[ mlpol / qa / go / 1ntr / vx / cyb / sp / üb / a ] [ Overboard ] [ Statistics / Banlist / Search ] [ PonyX ] [ Policy / Store ] [ home ]

/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

Password (For file deletion.)

Let's skip the other 6 layers and go straight to the physical /cyb/

  [Go to bottom]   [Catalog]   [Return]   [Archive]

File: 1550244539201.jpg (105.81 KB, 640x360, donald-trump-border_wall.jpg)

ef594 No.204816

>President Trump is set to declare a national emergency during Friday morning remarks from the Rose Garden at the White House.
>Trump is also expected to sign a spending bill to avoid a second government shutdown over his campaign promise to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. In order to get the wall funding he wants without Congressional approval, Trump has signaled he will declare a national emergency with the goal of shifting funds for wall construction.
>By declaring a national emergency, Trump will have about $8 billion in order to build the wall along the southern border, Mick Mulvaney, acting White House chief of staff told reporters Friday morning ahead of the announcement.
>Trump’s likely emergency declaration faces opposition from Congressional Democrats, and even some members of his own party have urged him not to start the precedent of using emergency powers for the wall.


ef594 No.204819

Announcement begins

c6c32 No.204820

File: 1550245940584.jpg (1.54 MB, 6064x6072, 1469490712652.jpg)

35a41 No.204822

File: 1550247061792.jpg (78.35 KB, 1280x906, considerthefollow.jpg)

>not understating we were under a state of emergency since 3 after 9 -11 until the Trump admin.
It's nothing really. Allows him to take out from the military budget to use the Core of Engineers and release DOJ funds. But the emergency powers act does nuder him from marshal law and fema not having money doesn't help.

7fa2a No.204834

It is pure betrayal to his base.
It is the final straw to the long and known train of delays and excuses.

>Ann Coulter: By signing the budget deal, Trump signs away his right as CIC to build the wall


b85a5 No.204859

Build the beaner wall.

385a7 No.204928

File: 1550274569944.jpg (100.67 KB, 1280x720, redgreen.jpg)

Your thinking is one dimensional.

>NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 201 and 301 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), hereby declare that a national emergency exists at the southern border of the United States, and that section 12302 of title 10, United States Code, is invoked and made available, according to its terms, to the Secretaries of the military departments concerned, subject to the direction of the Secretary of Defense in the case of the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. To provide additional authority to the Department of Defense to support the Federal Government's response to the emergency at the southern border, I hereby declare that this emergency requires use of the Armed Forces and, in accordance with section 301 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1631), that the construction authority provided in section 2808 of title 10, United States Code, is invoked and made available, according to its terms, to the Secretary of Defense and, at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense, to the Secretaries of the military departments.


0c130 No.205003

The spending bill he signed makes the wall illegal. No prototypes allowed, only steel fences "pre-existing technology". 55 miles of repair, zero miles for areas of new construction. And he has to build in liberal controlled areas getting their approval first which means there will be no wall and only open borders.

Ontop of this, the spending bill allows rape babies and child trafficking to be used for amnesty because of their 'sponsors' will be granted amnesty if they come with a child and cant be deported. Less border patrol, less beds, more subhumans get moved into the country as catch&release escalates.

385a7 No.205016

All counterarguments to your statements are here:
>DHS official: Border security bill does not contain ‘amnesty’ poison pills

385a7 No.205020

File: 1550292402795.png (685.07 KB, 984x852, Untitled.png)

78147 No.205060

>More technology, port infrastructure and Customs and Border Protection officers. The Trump administration could hire as many as 1,200 new Border Patrol officers under the agreement, and it won $100 million in technology funding aimed at the stretches of border between ports of entry, as well as another $112 million for aircraft and sensor systems. But a larger amount - $564 million - is aimed at beefing up scanning capability at the ports, where the majority of drug and human trafficking occurs.

>A soft cap on ICE detention capacity. Democrats pushed in negotiations for a hard cap on how many people Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officers could detain - arguing that the agency needed to focus its efforts on criminals, not otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants. The bill contains a provision aimed at lowering the detainee cap from the current level of about 49,000 to about 40,000. But Republicans aides say that ICE will retain flexibility to maintain or exceed its current detention levels. The bill does include new restrictions on ICE detention practices including a ban on restraining pregnant women and mandatory public disclosure of family separation incidents.

0c130 No.205107

DHS only gave partial counter arguments which is better than thought but still really bad. the bill he signed is veto-proof from both house/senate majority and he also gave them power to challenge the national emergency in legislation bullshit and they're already doing it.

385a7 No.205155

What if he signed the NE before the Bill? Can't retroactively apply a law.

385a7 No.205168

File: 1550354175016.png (30.16 KB, 588x484, MACIAS - FUNDING THE WALL.….png)

0c130 No.205175

File: 1550355131833.png (418.53 KB, 780x821, 51f5948ffb83521dd327dbeb0e….png)

The law already allows it. He went full retard stating that he "Didn't need to do it" and they are going to push back insisting that there is no crisis at the border. Which if you look at it from the rapefugee crisis in Europe it's barely anything compared to that, yet. Because the jews are sending them in thousands instead of millions. Border patrol is already overwhelmed though because the US border control is a fucking joke.

385a7 No.205182

The only thing that matters pragmatically is, is wall construction still happening?

http://a1r.tv/videos/view/18747 Published: 20190102
https://youtu.be/H-f6KkLJF9c Published on Jan 12, 2019
https://youtu.be/MBJNmiZwf6Q Published on Feb 12, 2019

All the rest is drama and misdirection.

78147 No.205197

File: 1550357970758.png (54.47 KB, 631x198, texas1.png)

I believe the national emergency is just theater at the moment. as soon as the 9th circuit orders an injunction the executive order will be placed on hold. the Supreme Court's docket is full for 2019 so they won't even begin construction this year. while everybody is focused on this drama I believe something else is going on.

in Texas there is a push to build the wall themselves. if Texas constructs any barrier then congress can't say anything about it.

after reading this you might be thinking fuck Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick for wanting federal funding but keep in mind he's an early Trump ally and close to Jared Kushner. Patrick is the one who created the idea of Texas building a portion of the wall in the first place.

the democrats think they have barred Trump from building a wall by limiting the place of construction and needing the approval of the locals. in that area it will stop construction HOWEVER absolutely nothing is stopping the DHS from diverting wall funding into a block grant to Texas for "border security".

Patrick wants to build 200 miles from Brownsville to Falcon Lake. if this scenario plays out, the democrats would be completely powerless to stop it. how exactly are the going to oppose diverting federal wall funding into block grants and they absolutely have zero say in what Texas wants to build in Texas.

