The Trump Presidency will be in the top 10 in our nation's history

[mmpsteve]

Sometimes a good suggestion leads to good legislation. Aside from the top ten, where do you stand on the issue of birthright citizenship? Seems like an incentive for illegal activity.

It might just be me, but it seems the president shouldn't be able to change the Constitution on a whim. A president even making such a suggestion is proof enough as why he'll never be considered in the "top 10."

 

[hoosierdoc]

Ending birthright citizenship seems like a reasonable thing to do. After looking into it I don’t think trump is absurd for trying it. Certainly a solid argument can be made that the amendment was misinterpreted.

Trump should do it, dem judge will block it, and then we appeal it at the supreme court. How very constitutional

 

[jamil]

But Obama using EOs concerning other areas of the constitution was unconstitutional. C'mon guys, can't we be a bit more consistent? The pens in the other hand and so now anything goes?

 

[BugI02]

But Obama using EOs concerning other areas of the constitution was unconstitutional. C'mon guys, can't we be a bit more consistent? The pens in the other hand and so now anything goes?

Surely you can understand that after having to sit through years of Obama creating or abetting these crises with his pen and phone, the temptation is great to see how the other side would like having that pen and phone shoved up their ... nostrils

 

[Tombs]

But Obama using EOs concerning other areas of the constitution was unconstitutional. C'mon guys, can't we be a bit more consistent? The pens in the other hand and so now anything goes?

The pen has been used and it will continue to be used.

Do you want to help the country with the pen during the time you have left?

"Hey guys I decided to stop doing the thing because I have principles, you'll stop too... won't you?"

Yeah no. Use the pen to resolve the power struggle. Step one is to stop importing more democrat voters, who are seeking the same policies that caused them to flee the countries that they came from.

 

[jamil]

Surely you can understand that after having to sit through years of Obama creating or abetting these crises with his pen and phone, the temptation is great to see how the other side would like having that pen and phone shoved up their ... nostrils

“Gotcha last” isn’t a particularly effective long term strategy.

 

[jamil]

The pen has been used and it will continue to be used.

Do you want to help the country with the pen during the time you have left?

"Hey guys I decided to stop doing the thing because I have principles, you'll stop too... won't you?"

Yeah no. Use the pen to resolve the power struggle. Step one is to stop importing more democrat voters, who are seeking the same policies that caused them to flee the countries that they came from.

Sounds to me like you guys are justifying Trump doing it because he’s your guy.

Don’t ***** about “muh constitution” then when the next Democrat uses the pen and phone to undo everything Trump did, just like Trump undid Obama’s.

 

[BugI02]

“Gotcha last” isn’t a particularly effective long term strategy.

Neither is rolling over and hoping that the people who hate you and everything you stand for (and likely feel the same way about America) will think better of you for it

The most effective long term strategy would seem to be to drag the pendulum as far right as possible (within the rule of law) and then put as much drag on it as possible as it tries to swing back

Trump is the most legally hamstrung and constrained president in living memory. He can't get away with anything even slightly extralegal despite the nationwide case of the vapors. His every action is placed under a legal electron microscope and examined for the National Socialism that half the country just knows is there somewhere, despite continued lack of evidence (just like collusion). Get back to me when he actually does something unconstitutional or fails to submit to the dictates of the judicial branch

 

[BugI02]

Sounds to me like you guys are justifying Trump doing it because he’s your guy.

Don’t ***** about “muh constitution” then when the next Democrat uses the pen and phone to undo everything Trump did, just like Trump undid Obama’s.

