Grr, I do not want that lady on my team!
Well, if it makes you feel any…better?, the only reason she’s bailed on him is because he isn’t racisming hard enough.
Any time you think Coulter is on your team, remember she basically criticizes Trump for this
I don’t even want her to utter sentences that I agree with. It creates potentially hemorrhage-causing cognitive dissonance.
It’s the internet, is it really possible to shit something up on it. Better to express an opinion than stay quiet while others drone away.
Hey if she evolved into a decent, non-Nazi, anti-Nationalist person who is totally against racism and all the crap going on in the Republican Party? I’d welcome her. People can change, even total assholes.
The thing about most Republicans is they always dig their heals in. Instead of developing empathy or admitting they were wrong, they’d rather button down and and hit the “nuke everyone” button. If someone evolved to get past that, there’s a good change they’ve learned and become a better person. We need to encourage that. Even for liches and basement dwellers.
But that’s not the case. She said Trump is an idiot because he is failing at negotiating the wall. Because he declared a national emergency and then said we didn’t really need one, he just declared it because it was faster. This upset her, his stupidity. She went on to explain that the wall is the central reason he was voted in to office, and we need it now.
OH I know. I was just leaving the door open in case she actually wanted to make a complete reversal of her abhorrent views and join an ethical and compassionate society. I know it won’t happen but…
If she could profit from it I’m betting that she’d do a 180 in a heartbeat. But her present audience of morons pay better.
Does Coulter even have an audience (aside from DJT)? I don’t know anyone who GAS what she has to say.
In Trump We Trust was a NYT bestseller for ebooks. So yes. Most people just wont admit it.
I imagine it sold better on e-readers since no one can see what you’re reading.
Hey guys, Lindsey Graham supports Trump’s emergency declaration! Quelle surprise!
It’s like Godfather 2 when they set up the Nevada Senator and then have him in their pocket. Do you think the Russians have something on Graham and have told him to keep in line? He was a vocal Trump critic and then overnight he flipped.
Yes, if she stopped getting paid to write right-wing screeds she would probably pull a David Brock. It’s money that matters …
So this is a fascinating breakdown by Nate:
Here’s what’s up.
The National Emergencies Act contains a super-fascinating provision within it. Congress can, essentially, override the presidential declaration. And how it happens is a little unique when we compare the process of bills becoming laws.
Basically, the House can take it up and put it in for a vote. If it passes there, the senate has to vote on it. No cloture, no filibusters, no leaving it to McConnell to decide. By law they have to vote.
As Silver notes, a few more than 4 Republican senators – the number you’d need to overturn – have come out against this in pretty strong language. So, let’s say you get Collins, Murkowski, Alexander (who’s retiring) and then one of Paul, Tillis, or Toomey (all three have declared fairly unequivocal opposition), and you’ve got your majority voting aye to block this.
But…then it actually goes to the White House, the way a bill would. And that means the president can veto it. And then it comes back to congress. Maybe. It’s actually not clear if Mitch needs to bring the override to a vote. He can just let it stand.
And so in the end, this becomes a thing about posturing, mostly; as the article points out, it’s pretty unlikely the senate would override anyway. But make no mistake: Trump’s political opponents all over the ideological spectrum will make hay of it if both House and Senate vote against the declaration of emergency, and the president vetoes. And it provides another bullet to fire for lawyers seeking to block this in court.
“May you live in interesting times.”
Wait, so by design, Congress can override the President’s action, but then the President has to sign it, to confirm Congress’s override? So the President has to sign off on overriding his own action, which he’s presumably disinclined to do, because he did the thing in the first place.
What a weird say to design that system.
“Hey, Don’t do that!”
“But I want to.”
“Oh…well, uh, okay then. Carry on, I guess.”
The original version of the law allowed Congress to end an emergency unilaterally, but a SCOTUS decision in another matter nixed the idea that Congress can act on the basis of a joint resolution rather than a signed law. So the law was amended to require an actual bill and executive signature. If the President didn’t sign or vetoed the bill, Congress can override the veto like any other law.
So when we have our real emergency, healthcare and climate change - those republicans better shut the f*ck up and swallow their pill as we address and fix those actual critical issues.
Scott’s post has the right of it, it wasn’t originally designed this way, but ended up there, where essentially what has to happen is congress passing a bill to undo the “emergency”.
I have a general question for the lawyers on the forum, a pity we don’t have any Con Law professors.
Congress has delegated a lot of authority given to it under the constitution to the president. The ability of the president to spend money not authorized by Congress under the National Emergency act. The ability to raise or lower tariffs due to National Defense needs, and the ability to negotiate trade deals, under FAST track rules. The constitution clearly gave all of these authorities exclusively to Congress. If Congress wants to take them back, how does the President get a chance to veto these bills?