385a7 No.205233

>Trump May Have $21 Billion in Military Funds Available for the Wall

Congress believes the Pentagon has $21 billion in unobligated military construction funding—money that has been appropriated by the legislature and set aside for specific projects but not yet issued—that the president could use to build the wall over objections from Congress, according to two congressional aides.


385a7 No.205243


>Why Trump will win the wall fight

>However, Congress later gave presidents sweeping authority under the National Emergencies Act of 1976. While this law allows for a legislative override by Congress, the authority to declare national emergencies is basically unfettered. It is one of many such laws where Congress created the thin veneer of a process for presidential power that, in reality, was a virtual blank slate. At the same time, Congress has continued to give the executive branch billions of dollars with few conditions or limitations.


385a7 No.205257

>….Will be getting almost $23 BILLION for Border Security. Regardless of Wall money, it is being built as we speak!

385a7 No.205259

385a7 No.205262

File: 1550381431381.jpg (6.8 KB, 198x300, ?.jpg)

Where is the website that monitors wall construction in real time? Why doesn't such a site exist? Is it because the less people know about the on-the-ground facts the better? Why haven't anons set up coordinated civilian monitoring?

0c130 No.205268

Reminder that Pelosi threatened that a democrat president could use Trump's national emergency as a precedent to go on a gun grab spree.

>Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday issued a warning to Republicans poised to support President Trump's decision to declare a national emergency at the southern border: the next Democratic president, she said, could do the same on guns.

>"A Democratic president can declare emergencies, as well," Pelosi told reporters in the Capitol. "So the precedent that the president is setting here is something that should be met with great unease and dismay by the Republicans."

>"Let's talk about today: The one-year anniversary of another manifestation of the epidemic of gun violence in America," Pelosi said. "That's a national emergency. Why don't you declare that emergency, Mr. President? I wish you would.

>"But a Democratic president can do that."

(Hand rubbing intensifies)

>Doug Heye, a Republican strategist and former aide to former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), sounded a similar warning on Thursday, moments after the White House announcement.

>"Make no mistake: the next Democratic President will declare national emergencies on guns and climate change and cite the Trump precedent when doing so," Heye tweeted.

All the more reason to arrest these disgusting traitors.



0c130 No.205386

File: 1550436270627.png (90.97 KB, 533x819, ClipboardImage.png)

California 'definitely and imminently' suing over Trump emergency declaration, state AG says

>Opponents of Trump's wall point to the fact that the number of migrants crossing the border annually has declined in recent years. Many of the migrants who are making the journey are asylum seekers who seek out immigration officials when they arrive at the border.

>They also point to data that show that immigrants commit crimes at a lower frequency than U.S. citizens and that a wall is unnecessary because most of the drugs and people enter the U.S. at established points of entry. On Friday, Trump said he did not find that data credible based on his own observations.
Critics who say the president is using his emergency powers to skirt Congress' constitutional authority over spending have pointed to his own words at a news conference on the White House lawn Friday when he announced he was declaring the emergency.
"I didn’t need to do this. But I’d rather do it much faster," Trump said at one point during the lengthy news conference.

>"It’s become clear that this is not an emergency, not only because no one believes it is, but because Donald Trump himself has said it’s not," Becerra said. "Typically, our presidents have focused on issues where the national interests are clearly at stake. The national interests aren’t at stake here."

At least two lawsuits already have been filed in response to Trump's emergency declaration. The liberal watchdog group Public Citizen filed a federal lawsuit Friday in Washington, D.C., just hours after Trump's announcement. The group argues Trump exceeded his authority and disregarded the separation of powers outlined by the Constitution. The suit includes three Texas landowners whose property would be seized by the government through eminent domain to build part of the border barrier.
A second lawsuit was filed by the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics. It argues that the White House did not provide the supporting documents needed to justify the national emergency declaration.
Congressional Democrats vowed to do what they can to stop Trump from using his executive authority to shift the Defense Department money toward wall construction.
"The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the courts, and in the public, using every remedy available," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a joint statement Friday.
Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, said that he plans to introduce a "resolution to terminate" that could block the emergency declaration. Such a measure would likely pass in the Democrat-controlled House and could make it through the Senate, where a number of Republicans have objected to the precedent set by Trump's use of executive authority.

0c130 No.205387

385a7 No.205403

>"I didn’t need to do this. But I’d rather do it much faster,"

This has to be pre-planed bait. The Dems will now spend a year following that path while Trump keeps building. That comment controlled the Dem's next steps. By then RBG will be dead. This is like the Muller Investigation, it gives the Dems a path to nowhere to waste their energy on.

385a7 No.205423

0c130 No.205622

>This has to be pre-planned bait.
That's what Trump signaled anyways, but its going to be much worse thanks to what Trump said about not needing to do it.

California and a dozen other states are filing a lawsuit challenging Donald Trump's national emergency declaration, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said Monday.

>“The president admitted that there’s not a basis for the declaration. He admitted there’s no crisis at the border. He’s now trying to rob funds that were allocated by Congress legally to the various states and people of our states,” Becerra told Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC Monday afternoon.

>“The separation of powers is being violated, we’re going to go out there and make sure that Donald Trump cannot steal money from the states and people who need them, since we paid the taxpayer dollars to Washington, D.C., to get those services,” he said.

>A national emergency declaration gives the president special powers to take taxpayer dollars from other budgets to pay for border wall construction, but legal challenges to such an effort are inevitable. Before the emergency was declared, Becerra vowed "to reject this foolish proposal in court the moment it touches the ground."

>"The president does have broad authority. But he does not have authority to violate the Constitution," Becerra said. "President Obama never did this. He never tried to raid accounts, funding accounts, that had been allocated by Congress. When a president tries to do that, the Supreme Court will typically step in and say, 'Keep your hands out of the cookie jar.'"

>Becerra has sued the president dozens of times already, and the president signaled that he expected this lawsuit during his Friday remarks.

“And I'll sign the final papers as soon as I get into the Oval Office. And we will have a national emergency, and then we will then be sued, and they will sue us in the 9th Circuit, even though it shouldn't be there,” Trump said, speaking of the largest circuit court, which includes California. “And we will possibly get a bad ruling, and then we'll get another bad ruling. And then we'll end up in the Supreme Court, and hopefully we'll get a fair shake. And we'll win in the Supreme Court, just like the ban.”


cf985 No.205625

Trump seems to be in on a neocon psyop with the "socialism is evil" stuff that he offers to Venezuela. Does anyone here think that will actually help them? After Trump is done with them they will probably turn back into a shithole anyway.

385a7 No.205652

I wonder if South America, especially the equatorial areas, are simply too hot to be functional democracies. In the heat people will tend to avoid physical labor, and so would have a bias towards communist handouts whilst they relax in the shade.