What makes you think that we don't see this as a given in the current political climate? What about the events of the last two years makes you think that somehow the Young Socialist Party (Democrats) will accept any deviation from the party line if they regain power. What makes you think the Real Republicans® will suddenly develop a spine and the will to fight (for anything besides the last watercress sandwich in the salon)? The best strategy I can see is to implement what changes we can and let people see for themselves that, like climate change, the predictions of disaster are just fear-mongering (see: Tax cuts)

In no way do I or will I advocate unconstitutional measures, but it's not the MSM that determines constitutionality. I would fail to see any real problem if Trump issued the EO, was slapped down in the courts (virtually a guarantee in some circuit, likely the 9th) and the order is stayed until ruled upon by SCOTUS. I hope you don't subscribe to some crazy conspiracy theory that Trump's two appointments would be more loyal to him than the constitution. Thus SCOTUS would have the final say, and since all the armchair constitutional lawyers on INGO seem to feel no ruling can possibly alter the 14th - no harm, no foul. I know that my tribe will still accept the rule of law, can you say the
same of the other tribe(s) if SCOTUS were to somehow interpret the 14th in an unexpected (to the INGOgensia) way?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

What makes you think that we don't see this as a given in the current political climate? What about the events of the last two years makes you think that somehow the Young Socialist Party (Democrats) will accept any deviation from the party line if they regain power. What makes you think the Real Republicans® will suddenly develop a spine and the will to fight (for anything besides the last watercress sandwich in the salon)? The best strategy I can see is to implement what changes we can and let people see for themselves that, like climate change, the predictions of disaster are just fear-mongering (see: Tax cuts)

In no way do I or will I advocate unconstitutional measures, but it's not the MSM that determines constitutionality. I would fail to see any real problem if Trump issued the EO, was slapped down in the courts (virtually a guarantee in some circuit, likely the 9th) and the order is stayed until ruled upon by SCOTUS. I hope you don't subscribe to some crazy conspiracy theory that Trump's two appointments would be more loyal to him than the constitution. Thus SCOTUS would have the final say, and since all the armchair constitutional lawyers on INGO seem to feel no ruling can possibly alter the 14th - no harm, no foul. I know that my tribe will still accept the rule of law, can you say the
same of the other tribe(s) if SCOTUS were to somehow interpret the 14th in an unexpected (to the INGOgensia) way?

I've stated elsewhere (maybe earlier in this thread) that I wouldn't be a bit surprised if this EO business is merely part of the art of the deal. What do you do when your business partners refuse to engage in a deal you believe should be acted on? You do something to force their hand. I'm not sure this particular EO would be constitutional but the intent might be to never have it stand as the last word but the impetus to get Congress to finally address this and fix it the way he promised on the campaign trail he'd get it fixed.

 

[jamil]

There’s a whole range of stuff between rolling over and seizing the tool you (rhetorical “you”) said was unconstitutional when it was someone you disagree with, and thinking the best thing you can do is out-fringe the other fringe. So what happens when they have the same strategy as you? Wider, more extreme, constitution ruining swings. You’re in a minority on that. There are way more moderates who don’t agree with either fringe than both fringes put together.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Sounds to me like you guys are justifying Trump doing it because he’s your guy.

Don’t ***** about “muh constitution” then when the next Democrat uses the pen and phone to undo everything Trump did, just like Trump undid Obama’s.

+1

 

[jamil]

I've stated elsewhere (maybe earlier in this thread) that I wouldn't be a bit surprised if this EO business is merely part of the art of the deal. What do you do when your business partners refuse to engage in a deal you believe should be acted on? You do something to force their hand. I'm not sure this particular EO would be constitutional but the intent might be to never have it stand as the last word but the impetus to get Congress to finally address this and fix it the way he promised on the campaign trail he'd get it fixed.

I wouldn’t discount that as a possibility. But I also wouldn’t discount that he’s serious. If it’s just the art of the deal will the Trumpers then be disappointed. They seem quite happy with the potential of this EO, no matter how unconstitutional. **** rule of law, it’s the “right” thing to do. Same rationale as the far left.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

There’s a whole range of stuff between rolling over and seizing the tool you (rhetorical “you”) said was unconstitutional when it was someone you disagree with, and thinking the best thing you can do is out-fringe the other fringe. So what happens when they have the same strategy as you? Wider, more extreme, constitution ruining swings. You’re in a minority on that. There are way more moderates who don’t agree with either fringe than both fringes put together.

