One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Biden wants to fix it, DJ'd rather blame
Page <<first <prev 23 of 36 next> last>>
Mar 4, 2024 14:40:16   #
Nick Nicholson Loc: Florida, USA
 
4430 wrote:
I keep asking our OPP lefties time and time again How many illegals coming across the border and they refuse to answer which is pretty cowardly !

Apparently they don't care just let the whole world come in for all the free stuff


I have no idea, as I cannot trust the information published by either side on this issue.

Reply
Mar 4, 2024 14:42:30   #
Nick Nicholson Loc: Florida, USA
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
Throughout our history, Americans have accomplished many great things, however one stands above all the rest,
what accomplishment would that be?


That would wind up as an opinion issue, I expect. My personal opinion is the constitution of the United States.

Reply
Mar 4, 2024 14:45:41   #
Nick Nicholson Loc: Florida, USA
 
quakenut wrote:
No, No, No. They do not need to pass the bill up for grabs right now. It will only let more and more illegal migrants come in. There is an invasion. Thousands of military age young men are coming in from terrorist countries, China and all over. Without being vetted and being dropped off wherever. Texas government is well within their rights to keep more from invading their state.

Biden went to the area that the governor had more or less stopped the invasion and that was at negative help by Biden. Biden would not do the job that he was pledged to but he would not. The state has authority to attend to its borders when the federal government fails to do its job. There is a good bill passed over a year ago that will do the job. Money does not need to be put up for the workers. The border guards can get back to doing the job they are supposed to be doing besides baby sitting.

Biden has killed thousands of Americans with the drugs coming across the border and the places that are emptying out the prisons and mental institutions and sending them to our borders.

His hate for Trump is the reason that the border is even a problem. The gangs were being dismantled and drugs were being stopped entering the United States. He undone all the good things Trump did to take care of the border. If he had been there to finish the job, it would be a non problem.

Biden does not care. He wants the immigrants to come in and give them voting rights. The way he does reminds me of people who throw dogs and cats out and now they jail them for that. The problem is these are people and that makes it even worse. He gives them a life of slavery and low skilled jobs. It is just sickening.
No, No, No. They do not need to pass the bill up f... (show quote)


You appear to have been brainwashed by GOP shills. You are fed lies on a daily basis. I do hope you are not gullible enough to watch Fox news!

Reply
 
 
Mar 4, 2024 14:55:40   #
EmilyD
 
Nick Nicholson wrote:
Unfortunately, trump used them to do thngs the congress would not do for him. Largely for such things as reducing the number of pople in federal agencies that were not liked by trump's corporate supporters including polluters and the energy companies. There were many more, but I have not the time to go back and find them all at present.

I just found this.

"Congress has no role in approving an executive order, nor can it overturn such an order. Executive orders are instructions to federal agencies to implement approved laws in accordance with the inclinations and political leanings of an administration. As such, they have the power to be socially transformative.

If Congress does not like an executive order then its only option is to pass a new law limiting the order’s specific actions, and/or limit/end funding for the order’s implementation. But any such law will need two-thirds majority support in the Senate to be safe from the president’s ability to veto legislation.

If Congress does not act, or is unsuccessful in changing the law, then the other option is to challenge the legality of the executive order in the courts.

If a court rules an executive order is illegal or unconstitutional, then the president would almost certainly appeal that decision to the Supreme Court. If the appeal is unsuccessful because the executive order deviates from “congressional intent”, or is seen to exceed the president’s constitutional powers, then the implementation of the order in that form must cease.

If, however, the Supreme Court upholds the order, it can remain in place until Congress changes the law."



https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-are-executive-orders-and-what-force-do-they-have-in-us-politics-72088

..

Reply
Mar 4, 2024 15:18:17   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
Nick Nicholson wrote:
I read it carefully and stated the truth quite accurately. Yes, Trump may sign, veto, or ignore a bill that lands on his desk from congress. But the content of the bill is stated in the constitution as assigned to the congress and is not mentioned at all in the section establishing the presidency or the responsibilities of that office. So, kindly cease trying to make a point that cannot be legitimately made. And by the way, the rather noticeable right wing bias of Hillsdale college means it is not a tustworthy source of much of anything. I have read a number of their articles in the past, and finally unsubscribed from their articles because they contained a lot of less than truthful information. So, I suggest you not waste your time reading the usual half truths, spin, and false information from Hillsdale College. And it is the proposed bills in congress that I am referencing, as you well know. So where was the GOP when we needed a new bill to help with the border? Nowhere in sight.
I read it carefully and stated the truth quite acc... (show quote)
I certainly expected such a feeble, convoluted, even ignorant response.