385a7 No.205655

File: 1550538348805.png (111.11 KB, 499x708, Untitled.png)

Trump (via Q) stating he will follow the Constitution and not Dems rules. Baiting seems to be the play here. Keep your enemy on the back foot and you control their actions. I bet the whole time the wall is already funded.

Still need a website that concentrates actual wall progress data. Why doesn't it exist?

385a7 No.205657

File: 1550539106455.jpg (204.98 KB, 1280x720, snapshot.jpg)

2a6f8 No.205972

File: 1550672489406-0.png (204.73 KB, 600x1271, 1546731747851.png)

File: 1550672489406-1.jpg (138.22 KB, 708x1179, 1547592127090.jpg)

Wall-pone will be happy

54015 No.205974

looks like a natural wall. Make it higher, add a dam while you're there.

385a7 No.206104

File: 1550721522071.mp4 (2.81 MB, 1280x720, Donald J. Trump - We have ….mp4)

>We have just built this powerful Wall in New Mexico. Completed on January 30, 2019 – 47 days ahead of schedule! Many miles more now under construction! #FinishTheWall

Trump implies involvement of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Corps_of_Engineers in wall building.

ef594 No.206109

FUN! Wonder how the leftist media will respond and spin this.

27eca No.206143

>Ontop of this, the spending bill allows rape babies and child trafficking to be used for amnesty because of their 'sponsors' will be granted amnesty if they come with a child and cant be deported.

It's not only sponsors but also "potential sponsors" and anybody residing with either of them. Even if it was sponsors alone it sounds incredibly serious, these other 3 groups just make it sound like apocalypse.

When I mull it over though, it might actually be a honeypot. Part of the process of becoming a "potential sponsor" (sending in an application) requires giving out your address, so now you are in a database. Step 2 is they either accept you or reject you. If you are rejected: you are no longer a potential sponsor, and they can come deport you and anyone living with you.

If you are accepted: you actually have to let this kid come live with you. You are then legally obligated to bring this kid to deportation court. If you fail to do that, you are in breach of the sponsorship agreement and lose sponsor status and won't be considered a potential sponsor anymore either. CHECKMATE.

The only possible way you can avoid breach is by bringing the kid to the trial, and helping them leave the country. If you do not leave with them, you no longer fulfill your agreement to care for them, and are in breach of contract, and can be deported. If you leave with them: problem solved. But then the illegals who formerly lived with you are alone now, and unprotected.

Also I believe all of the spending bill's instructions might include a self-termination clause by the end of the fiscal year. But the information collected on sponsor's addresses remains, so by the start of 2020 (less than a year to go until voting) Trump will have his hands on the residency info of all kinds of "sponsors" who he can freely deport in a massive blitz to prevent them from engaging in voter fraud. In the meantime, he's been building the wall to make it harder to get back in to disrupt the election. I expect all this to manifest a month or two before election night.

7fa2a No.206171

File: 1550738329463.png (1.6 MB, 1346x4824, canvas.png)

>Ann Coulter: Trump's Failing On Immigration. Don't Ask Me To Lie About It

0c130 No.207180

It's important to keep tabs on this situation and the enemy since the wall is crucial to stemming the brown horde.

>Trump on brink of defeat on border emergency

>Just one more Senate Republican is needed to block Trump’s emergency declaration, though even critics are reluctant to buck the president.

>President Donald Trump is on the verge of a bipartisan rejection of his emergency declaration at the border in what would be an embarrassing rebuke by a Congress opposed to his immigration agenda.

>Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) on Monday night said he would join Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, along with 47 Senate Democrats to block Trump’s attempts to secure billions for his border wall after lawmakers effectively stiffed him. Now just one more GOP senator’s support for a resolution to block Trump's bid would send the measure to Trump’s desk and force a veto.

>“Conservatives rightfully cried foul when President Barack Obama used executive action to completely bypass Congress,” Tillis said in a Washington Post op-ed on Monday night. “There is no intellectual honesty in now turning around and arguing that there’s an imaginary asterisk attached to executive overreach — that it’s acceptable for my party but not thy party.”

>Numerous Senate Republicans say that, like Tillis, they despise Trump’s decision to declare a national emergency to get additional funding for his wall. But most aren’t ready to say they will vote to block him from doing so.

>Many said they were undecided and still studying Trump’s move to circumvent Congress and score billions more for the border barrier. That suggests the resolution to block him remains just short of the simple majority needed for passage.

“It’s unnecessary, unwise and inconsistent with the Constitution,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), one of the most vocal critics of Trump’s emergency declaration. As to how he will vote, he said: “I’m going to wait to see what the resolution says.”

>Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said it shouldn't be hard for the Senate to muster a big bipartisan rejection of Trump’s actions.

>Though wavering senators reported no direct lobbying from the president, Trump made clear on Twitter that he expects them to back him and not fall for the Democrats’ “trap.” He also has vowed to veto any legislation from Congress halting his efforts.

"We've come together before in bipartisan ways, if there was ever one that cries out for bipartisan rejection of an overreach of power, this is it," he said on Monday.
Republicans will have fewer than three weeks to make up their minds. After the House passes the resolution,


dbbc5 No.207211

File: 1551174595643.jpeg (45.91 KB, 544x510, AngryAnnoyedFluttershy.jpeg)

If they were worried about unconstitutionality they would have blocked the New Deal and all its successor programs.

7fa2a No.207213

>since the wall is crucial to stemming the brown horde.
The actual obstacle is the government, then it gotta go.

204b5 No.207258

Those disgusting traitorous Jews said nothing when Obama raped America. Now they're going to pretend they have morals and Trump's a hypocrite for wanting a border wall the country needs to survive?
Time to redpill more r/the_donald redditfags with this.

ef594 No.207391

>House OKs Democrats' bill blocking Trump emergency on wall

>Democrats ignored a veto threat and rammed legislation through the House Tuesday that would stymie President Donald Trump's bid for billions of extra dollars for his border wall, escalating a clash over whether he was abusing his powers to advance his paramount campaign pledge.

>The House's 245-182 vote to block Trump's national emergency declaration fell well below the two-thirds majority that would be needed to override his promised veto. Top Republicans worked to keep defections as low as possible — 13 backed the Democrats' resolution — underscoring their desire to avoid a tally suggesting that Trump's hold on lawmakers was weakening.
>The vote also throws the political hot potato to the Republican-run Senate, where there were already enough GOP defections to edge it to the cusp of passage. Vice President Mike Pence used a lunch with Republican senators at the Capitol to try keeping them aboard, citing a dangerous crisis at the border, but there were no signs he'd succeeded.