He hasn't done it yet. But simply by mentioning he was contemplating it, he's got the entire country talking about it. That's good. Most people never even realized there was a counter argument to the status quo. We're having one of those "national conversations" the left always longs for...let's see how it shakes out. IF he does actually write the EO, then we can lose our collective minds.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I wouldn’t discount that as a possibility. But I also wouldn’t discount that he’s serious. If it’s just the art of the deal will the Trumpers then be disappointed. They seem quite happy with the potential of this EO, no matter how unconstitutional. **** rule of law, it’s the “right” thing to do. Same rationale as the far left.

That's because most people don't know how the government is supposed to work.

 

[BugI02]

Agreed. I have already raised this idea in another thread during an exchange of broadsides with the HMCS T.Lex (The President Trump Immigration Thread #2228)

I give the man (Trump) enormous credit for not just sitting on his hands and saying "There is nothing we can do". We don't have trains in Columbus, so I can't check on what level of Nazism he is exhibiting currently


ETA: This was in response to your #390 GFGT - should have quoted it for clarity

 

[BugI02]

There’s a whole range of stuff between rolling over and seizing the tool you (rhetorical “you”) said was unconstitutional when it was someone you disagree with, and thinking the best thing you can do is out-fringe the other fringe. So what happens when they have the same strategy as you? Wider, more extreme, constitution ruining swings. You’re in a minority on that. There are way more moderates who don’t agree with either fringe than both fringes put together.

And this putative surfeit of moderates has affected the course of recent events exactly how, pray tell?

Perhaps they should band together into their own tribe where their numerical superiority will allow them to implement the programs and strategies they don't seem to have

 

[BugI02]

Its like a running play in football - don't like what I'm doing, make me stop (a favorite analogy). But that requires you to get down into the trenches and get dirty and get banged up a little; forgive me if I don't suspend respiration waiting for that to happen

Remember, Kasich is available very soon if you need a standard-bearer (and can figure out if he stands for anything). We'll pay the freight!


ETA: The rhetorical you, not you personally

 

[jamil]

He hasn't done it yet. But simply by mentioning he was contemplating it, he's got the entire country talking about it. That's good. Most people never even realized there was a counter argument to the status quo. We're having one of those "national conversations" the left always longs for...let's see how it shakes out. IF he does actually write the EO, then we can lose our collective minds.

I don't think there are reasonable people losing their minds over it. I don't like the idea of doing something like this by EO as it's beyond the President's power to do, but there's no constitutional crisis yet. It's just talk. Maybe Trump has no intention of signing such an EO at all. Maybe its proximity to the election is not a coincidence. But if he does follow through, people should wait to see what he's actually doing if he does it before they get too upset about it.

And there are some possibilities that I think could be constitutionally compatible. It clearly establishes the concept of birthright citizenship but there is a gray area in terms of precisely to whom it applies. If the EO interprets it in a way favorable to him, without trampling over the constitution, then fair enough. But, people have to understand that whatever is done by EO is only as permanent as the president who signed it.

 

[KG1]

He hasn't done it yet. But simply by mentioning he was contemplating it, he's got the entire country talking about it. That's good. Most people never even realized there was a counter argument to the status quo. We're having one of those "national conversations" the left always longs for...let's see how it shakes out. IF he does actually write the EO, then we can lose our collective minds.

I agree with this as well. This was pretty much my position that I posted in the immigration thread.

We can all take up a position on this and hash them out and that’s great.

The birthright issue has been bandied about off and on for quite sometime.

Trump is trying to fulfill a campaign promise by bringing it to the forefront and he’s definitely done it in a big way.

Bottom line is whatever happens if and when he decides to push through an EO it will run it’s course through the Judiciary and if it’s determined to be unconstitutional the EO will not stick.

Trump was elected in part on his campaign promises to take on the illegal immigration issue and like it or not he’s attempting to fulfill that promise