MAGAThread XV: Because Another

[Seangoli]

Wait, the left is upset about the President circumventing congress through executive action? He’s got a pen and a phone what’s the big deal?

It's a shame this is the argument that was being mocked a few pages ago.

Do better. Expanding executive authority in this way is bad, anything less is partisan hackery.

He is not really expanding executive authority, however. At best, the only argument against the National Emergency being against the law is that the law requires the President to specifically enumerate what the threat is and provide specific actions to be taken in regard to the threat. As of now, it is dubious that illegal immigration is actively specific enough to meet the first, and "build a wall" is not a specific course of action but rather a broad goal.

Thag said, he is perfectly allowed to shuffle around funds in very specific departments under the Executive's control that are not apportioned to other, specific projects. He is taking funds from the Military Drug Interdiction program under the premise that it will help fight the war on drugs, and funds from the DoD Construction fund, which is a general fund. Further, he is taking some funds (about $600 million) from assets seized during drug busts and forfeitures, which is free money with no riders.


He can't take money specifically apportioned elsewhere for specific reasons, but he does have a small amount of leeway to use some funds in specific areas. This has always been the case. He can't raise funding, but he can move "free" funds around.

As for whether it's constitutional or not for Congress to allow the Declarations, that ship sailed a long time ago. There is jo point to arguing it.

[Tarsonis]

Wait, the left is upset about the President circumventing congress through executive action? He’s got a pen and a phone what’s the big deal?

It's a shame this is the argument that was being mocked a few pages ago.

Do better. Expanding executive authority in this way is bad, anything less is partisan hackery.

Of course it’s partisan Hackery, the left applauded the expansion of the executive under Obama but are horrified by it under Trump. The right oppositely so.

[Seangoli]

It's a shame this is the argument that was being mocked a few pages ago.

Do better. Expanding executive authority in this way is bad, anything less is partisan hackery.

Of course it’s partisan Hackery, the left applauded the expansion of the executive under Obama but are horrified by it under Trump. The right oppositely so.

I have always been curious: how did Obama expand executive authority? I really haven't seen how he has.

Trump equally hasn't done much on the matter either. Rather, I see the Republicans in Congress (and specifically the Senate) doing all sorts of stupid shit moreso than anything, far and above anything the Democrats have done. The closest I have seen is the Democrats invoking the nuclear option once for judicial nominees, which the Republicans have run away with. That said, the Republicans in the Senate have run rampant on Senate procedure.

[Zurkerx]

Mueller has evidence that Stone communicated with Wikileaks

Well then, this is actually the first time we see evidence that's related to the Russian Investigation that ties a Trump Adviser to Russian Collusion. Now, the details are not known given how confidential Mueller has been, but, I suspect this may frighten Trump, especially if anything is found from Stone's evidence linking the President or his family. We'll have to wait and see.

[Valrifell]

It's a shame this is the argument that was being mocked a few pages ago.

Do better. Expanding executive authority in this way is bad, anything less is partisan hackery.

He is not really expanding executive authority, however. At best, the only argument against the National Emergency being against the law is that the law requires the President to specifically enumerate what the threat is and provide specific actions to be taken in regard to the threat. As of now, it is dubious that illegal immigration is actively specific enough to meet the first, and "build a wall" is not a specific course of action but rather a broad goal.

Thag said, he is perfectly allowed to shuffle around funds in very specific departments under the Executive's control that are not apportioned to other, specific projects. He is taking funds from the Military Drug Interdiction program under the premise that it will help fight the war on drugs, and funds from the DoD Construction fund, which is a general fund. Further, he is taking some funds (about $600 million) from assets seized during drug busts and forfeitures, which is free money with no riders.


He can't take money specifically apportioned elsewhere for specific reasons, but he does have a small amount of leeway to use some funds in specific areas. This has always been the case. He can't raise funding, but he can move "free" funds around.

As for whether it's constitutional or not for Congress to allow the Declarations, that ship sailed a long time ago. There is jo point to arguing it.

Essentually semantics is what you're arguing, the whole point of requiring the President to specify what he's doing is to make sure he doesn't do something legitimately stupud and out of reach. By not enforcing this oversight Congress is effectively increasing executive authority even if it's not really on technicality.

[Valrifell]

It's a shame this is the argument that was being mocked a few pages ago.

Do better. Expanding executive authority in this way is bad, anything less is partisan hackery.

Of course it’s partisan Hackery, the left applauded the expansion of the executive under Obama but are horrified by it under Trump. The right oppositely so.

It must suck rooting for the political team that's so transparently garbage but you have to support because you agree with them more.

I imagine the #Bothsides argument really alleviates the self doubt that comes with such a position.