>Senate passage would force Trump's first veto, which the House vote demonstrated that Congress would surely fail to overturn. But the showdown was forcing Republicans to cast uncomfortable votes pitting their support for a president wildly popular with GOP voters against fears that his expansive use of emergency powers would invite future Democratic presidents to do likewise for their own pet policies.

>The White House wrote to lawmakers formally threatening to veto the legislation. The letter said blocking the emergency declaration would "undermine the administration's ability to respond effectively to the ongoing crisis at the Southern Border."

>Republicans said Democrats were driven by politics and a desire to oppose Trump at every turn, and said Trump had clear authority to declare an emergency to protect the country. They also defended the president's claims of a security crisis along the boundary with Mexico, which he has said is ravaged by drug smugglers, human traffickers and immigrants trying to sneak into the U.S. illegally.

>In the Senate, three Republicans have said they will back Democrats' drive to block the emergency declaration: Maine's Susan Collins, Alaska's Lisa Murkowski and North Carolina's Thom Tillis. One more GOP defection would provide enough votes to approve the Democratic measure, assuming all Democrats and their independent allies back it.

>Though presidents have declared 58 emergencies under the law, this is the first aimed at acquiring money for an item Congress has explicitly refused to finance, according to Elizabeth Goitein, co-director for national security at New York University Law School's Brennan Center for Justice. This is also the first time Congress has cast votes on whether to annul an emergency declaration, she said.

>Even with Democrats' effort near-certain to ultimately fail, several lawsuits have been filed aimed at blocking the money, including by Democratic state attorneys general, progressive and environmental groups. Those suits at the very least are likely to delay access to those funds for months or years.


385a7 No.208161

File: 1551567200796.jpg (55.96 KB, 890x445, crane 1.jpg)

385a7 No.209613


“To clarify, the composition of the more than 5,000 personnel currently on the Southwest Border (and growing to approximately 6,000 by March 1) is comprised of both Active Duty and National Guard personnel,” the Pentagon said in a statement. “Specifically, approximately 2,100 personnel are National Guard and the rest are Active Duty.”

36th Engineer Brigade
5th Engineer Battalion
563rd Military Police Company
595th Engineer Company
161st Engineer Support Company
Alpha Company, 52nd Engineer Battalion
Alpha Company, 16th Engineer Battalion
Forward Support Company, 5th Engineer Battalion
1st Support Maintenance Company
542nd Support Maintenance Company
584th Support Maintenance Company
46th Engineer Battalion
Forward Support Company, 46th Engineer Battalion
108th Military Police Company
515th Engineer Company
610th Engineer Support Company
147th Support Maintenance Company
602nd Support Maintenance Company
7th Engineer Support Battalion (USMC)
Alpha Company, 7th Engineer Support Battalion (USMC)
CE Company, 7th Engineer Support Battalion (USMC)
Alpha Company, 1st Law Enforcement Battalion (USMC)
Echo Company, 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment (USMC)
Fox Company, 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment (USMC)
Golf Company, 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment (USMC)
Weapons Company, 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment (USMC)
Combat Logistics Battalion 5 (-) (USMC)
819th Red Horse Squadron (USAF)
503rd Military Police Battalion
66th Military Police Company
41st Engineer Company
4th Sustainment Brigade
264th Combat Sustainment Support Battalion
227th Quartermaster Company
178th Adjutant General Company
126th Transportation Company
155th Transportation Company
377th Transportation Company
259th Movement Control Team
153rd Quartermaster Company
1st Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment
Alpha Company, 1st Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment
Bravo Company, 1st Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment
Charlie Company, 1st Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment
1st Battalion, 37th Field Artillery Regiment
Headquarters and Headquarters Battery, 1st Battalion, 37th Field Artillery Regiment
Charlie Company, 1st Battalion, 37th Field Artillery Regiment
Charlie Company, 1st Battalion, 23rd Infantry Battalion
1st Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion (USMC)
Echo Company, 2nd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment (USMC)
Golf Company, 2nd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment (USMC)
3rd Combat Aviation Brigade
4th Battalion, 3rd Combat Aviation Brigade
24th Theater Public Affairs Support Element
63rd Expeditionary Signal Battalion
505th Military Intelligence Brigade


385a7 No.209639

File: 1552180022350.jpeg (52.41 KB, 600x594, 914a3cec05727f7ae01835fc5….jpeg)

ef594 No.209644

7fa2a No.209785

File: 1552242804436-0.png (656.9 KB, 1366x768, Screenshot_20190310_143241.png)

File: 1552242804436-1.png (53.66 KB, 886x487, canvas.png)

32e58 No.209788

Yang seems like controlled opposition. I'll wait until he names the Jew before I rank him above Trump.

ef594 No.209789

File: 1552243528686.png (288.19 KB, 589x548, 1487159924870.png)

One thing I will grant them it is that Share Blue have become better at shilling. But with all the billions of dollars donated by Soros they should at least get to the level of unpaid people that just were bored.

7fa2a No.209796

File: 1552244931648.jpg (55.55 KB, 1280x536, fashwave_wallpaper_53_risi….jpg)

>Yang seems like controlled opposition.
Of course he is. Any player gaming into the (((System))) plays by kikes' rules.
The point here is to bring justice to the pretender Trump and the ZOG faction supporting him.
Deceit has a price.

385a7 No.209797

File: 1552245263544.jpg (28.03 KB, 593x399, 4chan-far-left.jpg)

>bogey man

Remember 4chan is in a permanent state of disruption. The memes that take off are the things that are anti- the current situation. That's because this is the natural state of young people. Remember 4chan was left wing once.

I don't know what year we can call 4chan maximum left, but perhaps 2019 is maximum right. This implies that the ideological cycle on 4chan is very short compared to the real world. The real world cycle seems to be limited to the life span of a human. The reason being is that everyone who remembers why [insert ideology here] actually sucks needs to be dead before romanticizing it can begin to call for its return.

If we apply this idea to 4chan then the lifetime of a person being regularly in 4chan is probably something like about 15-20 years. And so the political cycle will be of a similar duration. This YangGang thing will keep growing, people will forget that it started as ironic. This "next generation" of 4chan will love it because it "defeats" the prior 4chan "generation". And everyone loves seeing the previous winner loose.

