Drumpf Thread (Reborn!)




The problem , however , isn’t just that we have a mendacious crypto-fascist in the White House who looks to other crypto-fascists for counsel and succor. The problem is that the National Emergencies Act (NEA), passed in 1976 and which Trump would invoke to get his way, makes it easy for any president to declare emergencies. Trump’s threat to deploy extraordinary powers to counter a fake crisis on our southern boundary should spark a clarion call to reexamine, repeal and replace the NEA.

The NEA was designed to place congressional checks and balances on the emergency authority of the president, and to restore the separation of power between Congress and the executive branch. The act may have been well-intentioned as a post-Watergate reform, but in practice it has been a dismal failure.

Historically speaking, there is nothing new in Trump’s emergency posturing. Prior to the adoption of the NEA, American presidents issued scores of emergency orders, dating back to George Washington’s 1794 proclamation. Aimed at suppressing the Whiskey Rebellion (a rural uprising against the nation’s first excise tax) in western Pennsylvania, the first U.S. president’s declaration facilitated the mobilization of state militias.

In succeeding decades, other presidents invoked more sweeping powers. At the start of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus. During World War II, Franklin Roosevelt ordered the internment of Japanese-Americans. In the midst of the Korean War, Harry Truman attempted to seize the country’s steel mills to avert an industrywide labor strike.

Apart from the Supreme Court’s decision in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company v. Sawyer (1952), which invalidated Truman’s takeover bid, federal courts have been reluctant to overturn presidential emergency declarations. In 1944, to cite perhaps the most egregious instance of judicial abdication, the Supreme Court upheld Roosevelt’s Japanese internment order in Korematsu v. United States. It wasn’t until last year—in its decision affirming Trump’s Muslim travel ban, ironically—that the high court officially repudiated the Korematsu case.

By the early 1970s, Congress had enacted some 470 statutes, delegating extraordinary powers to the president in times of crisis on issues ranging from public health, natural disasters and land management to national defense and security. A 1934 law still on the books even allows the president to shut down or take control of “any facility or station for wire communication” (arguably, the internet in the digital era) upon his proclamation “that there exists a state or threat of war … or other national emergency.”

As Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, writes in The Atlantic, the NEA was passed to “rein in this proliferation.”

Problematically, the act doesn’t define what constitutes an emergency. “The president,” Goitein explains, “still has complete discretion to issue an emergency declaration—but he must specify in the declaration which [statutory] powers he intends to use, issue public updates if he decides to invoke additional powers, and report to Congress on the government’s emergency-related expenditures every six months. The state of emergency expires after a year unless the president renews it, and the Senate and the House must meet every six months while the emergency is in effect ‘to consider a vote’ on termination.”

Thirty-one states of emergency are in effect today, according to Goitein. Many, such as the freeze on Iranian government assets imposed in 1979, have been regularly renewed. Goitein also notes that “during the 40 years the law has been in place, Congress has not met even once, let alone every six months, to vote on whether to end them.”


Sorry buds…IM BACK NOW!

Where to start…well, i think its crystal clear that hell not go quietly.
As far as this shutdown well…he DID say he was going to take full responsibility for it yet blames the Dems.

Its shocking that people thought hes a brilliant person.


Recently, news channels showed Trump telling reporters he can empathize with 800,000 federal workers struggling to pay their bills thanks to the government shutdown he ordered on the pretext of a “national security” crisis on the United States’ southern border.

I can relate,” Trump said. “And I’m sure that the people that are toward the receiving end will make adjustments. They always do. … People understand exactly what’s going on.”

According to CNN, the government even gave unpaid workers sample letters“explaining the situation” to creditors.

The closure could go on “for years,” claimed the president, adding that given federal government workers support the move, it was better to call his payment stoppage a “strike.”

The telescreens showed Trump threatening to declare a “national emergency” over a “national crisis” of “illegal crossings” at the U.S.-Mexican boundary. We saw Trump and his press secretary claim that U.S. authorities had recently interdicted many “terrorists” (including “Islamic” ones) from crossing the border.

We learned that the president threatened via tweet to end “birthright citizenship”—the national citizenship granted to all persons born in the U.S. under the Constitution’s 14th Amendment—through an executive order.

When the corporate media granted Trump prime telescreen time to promote his wall, he dedicated much of his talk to grisly stories about Latino immigrants who raped and murdered U.S. citizens.

