of the roughly 11m undocumented migrants in the US, almost half are estimated to have overstayed their visas.Mr Trump’s declaration will also test Republican patience.

Fewer than a third of Americans support Mr Trump’s move, according to polls. Many Republican senators have expressed deep misgivings about Mr Trump’s extravagant definition of executive power. Future Democratic presidents could declare global warming a national security crisis and push through the “Green New Deal”, said Marco Rubio, Mr Trump’s former presidential rival. More realistically, Mr Trump himself could escalate his use of emergency powers if the Supreme Court upheld this one (as he predicted it would in his accompanying commentary on the likely legal challenges). Were an illegal immigrant to be caught voting, for example, would Mr Trump post armed guards at polling stations? His imagination would be the limit.

A common sense reading of the US constitution would suggest Mr Trump’s move is illegal. He circumvented Congress, which allocated only $1.375bn for border security. He will now divert billions more from various Pentagon and Treasury budgets to build a wall. This undercuts Capitol Hill’s sole prerogative to approve spending.

Perhaps the most egregious example was in 1952 when president Harry Truman tried to nationalise US steel mills when workers went on strike. The Supreme Court struck that attempt down. Unlike Mr Trump’s confected border crisis, the US was in the midst of the Korean war.But Mr Trump has two things going for him.

The first is that the Supreme Court is now majority conservative. The court includes Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, two Trump appointees who take a robust view of White House powers. Second, Mr Trump has the base on his side. Most US voters may be unhappy with the move.

But conservative pundits, including Sean Hannity, the Fox News anchor whom many jokingly refer to as Mr Trump’s “de facto chief of staff”, applauded him. Mr Trump even cited Mr Hannity’s support in his declaration on Friday. Such figures are not concerned with the nitty gritty of actual facts on the US border.

Earlier this week, Fox News found that 45 per cent of Republicans believe God wanted Mr Trump to be president. That rose to 55 per cent of evangelicals. “He [God] wanted Donald Trump to be president and that’s why he’s there,” said Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Mr Trump’s spokesperson.

Those arguing against Mr Trump’s move on factual grounds may be missing the point. His border wall is an act of faith. If you believe the US-Mexico border poses a national security threat, then that is what it shall be.

edward.luce@ft.com

https://www.ft.com/content/d90a1b3c-311c-11e9-8744-e7016697f225

Yet.
Stepping stones are a bitch
Elgatouno says

Since he has no interest in “seizing the means of production"

He'll be too busy fighting the plague of white cis men from the bench

Elgatouno says

Social democracy is a system that leaves the means of production in private hands but assures that regulations, some public control of the economy, and extensive entitlements exist to keep everybody at a decent standard of living.

Elgatouno says

Since he has no interest in “seizing the means of production" this is what Bernie Sanders actually is.

Bernie/Ocasio 2020

He's a Capitalists because he PREYS on Idiots that does not know the difference.
And Socialism has already failed in America just in the first month of 2019 and it's not even implemented yet.

Bernie doesn't not want the Nordic model. He wants to seize the means of production. His views align more closely with Cuba/Venezuela and he's even written as much. Aside from that, the Nordic model ain't all it's cracked up to be. Many people from those countries state that once you get to a certain income, you stop trying because the payoff is so low compared to the extra work you would put in.

You can't have welfare and unfettered immigration simultaneously. Without strong barriers, people will only stop coming from the worst places on earth when our country is just as bad as the worst places on earth.

What's the difference between seizing the means of production and binding it, shackling it and taxing/regulating it until the golden goose is dead and no longer produces?

Elgatouno says

theoakman says

Bernie doesn't not want the Nordic model. He wants to seize the means of production. His views align more closely with Cuba/Venezuela and he's even written as much.

I find people who say shit without providing proof usually are just talking out of their ass.

Ok, so you are just too lazy to look it up or so ignorant that you've never heard the quote:

"These days, the American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, in places such as Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina, where incomes are actually more equal today than they are in the land of Horatio Alger. Who's the banana republic now?"

And before you try to go quote some leftwing sources about how he didn't actually say that, this came from his own friggin website.

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/close-the-gaps-disparities-that-threaten-america

I love this leftist re-writing of history to hide their stupid shit.

Bernie Sanders is quoted as saying the “American dream” was more likely to be realized in Venezuela than the US, this was literally 3-4 years ago.

Sanders is a hardcore Marxist through and through.

Tenpoundbass says

He's a Capitalists because he PREYS on Idiots that does not know the difference.

As someone that knows the difference, Is are England and CAnada socialist for having national health care systems ?

Since we’re playing pretend, if Megatron became president, could he declare the an emergency to blow up all automobiles to find the autobots?

Maybe then we can send some American war criminals (Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam) and some financial criminals to Gitmo for a well deserved visit - a long long visit.

Hand it over, you fucks!

The DNC would never allow a Sanders candidacy. After all, he's a White male!

Sanders should run as an independent. I'd vote for him. 2020 should be the year where we walk away from the corruption of the established parties.

Not likely, but... a guy can dream.