Kek has no loyalties except to chaos.

ef594 No.209802

>Kek has no loyalties except to chaos.
That is true. It is just the way it is pushed that makes it feel like a Share Blue operation. It isn't a new fresh meme for Yang, it is rehashed memes they try to co-opt. And yes there is likely cycles in 4chan, but that is more board to board, and 4chan is both left and right at the same time all the time.
It could be an ironic meme someone has created for fun, but also it feels like a forced meme. Trump was a slow evolution to what we saw at the end when he was elected. In the start Trump was something only a few posters cared about and kept to their thread (many times over /tg/ was at page 8-9 because of inactivity early on). They didn't try to push it hard on others (from what I experienced).
If they really wanted to push Yang and him stand out there is so many better ways to do it. But in the end I think they will push this Yang hard and all the leftist trolls will flood it everywhere. What they don't realize is that /r9k/ isn't leftist. If /r9k/ got their will they would be the perfect SS soldiers. Dedicated to one cause, to make the world better and more wholesome. And if they were given weapons, were fed, and given the order to go into war (or in other words given state sanction to do a cleansing) they would go into battle without any hesitation.

385a7 No.209807

>That is true. It is just the way it is pushed that makes it feel like a Share Blue operation.
This is just a slip into baseless propaganda. It's lazy logic and it diminishes the value of anything you have to say afterwards because it is founded on a unsupported bias.

>It isn't a new fresh meme for Yang, it is rehashed memes they try to co-opt.

The mysterious they… see previous comment.

>And yes there is likely cycles in 4chan, but that is more board to board, and 4chan is both left and right at the same time all the time.

Good point. 4chan is a place for a vast multitude of interests. But one will be predominant at anytime. Leftists and /b/ are obvious allies. Following and exploring feelings regardless of practical concerns fit both perfectly. /pol/ is the counter-reaction to the resulting chaos/diverstity as it tries to bring back social order, law and cohesion. /b/ has fallen and /pol/ rose, now /pol/ is falling. Everything dies.

>It could be an ironic meme someone has created for fun, but also it feels like a forced meme.

All memes are forced. The act of posting a meme is a digital attempt to persuade the viewer to your perspective. It is the application of force onto the psyche of the observer. Saying a meme is forced is meaningless. If the meme catches on it will expand, the force forcing the meme grows larger. You should probably say the meme is not naturally emerging, which I am sure is what you meant, but the sheer ubiquity of it is evidence that the "it is not natural" idea is false:

Here is dailystormer supporting YangGang… seriously DailyStormer:

Then there is this:
>The post appeared on the Yang For President subreddit on Thursday, warning supporters against creating anything that might reflect poorly on the candidate. “I get it,” the author warned, “you want to show off how dark your sense of humor is.” Pro-Yang memes are fine, the post argued, but the latest flood of Pepe and Trump-adjacent rage comics “reinforces the stereotype we are trying to avoid.”

YangGang ironic memes are already being perceived as truthful pro- memes.

There is a complete absence of awareness of memetics. And that's because the children are upset because Trump didn't go hard enough right yet, so the solution is to promote communism. How childish, Mommy didn't buy you the latest console so you smashed your old one up. That will teach her!

It's time for everyone to grow up face the real world. Real world change is a SLOW process. A FAST process invites blowback. Does a child understand battle strategy? No they are just emotion driven tantrum. Something that is supposed to be exclusive to the Left. Pro-tip: it isn't.

7fa2a No.209816

File: 1552250008825.png (3.99 MB, 1500x1500, 2a7635390c971ae804f2a951f4….png)

>And that's because the children are upset because Trump didn't go hard enough right yet, so the solution is to promote communism. How childish, Mommy didn't buy you the latest console so you smashed your old one up. That will teach her!
>Implying Trump and the overlords are the adults
>Implying people's mandate is child stuff and they should accept it
>Implying people has no right to lash out to unfaithful employees
Nope, anons are not taking that.
The time to find out who will submit is getting closer. Will the System submit to the people, or the people to the System?

16b9d No.209817

File: 1552250522629.jpg (22.79 KB, 394x325, epona1.jpg)

>the children are upset because Trump didn't go hard enough right yet
>Real world change is a SLOW process. A FAST process invites blowback
Fucking thank you!

ef594 No.209818

True it is lazy thinking, and an "easy explanation" without deep reasoning behind it.
And yes Yang has many good points to his policies, but he as with trump will be depending on the Senate and the House. And there he will face even more opposition to the policies that appeal to people than Trump is facing. The automation will be and is a problem combined with an evergrowing population (I know they say it will flatten out eventually, but how many billions more people will be added before that). I'm more thinking that even if he has good intentions the most we can hope to get is an committee that will look into "universal pay" and nothing more. The borders will stay open, people will flood in. The subtexts I see is that Yang is a globalist defeatist that has resigned to a world with large global conglomerates paying people from the profit… somehow. But there is so many faults and holes in his policies that he will do more harm than good. He is basically aiming for a zero sum game. Corporations pay people to buy goods from them.
But I didn't know Yang already was this widespread. I guess we will have to see many images of him posted around. But in the end I don't think he will not be the candidate for the Democrats. "It is time for a black woman, or a 1% native american woman", or some shit like that.

385a7 No.209820

File: 1552250942169.jpg (616.75 KB, 1000x667, wheel.jpg)

>The time to find out who will submit is getting closer. Will the System submit to the people, or the people to the System?
Totalitarianism vs Libertarianism.

There is no final victory in the battle of dualities. There is no "time" when the final solution will arrive. But keep running, it's important you be the an hero that you are.

7fa2a No.209822

File: 1552251004686.mp4 (11.46 MB, 426x234, _pol_ is always right - Ra….mp4)

>But I didn't know Yang already was this widespread.
Never underestimate /pol/

385a7 No.209831

You post is a bit meandering. I'd like to see you provide evidence for you assumption with links.

>And yes Yang has many good points to his policies

Anyone can point out the faults in a system. That's because there is no such thing as a system without faults. The problem comes from his solutions proposed. If the solution is also faulty, the pointing out of the current faults becomes irrelevant. And therefore shouldn't be used as a promotion of him.

>The automation will be and is a problem combined with an evergrowing population (I know they say it will flatten out eventually, but how many billions more people will be added before that).

Yes it is problem for the current system. I have a suspicion that a society that becomes so efficient that it produces excess capacity actually seeks a path to destroy that excess capacity. It used to be that the excess capacity would be soaked up by extra children born and survivng, but now that capacity doesn't make children it makes free time which leads to degeneracy, conflict and war. These later forces of chaos bring back a balance that "intelligent" humans can't achieve. Because a collection of humans with free time dedicates itself to fighting itself.

I do think that automation COULD lead to a more communist like "utopia" where the slave is the machines. However in practice we will instead destroy it because somebody doesn't think the same way I do and that means they must be destroyed. The situation will escalate until no resources remain for said "Final Victiory".

Communism does work because humans aren't angels, they are tribalistic territorial animals with opposable thumbs and a neo-cortex.