No, Trump cannot "sign, veto, or ignore a bill that lands on his desk from congress" because he is not the POTUS.
The idea that Conservatism is an illegitimate system of beliefs is ludicrous.

Simply put: Congress passes legislation, POTUS signs it into law, and the Executive Branch enforces the law.
It's the concept of "separation of powers".

A well-known concept derived from the text and structure of the Constitution is the doctrine of what is commonly called separation of powers. The Framers’ experience with the British monarchy informed their belief that concentrating distinct governmental powers in a single entity would subject the nation’s people to arbitrary and oppressive government action. Thus, in order to preserve individual liberty, the Framers sought to ensure that a separate and independent branch of the Federal Government would exercise each of government’s three basic functions: legislative, executive, and judicial. While the text of the Constitution does not expressly refer to "the doctrine of separation of powers," the Nation’s Founding document divides governmental power among three branches by vesting the Legislative Power of the Federal Government in Congress; the Executive Power in the President; and the Judicial Power in the Supreme Court and any lower courts created by Congress.

Although the Framers of the Constitution allocated each of these core functions to a distinct branch of government, the design of the Constitution contemplates some overlap in the branches’ performance of government functions. In particular, the Framers favored an approach that seeks to maintain some independence for each branch while promoting a workable government through the interdependence and sharing of power among the branches. Moreover, to address concerns that one branch would aggrandize its power by attempting to exercise powers assigned to another branch, the Framers incorporated various checks that each branch could exercise against the actions of the other two branches to resist such encroachments. For example, the President has the power to veto legislation passed by Congress, but Congress may overrule such vetoes by a supermajority vote of both houses. And Congress has the power to impeach and remove the President, Vice President, and civil officers of the United States.

Over the course of our history, the Supreme Court has elaborated on the separation-of-powers doctrine in several cases addressing the three branches of government. At times, the Court has determined that one branch’s actions have infringed upon the core functions of another. For instance, the Court has held that Congress may not encroach upon the President’s power by exercising an effective veto power over the President’s removal of an Executive officer. Furthermore, the President may not, by issuing an executive order, usurp the lawmaking powers of Congress. The Supreme Court has also raised concerns about the judiciary encroaching on the legislative or executive spheres where a litigant asks the courts to recognize an implied cause of action, or to vindicate the rights of the public at large rather than those of a specific individual in a case properly before the court. When ruling on whether one branch has usurped the authority of another in separation-of-powers cases, the Court has sometimes adopted a formalist approach to constitutional interpretation, which closely adheres to the structural divisions in the Constitution and, at other times, has embraced a functionalist approach, which examines the core functions of each of the branches and asks whether an overlap in these functions upsets the equilibrium that the Framers sought to maintain.

As discussed in the Constitution Annotated, the Court’s decisions in separation-of-powers cases often—but not exclusively—address the relationships that the first three Articles of the Constitution establish among the branches of government. Some key constitutional provisions that have served as sources of modern separation-of-powers disputes include Article I, Section 7, which requires, among other things, that legislation passed by Congress be presented to the President for his signature or veto before it can become law; Article II’s Vesting Clause, which states that the "executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America;" Article II’s Appointments Clause, which addresses the respective roles of the President and Congress in the appointment of federal officials; Article III’s Vesting Clause, which states that "[t]he ‘judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish . . .’"; and Article III, Section 2’s Case or Controversy Clause, which limits the jurisdiction of the federal courts.

In addition to the first three Articles, other provisions of the Constitution implicate the separation-of-powers doctrine. For example, the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison interpreted Article VI’s establishment of the Constitution as being superior to other federal law to forbid Congress from exercising its legislative power in a manner inconsistent with the Nation’s Founding document by enlarging the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond the boundaries established in Article III. And the amendments to the Constitution also set forth some important structural features of the separation of powers. For instance, the Twelfth Amendment establishes the process for choosing the President and Vice President, specifically delineating the functions of both houses of Congress in counting and certifying the votes for President and the role of the House of Representatives in choosing a President when no candidate has attained a majority of electoral votes.


Obviously there is no doubt the Hillsdale professors are far more knowledgeable of our Constitution than a leftist slug who is driven by political prejudices opposed to the principles spelled out in our Constitution.