[Bombadil]

Mueller has evidence that Stone communicated with Wikileaks

Well then, this is actually the first time we see evidence that's related to the Russian Investigation that ties a Trump Adviser to Russian Collusion. Now, the details are not known given how confidential Mueller has been, but, I suspect this may frighten Trump, especially if anything is found from Stone's evidence linking the President or his family. We'll have to wait and see.

See the thing is Trump didn't do politics before so he can hardly be blamed for using a bunch of crooks in his campaign, now he does politics so it's different.

“I am learning. I never did politics before. Now I do politics.”

Everything will be better now.

[Zurkerx]

:D

Of course it’s partisan Hackery, the left applauded the expansion of the executive under Obama but are horrified by it under Trump. The right oppositely so.

I have always been curious: how did Obama expand executive authority? I really haven't seen how he has.

Trump equally hasn't done much on the matter either. Rather, I see the Republicans in Congress (and specifically the Senate) doing all sorts of stupid shit moreso than anything, far and above anything the Democrats have done. The closest I have seen is the Democrats invoking the nuclear option once for judicial nominees, which the Republicans have run away with. That said, the Republicans in the Senate have run rampant on Senate procedure.

The closest seems to be his executive orders on immigration, and among other minor things but this was the biggest:

https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/03/politics ... index.html

[Gravlen]

Regarding the legality of Trumps latest manoeuvre, here's an opinion piece arguing that the courts won't strike down his declaration of emergency but should stop his planned move because the statute he cited to authorize wall construction clearly blocks him from doing so.

I do not dispute that Trump likely can declare a national emergency, in large part because Congress has placed few meaningful restraints on that power, but such declarations don’t allow him to do anything he wants; they mainly serve to unlock other statutes which grant him other powers. In this case it unlocks Section 2808:

In the event of a declaration of war or the declaration by the President of a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) that requires use of the armed forces, the Secretary of Defense, without regard to any other provision of law, may undertake military construction projects, and may authorize the Secretaries of the military departments to undertake military construction projects, not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces. Such projects may be undertaken only within the total amount of funds that have been appropriated for military construction, including funds appropriated for family housing, that have not been obligated.

As statutes go, that’s relatively clearly and cleanly written. For Trump to use his $3.6 billion for the wall, he has to show that the emergency “requires the use of the armed forces” and that the relevant funds are being used to “undertake military construction projects . . . that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces.”

A border wall, by contrast, is a civilian structure to be manned by civilian authorities to perform a civilian mission. The troops would not be creating a military fortification for military use. Not only is it not “military construction,” it’s also not “necessary” in order to support the use of the armed forces — unless one wants to make the fantastical argument that the wall somehow “protects” the troops who are building the wall. They are not defending the border from actual invasion as defined by the law of armed conflict or relevant American law. They are assisting in a law-enforcement mission that is mainly designed to prevent the commission of federal misdemeanors, not to stop an army that intends to take and hold American territory.

We’ve grown sadly accustomed to presidents’ abusing poorly drafted statutes to stretch their power well beyond the Founders’ intent. It’s strangely comforting to read a statute like Section 2808 that’s competently written and precisely drafted. While a court isn’t likely to overturn the emergency declaration itself, it is unlikely to believe the administration’s fiction that a civilian wall is true “military construction” or that it is any way “necessary” to support the use of the armed forces. Indeed Trump’s declaration hardly even tries to make the case.

[New yugoslavaia]

So, what is this "the left"?
Are people saying the hippies and environmentalists are evil?

[Thermodolia]

I think we live in Bizarro Land

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

I think we live in Bizarro Land

What universe are we even in?

[Tobleste]

Of course it’s partisan Hackery, the left applauded the expansion of the executive under Obama but are horrified by it under Trump. The right oppositely so.

It must suck rooting for the political team that's so transparently garbage but you have to support because you agree with them more.

I imagine the #Bothsides argument really alleviates the self doubt that comes with such a position.

It's the only possible motive to making it. Presumably no-one's stupid enough to actually believe it. There's fairly obvious differences (e.g. an executive order isn't a national emergency, Trump had been offered the border wall before but refused, Pelosi and Schumer haven't admitted to wanting to sabotage him as McConnell did) so I can only assume it's a talking point and not something any reasonable person could believe.

[Tobleste]

So, what is this "the left"?
Are people saying the hippies and environmentalists are evil?

Basically yes. "The left" is the right wings term for everyone not right wing. Using a single term to describe everyone they dislike means they can treat them all as the most extreme so to them, everyone left wing is a communist.

[New yugoslavaia]

So, what is this "the left"?
Are people saying the hippies and environmentalists are evil?

Basically yes. "The left" is the right wings term for everyone not right wing. Using a single term to describe everyone they dislike means they can treat them all as the most extreme so to them, everyone left wing is a communist.