>I'm more thinking that even if he has good intentions the most we can hope to get is an committee that will look into "universal pay" and nothing more.

Good intensions mean nothing. You life and die on maths (includes physics).
ALso did you just say that the Democrats would vote against "universal pay"? Why would they miss the chance to have a dependent population who keep quiet so they get gibs?

>The borders will stay open, people will flood in.

A difficult reality. Humans have always migrated.

>The subtexts I see is that Yang is a globalist defeatist that has resigned to a world with large global conglomerates paying people from the profit… somehow.

In theory I can see how that works, but not in practice. For example you could have massive automated factories run by, say, 5 people. The company pays 90% tax and the people get gibs and Star Trek replicators. In practice no one is going to work or run a business if they loose 90% to tax. Automation is a very interesting problem, but we have been facing it ever since clogs were put in machines.

>But in the end I don't think he will [-]not
be the candidate for the Democrats.
It's the drift that bothers me. Also Trump can't beat Hillary. Oops!

385a7 No.209834

>Good intensions mean nothing. You life and die on maths (includes physics).
Good intentions mean nothing. You live and die on maths (includes physics).

Sorry for typos.

ef594 No.209842

>Also did you just say that the Democrats would vote against "universal pay"? Why would they miss the chance to have a dependent population who keep quiet so they get gibs?
They might want to vote for it, but there is no money to do it. I think even Republicans would vote for it if money was no issue. If money was no issue people would be allowed to keep their doctor under Obamacare. But the Democrats will dangle the fruit in front of the voters to entice them. If they actually gave people what they promised people might not vote for them next election because there will be another issue people would care about then. Without struggle you cant offer hope.

>the people get gibs and Star Trek replicators

If they manage to create the Star Trek replicator I think we will get a world where money don't have value anymore. All you would need was power to run the replicators and you could get whatever you needed or wanted made "out of thin air".

>It's the drift that bothers me.

True there is a shift going on that we have yet to see the full ramifications of, or where it will lead. Also yes there is always a chance he will end up as the Democratic candidate, and he has a chance given the push that is going on. But I think strong forces within the DNC will prevent him from rising to the top. I think there is too many angry black women in the party. Still I will concede there is a chance for Yang, it all depends on the internal fighting in the DNC.

385a7 No.209846

File: 1552255534632-0.png (1.79 MB, 1850x1600, nightmare_rarity_by_jack_p….png)

File: 1552255534632-1.jpg (19.02 KB, 474x303, mand.jpg)

>They might want to vote for it, but there is no money to do it.
Age of the universe: 13.772 billion years
US Debt: $21.97 trillion
The lack of money does not seem to be relevant in US decision. (Except for the bombing of nations that try to go off the US$/Oil standard.)

>Without struggle you cant offer hope.

You just black pilled me in a completely new way. Have a pony.

>If they manage to create the Star Trek replicator I think we will get a world where money don't have value anymore. All you would need was power to run the replicators and you could get whatever you needed or wanted made "out of thin air".

Replicators leads to weapons for the adult children to use because the absolutely worst thing in their utopian life has just happened. Someone called them a bad name or embarassed them on the successor to Twitter. The government has now banned public replicators because society is too immature to use them for good purposes.

>True there is a shift going on that we have yet to see the full ramifications of, or where it will lead.

Interesting to think that it might be a mini-cycle in the major cycle.

ef594 No.209848

File: 1552256229896.jpg (110.21 KB, 368x375, dash_hug.jpg)

>You just black pilled me in a completely new way. Have a pony.

385a7 No.209851

Black pills are good. Not the suicide type but the type that makes you realize it isn't passion that makes the world a better place. And passion does not lead to utopia. It is pragmatic well thought out solutions.

Sun Tzu says something like, the warrior wins before he fights, the idiot fights then hopes to win. Stormfags are the later.

We need to stop dreaming and instead be pragmatic. Dreaming utopia is what is destroying the Left. Trump seems to be the best obtainable in the current environment. We just need to have sensible expectations on what can be achieved per time period.

385a7 No.209852

File: 1552257025990.png (528.33 KB, 3221x2419, rd-fs-hug.png)

ef594 No.209859

LOL. Looks like the new narrative is "Muh China" now.

>Massage parlor magnate helped steer Chinese to Trump NYC fundraiser, attendee says

>A Chinese-American massage-parlor entrepreneur arranged for a group of Chinese business executives to attend a paid fundraiser for President Donald Trump in New York City at the end of 2017, according to a source who was present at the event.

>Yang was present at the Dec. 2, 2017, fundraiser, held at Cipriani restaurant in Manhattan, according to a photograph that circulated in Chinese-language media at the time. The source, who asked for anonymity to discuss the private fundraiser, said Yang identified herself as an official at the National Committee of Asian American Republicans, a Washington, D.C.-based political action committee founded in the summer of 2016.
>In the 11 days before the event, Yang gave $5,400 to Trump's campaign and $23,500 to the Trump Victory political action committee, according to a Miami Herald analysis of federal political contributions. The 45 year old, a naturalized American citizen, also claimed to have arranged the presence of a large group of business people from mainland China.

>Foreign visitors may attend fundraisers as long as they don't pay their own entry. But only citizens and permanent residents are allowed to donate to U.S. political campaigns. It would be illegal for foreign nationals to reimburse a U.S. citizen for paying their way into a fundraiser. Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation has been examining whether money from abroad influenced the 2016 election. There is no evidence that Yang or her businesses are part of that investigation.


05f22 No.209895

>dangle the fruit in front of the voters to entice them
Just as Republicans have done with reversing Roe v. Wade for over forty years. Half the people still want it ended, there are million-strong marches in the capital, and it is the most important social issue in the minds of most conservatives. Why get rid of this strong motivation by actually doing something? It's always "elect me and we'll see about finally getting rid of it," but nothing ever happens.

Democracy is such an outlet for outrage that people are willing to let evil perpetuate so long as they voice their dislike peaceably. Imagine if a million people actually went after the clinics and the abortionists. Would there be a single one left standing and could the government do anything about it? Wouldn't the visibility create more backlash against abortion? Yet it's these people who are treated as lunatics.

385a7 No.209917

File: 1552274971824.jpg (46.1 KB, 217x315, Deutsches_Reich_Mother's_C….jpg)

Do you have any answers that aren't violent? For example, even Hitler rewarded women for being mothers and contributing to society. You don't even rate at Hitler tier thinking, which is quite an achievement. Your plan instead is to kill people (including white people at those places) and invite the backlash from women and men who don't want to be slaves to the womb. Your thinking is like ISIS, once we terrorize people enough they will love our ideas.

How about a positive contribution to our problems rather than more violence?