Hillsdale College is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission (hlcommission.org), a regional accreditation agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education.

168 full-time instructional faculty, 90% with terminal degree in their discipline.

Degrees Offered

Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Science; MA in Classical Education—Graduate School of Education; MA and PhD in Politics—Van Andel Graduate School of Statesmanship; MA in Government—Van Andel Graduate School of Government

Majors Offered

Accounting, Applied Mathematics, Art, Biochemistry, Biology, Chemistry, Classics, Economics, English, Exercise Science, Financial Management, French, German, Greek, History, Latin, Marketing, Mathematics, Music, Philosophy, Philosophy and Religion, Physical Education, Physics, Politics, Psychology, Religion, Rhetoric and Media, Spanish, Sport Management, Sport Psychology, Theatre

Art History, Classical Education, Computer Science, Dance, Early Childhood Education, Entrepreneurship, General Business, Graphic Design, Journalism, Military History and Grand Strategy, and Military Leadership are offered as minors only.

Interdisciplinary Majors

American Studies, International Studies in Business and Foreign Language, Political Economy, Sociology and Social Thought.

Pre-Professional Programs

Allied Health Sciences, Dental, Engineering, Law, Medicine, Pharmacy, Veterinary Medicine

Off-Campus Study Programs

Washington-Hillsdale Internship Program in Washington, D.C.; Hillsdale College at the University of St. Andrews, Scotland; Hillsdale College in Seville, Alicante, or Barcelona, Spain; Hillsdale College at the National University of Córdoba, Argentina; Hillsdale College at Sacred Heart University, San Juan, Puerto Rico; Hillsdale/Oxford program at Keble College, Oxford University; Hillsdale College at the Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany; Hillsdale College Summer School in Würzburg, Germany; Hillsdale College at Regent’s College, London

Reply
Mar 4, 2024 15:19:49   #
WEBCO
 
Nick Nicholson wrote:
Appears that way to me. But trump set the example of using unconstitutional EOs, so I guess Biden followed his example and did the same. And no one called either one on their lack of constitional authority.


Obama did before Trump. DACA

Trumps EO was to enforce the law.

Reply
Mar 4, 2024 15:22:29   #
WEBCO
 
Nick Nicholson wrote:
Unfortunately, trump used them to do thngs the congress would not do for him. Largely for such things as reducing the number of pople in federal agencies that were not liked by trump's corporate supporters including polluters and the energy companies. There were many more, but I have not the time to go back and find them all at present.


Every president does. Your TDS is evident

Reply
 
 
Mar 4, 2024 15:24:44   #
4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory
 
Nick Nicholson wrote:
I have no idea, as I cannot trust the information published by either side on this issue.


Surely You have a number that You would say Stop No More !

Reply
Mar 4, 2024 16:09:24   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
Nick Nicholson wrote:
No bragging involved. You accused me of stupidity and ignorance. I pointed out the facts, and as you bragged about running your own business, I should note that I did the same for the last 12 years of my career. I would point out that unions are the primary reason why America had a great economy 50-plus years ago, which is exactly correct because they put 65 percent of America's wealth in the hands of the working class. But I won't waste my time because no matter the provable truths, you will never believe the truth or facts in any case. The GOP and corporations own your mind. That is obvious in your tirade.
No bragging involved. You accused me of stupidity ... (show quote)


In the two years from 1972 to 1974, the American economy slowed from 7.2% real GDP growth to −2.1% contraction, while inflation (by CPI) jumped from 3.4% in 1972 to 12.3% in 1974.

Reply
Mar 4, 2024 21:05:49   #
Bad Bob Loc: Virginia
 
Nick Nicholson wrote:
Proven not a fool many times over while working as an expert witness in state and federal courts including taking on a fedral agency, preparing documents for the SCOTUS in the landmark case- Riverside Bayview which I initiated, reviewing reports from scientists, authoring or editing the Environmental Impact Statements for over 110 projects includiing 2 in foreign countries. Designing entire port facilities, navigation locks, magnetic silencing facilities for all sizes of US Navy ships, a place to dock your VLCC, water treatment systems, wastewater treatment systems, hazardous materials cleanup methods. Member and co-chair of a subcommittee of the US/Canada International Joint Commission. Worked in 17 countries, typically hired by the World Bank or the Asian Development Bank to povide quality control.

