President Donald Trump

[revo]

I think the original scenario that you put forth about some future President making a retaliatory action banning guns is inane. I also think that it would likely lead to a new civil war, which would be uglier than the 1st one we had.

And I just posted an article that shows the GOP fear after a Trump contrived national emergency is that a Democratic president retaliates by declaring other "national emergencies" such as income disparity, or climate change, or whatever, so a "national emergency" banning assault rifles again certainly doesn't seem like a stretch, considering they already were banned for a decade not so long ago. Of course, the same legalities would apply and this would get nowhere. But my point, about Trump severely overreaching, is very accurate.

[baldgriff]

And I just posted an article that shows the GOP fear after a Trump contrived national emergency is that a Democratic president retaliates by declaring other "national emergencies" such as income disparity, or climate change, or whatever, so a "national emergency" banning assault rifles again certainly doesn't seem like a stretch, considering they already were banned for a decade not so long ago. Of course, the same legalities would apply and this would get nowhere. But my point, about Trump severely overreaching, is very accurate.

We agree on Trump's "national emergency" as an over reach. I guess I have enough trust in the separation of duties and our courts that we would never get to the place your describing. Seriously, the "retaliatory action" you reference would be a direct attack on the rights of citizens - I dont see Trump's over reach as a direct attack against the rights of citizens. Additionally, your scenario would very likely lead to blood shed at a minimum and civil war at the worst.

[nots]

These are just GOP talking points. The Democrats are not advocating for "Open Borders". In fact, they are willing to spend (and have already spent) plenty of money on border security, which includes more border agents, more immigration officers to process asylum claims, better technology on the border and at check points, and even adding or repairing border fencing where needed. What the Democrats oppose is taking all of that money for agents, officers, technology, and fencing, and wasting it on a 2,000 mile long, 8 foot concrete (or steel) wall.

Trump has asked for $800M for care for families at the border.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/8/18171913/shutdown-trump-speech-wall-funding

[onejayhawk]

These are just GOP talking points. The Democrats are not advocating for "Open Borders". In fact, they are willing to spend (and have already spent) plenty of money on border security, which includes more border agents, more immigration officers to process asylum claims, better technology on the border and at check points, and even adding or repairing border fencing where needed. What the Democrats oppose is taking all of that money for agents, officers, technology, and fencing, and wasting it on a 2,000 mile long, 8 foot concrete (or steel) wall.

So you quote Democratic talking points and not even the more rational ones. Anyone that claims the money would be wasted on a physical barrier has lost contact with facts. Mountains of studies to say that a barrier is an effective force multiplier. It's no pancea, but it is necessary. First, stop the bleeding.

J

[revo]

Ooof. Yes, the FBI suspected Trump, as President, of treason. Dayum! The Manchurian Candidate!

“WASHINGTON — In the days after President Trump fired James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation.

The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.”

[OaklandA's]

Anyone that claims the money would be wasted on a physical barrier has lost contact with facts. Mountains of studies to say that a barrier is an effective force multiplier. It's no panacea, but it is necessary.

Please try and read more carefully. I said Democrats are fine with border fencing, which is a physical barrier, and an order of magnitude cheaper than an 8 foot high concrete wall. The money spent on Trump's HUGE BEAUTIFUL WALL could be better spent on other border security measures.

[Sour Masher]

Please try and read more carefully. I said Democrats are fine with border fencing, which is a physical barrier, and an order of magnitude cheaper than an 8 foot high concrete wall. The money spent on Trump's HUGE BEAUTIFUL WALL could be better spent on other border security measures.

Yes, like hiring more adjudicators to process asylum seekers more quickly.

[swampdragon]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/12/o...gtype=Homepage

Trump’s Five Craziest Arguments About the Shutdown

[onejayhawk]

Please try and read more carefully. I said Democrats are fine with border fencing, which is a physical barrier, and an order of magnitude cheaper than an 8 foot high concrete wall. The money spent on Trump's HUGE BEAUTIFUL WALL could be better spent on other border security measures.

I was right the first time. Anyone that thinks it can be better spent on human resources has lost touch with facts. Or did you mean other sorts of border resources?

Also, Democrats fully oppose a border fence. Nancy Pelosi said not one dollar.

Yes, like hiring more adjudicators to process asylum seekers more quickly.

Definitely not that though Pelosi opposes it as well. Getting assylum seekers to limit theselves to ports of entry is the first step. There are dozens.

J

[revo]

Ooof. Yes, the FBI suspected Trump, as President, of treason. Dayum! The Manchurian Candidate!

“WASHINGTON — In the days after President Trump fired James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation.

The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.”

So a day after this news broke -- that the FBI was concerned Trump may have been a Russian spy -- it's revealed that Trump concealed all notes of his private meeting with Putin in 2017, and asked the interpreter for her notes and insisted she not reveal anything from that meeting. Hmmmmm.

[DMT]

So a day after this news broke -- that the FBI was concerned Trump may have been a Russian spy -- it's revealed that Trump concealed all notes of his private meeting with Putin in 2017, and asked the interpreter for her notes and insisted she not reveal anything from that meeting. Hmmmmm.

It's truly staggering how this is being allowed to continue. The Trump Party needs to be burned to the ground.

[swampdragon]

It's truly staggering how this is being allowed to continue. The Trump Party needs to be burned to the ground.

still no comments from any republican leaders - unless I missed something

[revo]

In addition, he was asked by a Fox News interviewer if he was indeed a Russian agent — and he didn’t answer. Hmmmmm.

[nots]

In addition, he was asked by a Fox News interviewer if he was indeed a Russian agent — and he didn’t answer. Hmmmmm.

Guy lies about everything, but he’s not going to lie to Fox News? Cmon

[revo]

Guy lies about everything, but he’s not going to lie to Fox News? Cmon

He didn't lie. He didn't give an answer. He just said the question was the most ridiculous thing he's ever heard, but he did not say 'No," and because Fox lobbed him the question, they didn't pursue.