7fa2a No.209922

File: 1552275807519-0.jpg (181.39 KB, 962x884, watches-a-25_1435243326022.jpg)

File: 1552275807519-1.jpg (177.45 KB, 1100x825, WKDdsh.jpg)

>How about a positive contribution to our problems rather than more violence?
Peace and love brother.
Just smoke this joint and everything will be alright.
By the way, ignore the (((system)))'s violence and tyranny, let us have a chat and just relax.

385a7 No.209939

Straw man. Refute that validating motherhood is a bad idea? I dare you.

70ab9 No.209977

File: 1552283870255.jpeg (77.62 KB, 630x416, IrishRepublicanArmyMural.jpeg)

More like the (early) IRA, which was ultimately successful in securing Irish independence. It's an important distinction. ISIS has a goal of world domination and subjugation of all cultures to their evil ideology. This won them no friends except among the most edgy bois. The Irish Republican Army was an Irish nationalist group with the one group of kicking the British out. Very few Irish liked the British and so even if they didn't participate directly they provided aid and supplies, much to the consternation of the British occupiers. The campaign of resistance was sold as a struggle for freedom which put the Brits in a bad light, and eventually they were forced to grant independence because the cost was too great.

The IRA went astray when they fought in Ulster. Because Northern Irish are protestant and more British, the struggle was seen as unjustified terrorism and they themselves sided with the British. It was no longer about home resistance vs. occupation but about one foreign group against civil authorities.

Please note that I am not advocating violence but merely hypothesizing on the results if, say, American Catholics formed their version of the IRA. After all, if abortion is murder (which many Americans believe) and if the federal government won't let the states prevent this murder, then it may be morally justified to deal with the murderers outside the law. This kind of thinking is not alien to American society; John Brown was considered a hero and martyr by many northern abolitionists even though he was actually a terrorist. If Lincoln had not won in 1860 then such anti-slavery terrorist acts would likely profligate, if northern states did not actually secede.

Keep in mind that I abhor violence as much as most people do. However, peace is not an ideal to be cherished but a good to be bargained at a certain price. If survival is to be accomplished then it should be done so at the lowest possible price (which puts me at odds with the "RAHOWA NOW!" crowd). Enabling a future for the white race without needlessly sacrificing life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness is the puzzle of our generation.

385a7 No.209985

You sound quite reasonable. The only points I would make is that PP is not a foreign invader it was made by the very nation it is in, and it has been accepted for many decades. The alternative, as you would suggest is the carrot approach rather than the stick approach. Motherhood needs to become a valid career, blowing up PP doesn't do that. The economic pressure hasn't changed, and back alley abortions would happen instead.

7fa2a No.209989

File: 1552285979428-0.png (1.53 MB, 1920x1080, MLP Twilight Sparkle 3d.png)

You are mixing women's natural function with the struggle for people' sovereignty as a group, it makes no sense.
Do you mind to explain the connection you seeing?

385a7 No.209990

Sure. Women are people.

7fa2a No.209992

File: 1552286431129-0.png (2.71 MB, 1920x1080, 06b.png)

So, you are trying to inject (((women's rights))) ideology into a discussion on the survival of the White Race and Western Civilization.
I don't see the relevance.

16b9d No.209994

Don't take the obvious bait anon

7fa2a No.209995

File: 1552286880057-0.jpg (59.9 KB, 1280x720, let them know.jpg)

Sometimes behind obvious bait is a nefarious intention to subvert the narrative.
To call these kikes out is a must.

7fa2a No.210235

File: 1552368621572.mp4 (7.57 MB, 1280x720, Is Yang Gang Accelerationi….mp4)

>Please note that I am not advocating violence but merely hypothesizing on the results
Of course, /mlpol/ is a board of peace.
Let me steer the subject back to Mr. Trump's deception and the new champion that is arising.
If this chink is elected into office, he will be under crossfire to fulfill his promises of $1000 a month.
On one hand he will have to take from the elite's money and to reduce the military budget, which obviously would be his death sentence. On the other hand if the money is not produced to the plebs, a national chimpout of biblical proportions will come.
Both scenarios will bring choppy economical times and unrest, bringing us closer to secession.

d026e No.210243

>chink bernie
>new champion
Bwahahahaa! Thanks. I needed that laugh.

70ab9 No.210276

File: 1552403398042.png (870.21 KB, 549x1024, PrincessofChaos.png)

One chimpout is not the same as another. A BLM-style chimpout raises race-related questions among whites as they think "do I really want to be potentially attacked by these creatures?" However, if the citizenry gets used to UBI it will think it's entitled to it, and the corresponding chimpout will not be to secure our existence but to restore gibs. If severe enough it may become the Soviet Union 2.0 (though I'm sure some Nazbols would like that). I'm certain a counterrevolution would occur but it's difficult to overcome the momentum of the initial uprising. Most of the people rising up will demand a larger government and you're unlikely to convince them to prize survival, liberty, and tradition. Going against them would mean either siding with the government (unacceptable) or forming a third faction with all the attendant problems of organization, leadership and recruitment. In any case, as was the case in the Russian Civil War our side would be rather fractured; many would simply want a "return to normalcy" and trying to form an ethnostate may face resistance.

On the other hand, America is more fond of secession than other countries and getting states to secede may finally be possible. You'll still face the difficulty of convincing even the most conservative states that ethno-nationalism is better than civic nationalism. If the big-government folks win out elsewhere you may have another war between the states, which (besides the horror it entails) would be better fought when everything is still chaotic.

Accelerationism relies on chaos, which is the same thing as setting a bank on fire in hopes you can grab some of the money. It may work but necessarily nothing is certain and you can't rely on people behaving as you would expect them to. It is my opinion that if unrest is to break out then not just any unrest would do but that geared towards our interests, such as the Yellow Vests (which itself is half-cucked due to the left-wing demanding programs that are impossible to pay for). As to what it should specifically be, that takes careful thought.

tl;dr As a libertarian I think encouraging any sort of popular bigger government program is bound to work against us due to expanding undesirable sentiments. If you want to be able to assemble a movement it's better to enable causes of collapse that are unpopular and would be protested against, not for.

ef594 No.210710

>Senate poised to reject Trump's emergency declaration

>Senate votes to terminate Trump’s emergency declaration for border, forcing veto showdown over use of executive power.

>Republican opposition grew Thursday to President Donald Trump's declaration of a national emergency at the southwest border as the Senate chugged toward a showdown vote that seemed certain to rebuff him despite his last-minute warnings.
>GOP Sens. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Mitt Romney of Utah and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania said they'd vote Thursday for a resolution to annul the border emergency Trump declared last month. That raised GOP defections to eight — well above the four needed ensure the measure would be sent to the White House.