Sorry you feel that way. Based on what I have uncovered in study of the history of the last 55 years is that you are being led down the path to continued destruction of America's greatnes and economy. 15 percent of the wealth that use to be owned by American workers has moved to the wealthy in America, which holds down our economy. And that loss of income to workers was accomplpished by corporatoins and the wealthy bribing congress to pass laws that cost jobs, prevented significant wage increases, and killed unions that previouly fught for wage increases. And I recommend you take another look at what actually caused the downfall of our greatness and economy. And why our working people have fallen so far behind in terms of economics. The facts are there for anyone with an open mind to see, but the actual cause of those economic problems is not what you are being told by the GOP and corporations. I recommend you try findiing out the truth. You are regularly being lied to by the very people who have cost us our greatness and economic stability. And I have no dog in this fight. I retired at the age of 70 and now am approaching 80. My only interest is that what has been happening over the last 55 years is hurtiing American workers and their families. And the GOP is the prime supporter of the corporate entities and the wealthy who have done this to America and who are still pushing for more in their pockets that thy will take from the American workers. Consider just one fact for a start. The government routinely passes out more free money to corporations than to individuals. Check that out from data available from the IRS, the BLS, and the Econmic Policy Institute. The information is there if you actually want to find the facts. If not, keep on believing what Fox tells you. You will eventually find out, when it hurts the most.
Proven not a fool many times over while working as... (show quote)



Reply
Mar 4, 2024 23:56:28   #
Radiance3
 
Ronald Hatt wrote:
This "Not MAGA"....is the lap dog, of Anti-Americanism! [ I would wager that this idiot, has not found a woman for

which to breed with!] Once a woman, listens to his utter stupidity, & garbage, spewing from his "bad breath

mouth"...She would flee, screaming, & racing, to get as far away as possible, from this pestilence? [ Yowzer!]

===================
No state can prevent Trump from their ballot. The law is the 14th Amendment "Equal protection of the law is applied to all US citizens."

In addition, the J6th Insurrection could not be used against Trump. First Trump and his party did not participate in the insurrection.

There was no Court decision or SC court decision convicting Trump for that J6th. Without conviction, all charges for that matter, including the Illinois dumb Judge, trying to eliminate Trump from their ballot is NULL and VOID.

In addition, all states could not remove Trump from the ballot system. It disenfranchises the citizens' rights to vote, a violation of Amendment 15. That Amendment 15 applies not only to blacks, but all citizens of the United States.

That was why my prediction before was 9-0 decision. And it happened SC 9-0.

So, the Marxist democrats must be desperate right now what to do next. I think Biden will be very busy buying votes.

Biden has already got 3.6 million students votes. Spent $132 billions of our money. There were all paid to student loans. He did it by installments. All of these are in violations of the SC decision. And in violations of Congress without appropriation.

The only way Biden could win is via MASSIVE ELECION FRAUD!

I am going to review and enhance the 2024 election PROCEDURES AND CONTROL I wrote to Congress and Trump IN 2023. There will be additions, and deletions of some process to improve and make it more effective.

Trump must need additional security. The LIBS are desperate. All their fabrications did not prevail.

Concerning Leticia James, and Fannie Willis charges against Trump. Those charges were all illegal. Fact is, I think those DAs must be disbarred for massive abuse of power. Get them mug shot instead.

Reply
 
 
Mar 5, 2024 06:55:54   #
Rose42
 
NotMAGA wrote:
Hatred of evil is God's command to us. DJT is one of the most evil creatures to ever walk the earth.

Psalm 97:10
Proverbs 8:13
Amos 5:15
Romans 12:9


Its not a command to hate a person. You are perverting God’s word. Shame on you

Good grief, there have been so many evil people to ever walk the earth and trump isn’t even close to them.

You’re not being rational

Reply
Mar 5, 2024 08:08:44   #
DASHY
 
quakenut wrote:
No, No, No. They do not need to pass the bill up for grabs right now. It will only let more and more illegal migrants come in. There is an invasion. Thousands of military age young men are coming in from terrorist countries, China and all over. Without being vetted and being dropped off wherever. Texas government is well within their rights to keep more from invading their state.

Biden went to the area that the governor had more or less stopped the invasion and that was at negative help by Biden. Biden would not do the job that he was pledged to but he would not. The state has authority to attend to its borders when the federal government fails to do its job. There is a good bill passed over a year ago that will do the job. Money does not need to be put up for the workers. The border guards can get back to doing the job they are supposed to be doing besides baby sitting.

Biden has killed thousands of Americans with the drugs coming across the border and the places that are emptying out the prisons and mental institutions and sending them to our borders.