The following weekend, Trump made another appearance to offer Democrats a “deal” he claimed would end the shutdown and “the humanitarian crisis at the border.” His “proposal” (a non-starter before it aired) combined billions for the border wall with some short-term and partial protections for the “Dreamers” (the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival [DACA] recipients who were born to parents without legal status). Calling opponents of his wall “open-border extremists” who would render the country defenseless in the face of a criminal invasion of drugs, gangs and violence, he also attributed the nation’s widespread drug crisis to our “open border policy.”

“The radical Left,” Trump bizarrely intoned during his speech, “can never control our borders. I will never let it happen. Walls are not immoral. In fact, they are the opposite of immoral.”

His entire proposal was absurdity in its purest form for a number of reasons. To begin with, contrary to what the president would have Americans believe, border crossings have been dropping for years and are now at historic lows. There is also no evidence of anything remotely akin to a terrorist (“Islamic” or otherwise) influx at the U.S.-Mexico border. It’s actually Trump’s draconian policies, replete with the vicious mass-internment of asylum-seeking families and children from Central America, which are the main causes of humanitarian horror unfolding at the border.

Moreover, drugs enter the U.S. primarily via air, water and legal [points of entry](https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-increasing-border-security-overlooks-smuggling-2018-4). They will not be stopped by physical boundaries along the southern U.S. border.



I am struggling to see the relevance of this in a Trump thread… that withstanding may all the goats of the east fuck the islamists up the ass!


its obviously relevant because you and others constant bash trump for the Muslim ban, and the reality is, beheading people is textbook Islam and its being pointed out in this video…so its a counternarrative datapoint

maybe you can appeal and report it and have it censored off the site, you will probably win since its administered by leftists who agree with your politics.


Actually I don’t! Others may! I do think the Muslim ban is ill conceived and ultimately as a result ineffective. If Trump really wanted to get it right he would have banned people from Saudi Arabia where the 9/11 terrorists came from but you know business deals and all that!

I wouldn’t do that. The only time I have ever reported anyone was because they were posting pictures of tortured and dead animals for no reason whatsoever. It is absolutely fine for you to have a different opinion. I am not a leftist I just happen to see that Trump is a criminal and deserves to be prosecuted for his crimes. (And yes I have said that Hillary should also be prosecuted for her crimes incase we need to go down that route!))


In case anyone thinks that Trump doesn’t really know Roger Stone then this should clear things up!





We ban all White people with guns?

And dont even let me go to the statistics of African Americans in prison which is VERY high.

So we need to ban them too?

Be VERY careful stereotyping.
It can come back to make you look pretty foolish in the long run…

Stereotyping tends to attract and apply to the lower forms of ideological thought.

This is crystal clear from our great and “like-a-smart-person” Trump…


So…why didnt Trump do that with Saudi?
Oh wait…he has business deals with them.

As far as censorship and this site…clearly you have ZERO clue how things work here. And i dont think anyone in this thread are Democrats in the first place.
I think Amor is, maybe, but he poses excellent points regardless and backs it up with facts. Not the “Alternative” ones.

This thread and one like it had even brought the attention of the site owner of which i told him lets keep this thread open. I love the debates on here.

So…anyone that points out, FACT BASED flaws in Trumps administration are “leftists”?

Well…prepare to be blown out of the water:

Blaming the left is the LEAST of your worries…


No need to rewind the clock so far …


But…wait…i thought immigrants were THE threat?
Its a crisis…remember?


Oh yes sorry, we need that Russian steel.


I’m not a fan of the wall but what has changed since 2006 that all of a sudden the wall is a horrible idea? Back then Schumer, Obama, Clinton and 23 other democrat senators voted for a wall. Am I just stupid in thinking this is more about opposing Trump than the actual wall? It is all bullshit!



No…its not a horrible idea at all.
But the reasons trump has given have been disputed on so many different fronts as far as crimes committed by illegals, deaths etc, illegals are “gonna kill us all” type mentality is what put him in a bad situation.

He basically demonized immigrants.
They have their issues, most definitely…but it was the way he made them sound like monsters coming to destroy a “particular” way of life in the USA.

But no…its not, in and of its self bad per se.
But a wall the length of the USA is just stupid.
There are certain parts of the terrain that would make it insanely difficult to complete.
I truly dont see how he completes this in his term.


He has said many times that he is not looking for a wall the entire length of the border though he should put one around southern California.


He actually changed that as you are correct but still, those other issues are what I feel holds it back.
But as ive said before, this wall, really is the least of his worries.
BTW, im in SoCal at the current time, and were not getting killed, raped, murdered and from what i can tell from my African American buddies, immigrants arent taking away jobs from them :laughing:


Not sure what he has to worry about. The only decent candidate the Dems have so far is Gabbard and she has no chance since she believes in peace.

Yet another reason for a wall around Cali.