A senior administration official on the call with Mulvaney said an emergency declaration was needed only to redirect $3.6 billion in military construction funds, saying low-priority projects would be shelved. The official said Trump could redirect without an emergency about $600 million from the Treasury Department's forfeiture fund and about $2.5 billion from Defense Department anti-drug activities.
"We're declaring it for virtual invasion purposes," Trump said in a Rose Garden speech."It's not like it's complicated, it's very simple. We want to stop drugs from coming into our country. We want to stop criminals and gangs from coming into our country.
White House Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney shared details on a media call before Trump's speech, saying the declaration would allow $8 billion for border barrier construction, including the $1.37 billion in fencing funds approved by Congress this week. Trump signed that spending bill into law at around 2 p.m. Friday, after his public remarks.
More @ Washington Examiner
Yes BUT. Right now the Democrats are looking up an Obama appointed federal judge to slap an injunction on this. Trump had to know that was going to happen. The only way he wins is to invoke martial law and over rule the court, OR get the SCOTUS with speed never before seen in that body. I just have a really bad feeling about all of this. Every state. Even the most solid red, are fielding gun confiscation laws. The government is acting like they are all dropping LSD, and PCP at the same time. Trump has just appointed ,and had confirmed ,the same team that gave us ruby ridge and Waco. I think something very bad(for us) is about to happen.--Ray
ReplyDeleteTrump had to know that was going to happen
DeleteYes and evidently planned to get as much as possible from the Dems, then do it. If they can't touch the funds below, then the wall should be able to proceed while the other goes through the courts.
The official said Trump could redirect without an emergency about $600 million from the Treasury Department's forfeiture fund and about $2.5 billion from Defense Department anti-drug activities.
Clinton declared half a dozen emergencies. Obama at least ten. There is currently at least 30 National Emergencies in effect. This is ONLY a big deal because the left and their media whores claim is is a big deal. And the lefts threat to declare an emergency over gun violence and act is an empty threat. Any rational person knows that if the right gives in and does/does not do something because the left makes a threat in no way guarantees the left will abide by any agreement. While Peloser might believe that could ban guns by such a simple act the smart people on the left know that such an act would likely lead to widespread violence. The right needs to stop worrying about not offending the left and do what is needed to fix the problems while they can. The left is NEVER happy unless they are in 100% control....and THAT is disastrous for freedom.
ReplyDeleteWhile Peloser might believe that could ban guns by such a simple act the smart people on the left know that such an act would likely lead to widespread violence.
DeleteBlithering idiot, she.
These "National Emergencies" have been available to Presidents since 1976 by Congressional legislation. I think Obama declared 10, George W Bush, 12 and Clinton 17. Evidently they allow very narrow scoped acts within the Executuve Dept such as moving or re-directing already appropriated funds around for things that are already law. Pelosi is an idiot of more likely, just spouting total political demagoguery to suggest that a National Emergency could be used to impose on the People.The media reports this as if it's a precedent. I found a list of declared National Emergencies by previous presidents, most of which are still in effect. But I watched their broadcast reporting on this and those were never mentioned! It's the continuing "lies of omission". --Ron W
DeleteThanks and as far as Pelosi's threat, go for it and see how that works out.
DeleteI want to see one of these leftist jerkwads asked, "So apparently 70,000 annual deaths from opioid poisoning is not enough for you to consider it a crisis. Just how many would it take? 100,000? 200,000? Or would 1,000,000 deaths be enough? How much suffering and death will it take to purge your hatred and bitterness and show us some honest humanity?
ReplyDeleteJust like lets try Communism again........
DeleteI've been using this question on various comment boards and it shuts these a holes right up. If they do respond it is invariably with profanity or threat of violence. What a shock. Neither am I surprised that none of the so called "conservatives" on FOX or elsewhere have the courage to ask it. Scum the whole lot of them.
Deletehe so called "conservatives" on FOX or elsewhere have the courage to ask it.
DeleteI haven't seen any, but don't watch TV, however you would think it would be in print also.
I am sure this isn’t going to be a popular opinion, but I am not, an end justifies the means, type of person. That is way too much a progressive tactic. At least for me.
ReplyDeleteDo we need a wall. Yes!
But I do not like this “National Emergency” declaration. I believe President Trump had several other options that could have been used. Much like the democrats got burned by eliminating the filibuster for judges.
There will be another democrat President. As much as we like the wall and support it being built. This is not the way. Were can we object when a democrat uses a “National Emergency” to promote his agenda? This is a double edged weapon and if we use it then rest assured the next democrat President will also use it.
As Commander in Chief of the military. I believe President Trump could have ordered the Military Corps of Engineers training. What better training for engineers than building a big beautiful wall. Eight billion dollars sounds like a lot to us, but in a multi-trillion dollar budget, it is like you or me losing a buck and change. I’m sure the money could have been taken.
I just do not believe the “National Emergency” card is the correct way to go. I can promise once this precedent is set, it will be used and when a democrat uses it I can also promise we will hate the idea.
Badger
One more Democrat will be the end.
DeleteThe 1976 National Emergency law evidently constrains them to only Executive Dept actions such as moving funds around. Like I said, Obama declared 10 or 11 National Emergencies, Bush 12 and Clinton 17. Maybe I wasn't paying close attention, but hardly a peep outta the media or those in the opposing parties. Maybe they were re: lesser contentious things. "The United States....SHALL protect each of them (the States) against Invasion." (Article IV, Section 4, U.S. Constitution) If the import of this declared emergency" isn't "constitutional", what is?? --Ron W
DeleteMaybe they were re: lesser contentious things.
Delete:)