Pelosi: Democrat President Could Use Emergency Powers For Gun Control

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,136
30,086
146
Well, so much for "small government" Conservatism. Seems that's only a thing with the other side is overstepping executive reach.

As far as the wall goes, the disconnect is that the wall does not equal border security. Saying people who oppose the wall oppose border security is disingenuous, and that's being kind. Furthermore, in order for many people to support and expensive solution to something, there needs to be evidence of a real problem. Not prayer rugs found in the desert, and talk of rapists, and calling what's happening at the southern border an "invasion". Facts. If facts show there to be a dire emergency, then take appropriate action. The fact is: they don't. So it's a double dose of horseshit: that there is a dire problem, and that the Wall is a solution for the supposed issue (it isn't).

The courts will now be involved, and that's probably fine as far as Trump cares. He's doing this for votes and support. If the wall never gets built, he did his best, and even has the added bonus of being able to point at opposition for it and lie that they "don't support border security."

This sucks for anyone who thinks the executive has too much power as it is. It truly sucks. It tells me that if a truly intelligent dictator wanted to grab the reigns here, we'd bend right over and take it. We are lucky that Trump is too moronic to get out of his own way (so far).

One is reminded over the perpetual furor that the rightwing jihadis experienced over 8 years of Obama, declaring him an emperor, superseding congressional authority, despite no actual examples of that ever happening....but then it started happening, very explicitly, with Trump.

Now it's totes alright.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
Republicans spent 8 years during the Obama admin complaining that Executive was becoming too powerful and threatened to undermine the Constitution, and no one listened. So they elected Trump to prove themselves right.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
The courts will now be involved, and that's probably fine as far as Trump cares.

If Trump does not recognize a functioning process of Congress mandated by the Constitution, why would he do so with the courts? He is the CIC and there is no explicit mention in the Constitution that says he can't tell the SCOTUS to eff off.

It is impossible to overstate the consequences of what Trump has attempted to do. This is effectively a coup against the government of the US by one individual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
As we've seen, the Nobel Peace Prize is meaningless.

It is. This isn't

Trump "I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster".

So the only thing trump "needs" to do is ignore the courts when his own words condemn him. You will have your Il Dulce.

And the NPP is meaningless, and certainly not as important as the support of an Enemy Domestic, which you embrace.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
1 out of nearly 600 does not make the price "meaningless". STFU.


It kind of does though. What did Obama do to earn his peace prize, other than being a Democrat brown skinned president? I imagine Trump has done more to push peace in areas of conflict than any POTUS in recent history.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
It is. This isn't

Trump "I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster".

So the only thing trump "needs" to do is ignore the courts when his own words condemn him. You will have your Il Dulce.

And the NPP is meaningless, and certainly not as important as the support of an Enemy Domestic, which you embrace.


It never had to get to this point, the obstructionist Democrats just had to vote for what was good for America over their party-first partisan anti-Trump agenda. But they wouldn't do that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: esquared

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Except you brainwashed idiots hate America, the Constitution, and everything we stand for, and your support of this unconstitutional act by the President proves this.


How is this unconstitutional but Pelosi threatening to jump over the 2A is not? In fact, just the emergency, how is that unconstitutional? We'll get back to Pelosi's threat. But how is this unconstitutional, tell me. All ears.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126

Oh I agree. It starts with the overthrow of your beloved tyrant by hopefully non violent means. If Trump becomes all you hope, a Napoleon of idiocracy then the other branches and powers of legitimate Constitutional rule may do what is necessary.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Dude!
Jesus!


Wars expanded under GWB and Obama. Reagan certainly was no stranger to conflict (though have to give him points for neutering the Soviets). If you look at the things actually done by the various POTUS's over recent decades, and not partisan talking points and narratives, you'll see Trump actually has done more to advance peace than the last several of his predecessors.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Oh I agree. It starts with the overthrow of your beloved tyrant by hopefully non violent means. If Trump becomes all you hope, a Napoleon of idiocracy then the other branches and powers of legitimate Constitutional rule may do what is necessary.


Yea, I know the Democrats was a coup so badly. At the same time they're hoping for that, they're screaming about the constitution and Trump's emergency declaration. The ironing is delicious.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
It kind of does though. What did Obama do to earn his peace prize, other than being a Democrat brown skinned president? I imagine Trump has done more to push peace in areas of conflict than any POTUS in recent history.
How so? There is still the same conflicts going on in all the same parts of the world. The only thing that changed in that regard when Trump became President is that 'conservative media' stopped reporting on it.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,136
30,086
146
It never had to get to this point, the obstructionist Democrats just had to vote for what was good for America over their party-first partisan anti-Trump agenda. But they wouldn't do that.

Damn, the blackshirts really did a number on you with those forced laxative treatments, didn't they?
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
How so? There is still the same conflicts going on in all the same parts of the world. The only thing that changed in that regard when Trump became President is that 'conservative media' stopped reporting on it.


I didn't say there weren't. I did say that Trump is not escalating and furthering those conflicts, like his predecessors.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
It never had to get to this point, the obstructionist Democrats just had to vote for what was good for America over their party-first partisan anti-Trump agenda. But they wouldn't do that.

Your dictator's words betray your statement. It never got to "this point". Trump admitted that this wasn't necessary. He was getting money but not fast enough. This was a willful and unnecessary act as stated by Herr Trump and you own your support of sedition.

Congratulation, you have just blamed the Allies for opposing Hitler's grab for power and territory. If we had only allowed him to take Europe for the Nazis, then war could have been avoided. Nice thinking Quisling.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Damn, the blackshirts really did a number on you with those forced laxative treatments, didn't they?


What's funny is how butt hurt you guys are over a physical barrier on a border that we have problems in regards to illegal crossings and human trafficking. This shouldn't even be an issue, but the obstructionists platform of "orange man bad!" is the real brainwashing going on here.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
It never had to get to this point, the obstructionist Democrats just had to vote for what was good for America over their party-first partisan anti-Trump agenda. But they wouldn't do that.
This is what politics look like to an entitled spoiled brat who thinks that they should always be able to get whatever they want without having to compromise, and that the failure of other parties to give into their demands can only be from malice.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Yea, I know the Democrats was a coup so badly. At the same time they're hoping for that, they're screaming about the constitution and Trump's emergency declaration. The ironing is delicious.

All the Jews had to do was convert.

You are undone.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Your dictator's words betray your statement. It never got to "this point". Trump admitted that this wasn't necessary. He was getting money but not fast enough. This was a willful and unnecessary act as stated by Herr Trump and you own your support of sedition.

Congratulation, you have just blamed the Allies for opposing Hitler's grab for power and territory. If we had only allowed him to take Europe for the Nazis, then war could have been avoided. Nice thinking Quisling.


I don't see it as unconstitutional. Guess we'll let the courts decide. Trump is a man of action, and Old Hickory type.