>Trump has promised a veto. It seemed clear that Congress would lack the two-thirds majorities that will be needed to overturn his veto, and Trump said as much at midday.

>"I'll do a veto. It's not going to be overturned," Trump told reporters. "It's a border security vote."
>He did not answer when reporters asked if there would be consequences for Republicans who vote against him.
>But a White House official said Trump won't forget when senators want him to attend fundraisers or provide other help. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on internal deliberations.

1855d No.211212

MOTHER OF FUCK. At this point, Trump should declare a national emergency: Subversive Spiteful Obstructionist Leftists in power need to be removed.
I'm pissed, and I hate that leftists want me to pissed.
However, I'm not doing what leftists want me to do and saying "Trump's too slow and too inefficient, he hasn't been able to do what he promised and he has therefore betrayed his voter base!".

0c130 No.211283

File: 1552689793606.png (455.39 KB, 1018x827, ClipboardImage.png)

He did veto it. but they're going to try to override his veto so it's not over.

Trump issues first veto of his presidency, says resolution 'put countless Americans in danger'
>Deeming congressional rejection of his border national emergency "reckless" and "dangerous", President Donald Trump issued the first veto of his presidency Friday, insisting the situation on the southern frontier amounted to a threat to Americans' safety.

>"Congress has the freedom to pass this resolution and I have the duty to veto it," Trump said from the Oval Office before officially sending the measure back to Congress without his approval.

>It is the first time in his two years in office that Trump has used his presidential veto power to block legislation and comes after a dozen Senate Republicans joined Democrats to rebuke Trump's use of his national emergency power to bypass Congress and fund construction of a border wall.
>Trump said the resolution, which would have reversed the national emergency, "put countless Americans in danger."
>"There haven't been too many that are bigger emergency than what we have" at our border, he said.

>While some lawmakers -- including some Republicans -- have argued against the President's use of national emergency powers in this instance, the Justice Department set forth a robust defense of the President's authority to do so in a letter to Senate Majority

>Leader Mitch McConnell earlier this month, according to a copy obtained by CNN on Friday.
>"The President acted well within his discretion in declaring a national emergency concerning the southern border," wrote Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd, setting out the legal basis for the proclamation under the National Emergencies Act and additional statutory authorities, which largely tracks an internal memo issued by the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.
>"The President's emergency Proclamation reasonably described the current situation as an ongoing 'border security and humanitarian crisis,'" Boyd adds. "The crisis at the border … may qualify as an emergency even though it, too, is not entirely new."

>Twelve Republican senators banded together Thursday to deliver the forceful rebuke after expressing concerns that Trump's use of the national emergency declaration as an end-run around Congress violates the separation of powers and sets a bad precedent that a would-be future Democratic president could follow to unilaterally drive their agenda.

>The White House sought to pare back Republican defections leading up to the vote, with the President and White House aides making clear to Republican senators that a vote against Trump on this issue would have ramifications come re-election time.
>Trump rejected entreaties from several Senate Republicans to agree to a compromise that would curtail his national emergency powers and instead framed the vote not as a matter of constitutional concerns, but rather as a litmus test on border security.
The approach -- particularly the threats of re-election repercussions -- stemmed defections from several Republicans up for re-election in 2020, but ultimately failed to stop the Senate from passing the resolution.

CNN http://archive.is/Jv2yz

0c130 No.211289

Dems prepare next steps after Trump's veto
>Democrats are planning a vote that aims to override President Trump's veto of legislation blocking his emergency declaration, an effort that’s all but certain to fail.

>The House will hold a veto-override vote on March 26, shortly after lawmakers return from a weeklong recess, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced Friday. The measure is unlikely to garner the necessary two-thirds majority, given that only 13 House Republicans joined with Democrats in support of a resolution last month to block Trump's emergency declaration to build a border wall.

>And even though 12 Senate Republicans joined all Democrats to send the measure to Trump’s desk, eight more would have to defect in that chamber to override the veto, the first of Trump's presidency.
>Even if they can’t force Trump to revoke the national emergency, Democrats are hoping to highlight the constitutional questions surrounding Trump's declaration and the infighting it’s prompted within the GOP.

“House Republicans will have to choose between their partisan hypocrisy and their sacred oath to support and defend the Constitution,” Pelosi said in a statement.
>Democrats are also eyeing other strategies for preventing Trump from expanding the wall with funds Congress previously allotted for other purposes, including military construction projects.

>“This will provide significant evidence for the courts as they review lawsuits,” he added. “We will also continue working in Congress to find avenues to terminate the emergency declaration — whether it be through appropriations or other processes.”

>One such avenue is simply to bring repeated votes on Castro’s disapproval resolution — a plan suggested Thursday by Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).
>Democrats are also considering efforts to attach the language as an amendment to larger bills, including 2020 spending measures and reauthorization of defense funding — legislation that’s “a natural fit” for the disapproval resolution, according to a Democratic aide.

>Schumer signaled that Senate Democrats would force additional votes on resolutions of disapproval blocking Trump every six months, as allowed under the National Emergencies Act, to prolong an issue that divides Republicans.

"I believe the law allows us to bring it up every six months, and certainly we would intend to do that," Schumer told reporters.
Schumer maintained that senators should challenge the White House even if Trump will veto each of those disapproval resolutions.
"The point of defending the checks and balances that the Founding Fathers put so exquisitely into our government? We've got to defend it 10 times even if they knock it down in hopes of winning the 11th," Schumer said.
>But Democrats said the passage of a resolution -- especially under divided government -- to terminate the declaration could bolster the legal arguments challenging Trump’s authority.
“Think about it: both chambers of Congress, one Democratic and one Republican, voted to terminate the President’s emergency declaration,” Castro said. “As the courts review this, that will be a significant legal fact.”

>When asked after Thursday’s vote on the declaration if the House could take up legislation to reform the National Emergencies Act, a Pelosi spokesman said House committees are looking into the issue.

>“The House Committees are reviewing the President’s unlawful use of the National Emergencies Act. It was never intended - and still is not permissible - to be used by the President to settle a policy dispute in which he miserably failed to convince the Congress and the American people,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said in an email.

TheHill http://archive.is/PpKCb

d026e No.211305

>House Republicans will have to choose between their partisan hypocrisy and their sacred oath to support and defend the Constitution,” Pelosi said in a statement
That's fucking hillarous coming from Pelosi. She doesn't give a single fuck about the Constitution.

[Go to top] [Catalog] [Return][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ mlpol / qa / go / 1ntr / vx / cyb / sp / üb / a ] [ Overboard ] [ Statistics / Banlist / Search ] [ PonyX ] [ Policy / Store ] [ home ]