His hate for Trump is the reason that the border is even a problem. The gangs were being dismantled and drugs were being stopped entering the United States. He undone all the good things Trump did to take care of the border. If he had been there to finish the job, it would be a non problem.

Biden does not care. He wants the immigrants to come in and give them voting rights. The way he does reminds me of people who throw dogs and cats out and now they jail them for that. The problem is these are people and that makes it even worse. He gives them a life of slavery and low skilled jobs. It is just sickening.
No, No, No. They do not need to pass the bill up f... (show quote)


Under the Biden administration DHS stopped more fentanyl in the last two years than in the previous 5 years combined.

“The Department of Homeland Security is combating the scourge of fentanyl and other illicit synthetic narcotics with every tool at our disposal,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas. “We have stopped more fentanyl in the last two years than in the previous five years combined and continue to optimize our intelligence and field operations to stop these deadly substances from hitting our streets. At the same time, we are cracking down on the ruthless cartels and criminal organizations that are responsible. CBP plays a critical role, working together with our federal, state, and local partners, and this strategy builds on the tremendous talent of a workforce fiercely dedicated to protecting the American people. The scope of the fentanyl challenge our country faces underscores the need for Congress to provide CBP with the additional resources, equipment, and personnel required to continue this critical work, as outlined in the Administration’s supplemental budget request.”

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2023/12/22/fact-sheet-dhs-front-lines-combating-illicit-opioids-including-fentanyl#:~:text=Through%20a%20whole%2Dof%2DDHS,

Reply
Mar 5, 2024 08:18:04   #
archie bunker Loc: Texas
 
DASHY wrote:
Under the Biden administration DHS stopped more fentanyl in the last two years than in the previous 5 years combined.

“The Department of Homeland Security is combating the scourge of fentanyl and other illicit synthetic narcotics with every tool at our disposal,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas. “We have stopped more fentanyl in the last two years than in the previous five years combined and continue to optimize our intelligence and field operations to stop these deadly substances from hitting our streets. At the same time, we are cracking down on the ruthless cartels and criminal organizations that are responsible. CBP plays a critical role, working together with our federal, state, and local partners, and this strategy builds on the tremendous talent of a workforce fiercely dedicated to protecting the American people. The scope of the fentanyl challenge our country faces underscores the need for Congress to provide CBP with the additional resources, equipment, and personnel required to continue this critical work, as outlined in the Administration’s supplemental budget request.”

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2023/12/22/fact-sheet-dhs-front-lines-combating-illicit-opioids-including-fentanyl#:~:text=Through%20a%20whole%2Dof%2DDHS,
Under the Biden administration DHS stopped more fe... (show quote)


That's a load of scat from a scoured bull.

Reply
Mar 5, 2024 08:25:46   #
DASHY
 
EmilyD wrote:
I just found this.

"Congress has no role in approving an executive order, nor can it overturn such an order. Executive orders are instructions to federal agencies to implement approved laws in accordance with the inclinations and political leanings of an administration. As such, they have the power to be socially transformative.

If Congress does not like an executive order then its only option is to pass a new law limiting the order’s specific actions, and/or limit/end funding for the order’s implementation. But any such law will need two-thirds majority support in the Senate to be safe from the president’s ability to veto legislation.

If Congress does not act, or is unsuccessful in changing the law, then the other option is to challenge the legality of the executive order in the courts.

If a court rules an executive order is illegal or unconstitutional, then the president would almost certainly appeal that decision to the Supreme Court. If the appeal is unsuccessful because the executive order deviates from “congressional intent”, or is seen to exceed the president’s constitutional powers, then the implementation of the order in that form must cease.

If, however, the Supreme Court upholds the order, it can remain in place until Congress changes the law."



https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-are-executive-orders-and-what-force-do-they-have-in-us-politics-72088

..
I just found this. br br i "Congress has no... (show quote)



President Biden was eliminating Trump's bad policy with his EOs. Here is what President Biden had to say about some of the Executive Orders he signed.

“And I want to make it clear — there’s a lot of talk, with good reason, about the number of executive orders that I have signed — I’m not making new law; I’m eliminating bad policy,” Biden said as he signed a series of actions on immigration from the Oval Office on February 2. “What I’m doing is taking on the issues that — 99% of them — that the president, the last president of the United States, issued executive orders I felt were very counterproductive to our security, counterproductive to who we are as a country, particularly in the area of immigration.”

Reply
Page <<first <prev 23 of 36 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.