Well, what do you expect from muricans?

[Zurkerx]

Regarding the legality of Trumps latest manoeuvre, here's an opinion piece arguing that the courts won't strike down his declaration of emergency but should stop his planned move because the statute he cited to authorize wall construction clearly blocks him from doing so.

I do not dispute that Trump likely can declare a national emergency, in large part because Congress has placed few meaningful restraints on that power, but such declarations don’t allow him to do anything he wants; they mainly serve to unlock other statutes which grant him other powers. In this case it unlocks Section 2808:

In the event of a declaration of war or the declaration by the President of a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) that requires use of the armed forces, the Secretary of Defense, without regard to any other provision of law, may undertake military construction projects, and may authorize the Secretaries of the military departments to undertake military construction projects, not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces. Such projects may be undertaken only within the total amount of funds that have been appropriated for military construction, including funds appropriated for family housing, that have not been obligated.

As statutes go, that’s relatively clearly and cleanly written. For Trump to use his $3.6 billion for the wall, he has to show that the emergency “requires the use of the armed forces” and that the relevant funds are being used to “undertake military construction projects . . . that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces.”

A border wall, by contrast, is a civilian structure to be manned by civilian authorities to perform a civilian mission. The troops would not be creating a military fortification for military use. Not only is it not “military construction,” it’s also not “necessary” in order to support the use of the armed forces — unless one wants to make the fantastical argument that the wall somehow “protects” the troops who are building the wall. They are not defending the border from actual invasion as defined by the law of armed conflict or relevant American law. They are assisting in a law-enforcement mission that is mainly designed to prevent the commission of federal misdemeanors, not to stop an army that intends to take and hold American territory.

We’ve grown sadly accustomed to presidents’ abusing poorly drafted statutes to stretch their power well beyond the Founders’ intent. It’s strangely comforting to read a statute like Section 2808 that’s competently written and precisely drafted. While a court isn’t likely to overturn the emergency declaration itself, it is unlikely to believe the administration’s fiction that a civilian wall is true “military construction” or that it is any way “necessary” to support the use of the armed forces. Indeed Trump’s declaration hardly even tries to make the case.

Hmm, that's going to be quite an argument to make, although I suspect the counter argument will be that by declaring an emergency, the military has the right to take over.

I just realized something: couldn't they have just attached an amendment/future bill that would have redirected these available funds to somewhere else to prevent (or before) the President from using said funds? That would have handicapped him I would think.

[Telconi]

It must suck rooting for the political team that's so transparently garbage but you have to support because you agree with them more.

I imagine the #Bothsides argument really alleviates the self doubt that comes with such a position.

It's the only possible motive to making it. Presumably no-one's stupid enough to actually believe it. There's fairly obvious differences (e.g. an executive order isn't a national emergency, Trump had been offered the border wall before but refused, Pelosi and Schumer haven't admitted to wanting to sabotage him as McConnell did) so I can only assume it's a talking point and not something any reasonable person could believe.

Tobleste is unable to comprehend the concept of opinions, and that other peoples' may differ from his. More at Eleven!

[Salandriagado]

The Pentagon or FEMA, most likely.

Either are garbage choices.

So we’re either compromising our national security or our disaster relief
Nice

Also, can we just take a moment to bask in the irony of the Republican party now taking money from military funding.

[Salandriagado]

Wait, the left is upset about the President circumventing congress through executive action? He’s got a pen and a phone what’s the big deal?

Wow, that's some mental whiplash you've got going on there.

[Salandriagado]

It's a shame this is the argument that was being mocked a few pages ago.

Do better. Expanding executive authority in this way is bad, anything less is partisan hackery.

Of course it’s partisan Hackery, the left applauded the expansion of the executive under Obama but are horrified by it under Trump. The right oppositely so.

Ah, the good old fashioned "my hypocrisy magically vanishes if I accuse other people of hypocrisy without any actual justification" argument.

[Shrillland]

Welp, Trump's UN pick just withdrew on her own: https://www.yahoo.com/news/heather-nauert-president-trump-apos-010659275.html

[Ifreann]

Welp, Trump's UN pick just withdrew on her own: https://www.yahoo.com/news/heather-nauert-president-trump-apos-010659275.html

The right career move.

[Farnhamia]

Welp, Trump's UN pick just withdrew on her own: https://www.yahoo.com/news/heather-nauert-president-trump-apos-010659275.html

The right career move.

She could go back to Fox News.

[Garner Industrial State]

Wait don’t checks and balances exist

[Bombadil]

Wait don’t checks and balances exist

Apparently Nixon was actually correct when he said "Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal."

The only check is the vote and alas Anglo Saxons in general have shown themselves not to be trusted with the vote lately. Their current sentiment seems to be 'fuck it and let the world burn'.