Thread by @graywolf442

NT! As everyone knows by now, Trump will be signing (if he hasn't already) the "compromise" bill to fund the government until the next time funding comes up later this year, *and* will also be declaring a national emergency at our Southern border.

I'm of two minds about this. On one hand, I'm glad that the government won't again go into a partial shutdown, allowing for politicians to use that unjustifiably as a cudgel against Trump and the Republicans.

On the other hand, where's the compromise? This bill funds *55* miles of border barrier, or fencing, whatever you want to call it, which is far less than the *250* miles the *real* experts on the border said they actually needed.

It also eliminates, from what I understand, a certain number of "beds" ICE would have to detain those who have entered our country illegally. Why? Because the Left is for open borders, of course, and with this they partly achieve that goal.

Now, as for declaring a national emergency ... I'm not an expert on the ramifications of all of this, but I think that, although Trump has been forced into doing this, and in future it *might* come back to haunt all of us ...

I still think this is something that is needed, as we absolutely need to take control of our Southern border to stop the flood of illegal aliens from entering our country unlawfully. Congress has had DECADES to fix this problem, yet refused to do so.

And that blame goes to both Republicans *and* Democrats, but primarily to the Democrats, who see no problem with allowing *anyone* to come into this country for *any* reason, and by *any* means necessary.

They look at the influx of illegal aliens as future voters - for them - and they like the idea of potentially returning to complete power on a permanent basis. Power and control are what the Left lusts for, country be damned.

For those who say that this sets an "alarming precedent", I ask this - how many other national emergency declarations have been made in the past by the likes of Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., and BHO?

Did you know that *most* of those are *still* in effect? Did anyone voice their "alarm" that *those* declarations could "set a precedent" that we might regret in the future? I don't remember anyone doing that, tbh, and I've been around for a while.

For the record, since 1979 after Congress codified the Presidents authority to declare national emergencies through the National Emergencies Act of 1976, there have been *58* national emergencies declared.

Each one has a one year "window" to be in force, unless renewed, which they often are. Do you know how many are *still* in effect as we speak? *31*. That includes 3 by Trump.

By contrast, GWB declared 13, and BHO 12, most of which are still in effect. Did we hear *anyone* stating with "alarm" that these would set bad precedent for the future? No. Most of the time, there was little or no "outcry" over any of them.

So, lets all withhold judgment on the rightness or wrongness of this new declaration, shall we? The Southern border, porous as it currently is, is a magnet to those who would enter our country illegally for whatever purpose.

We need to secure that border, to better protect those of us that are here legally, both citizens, and those who wish - legally - to become citizens. To do otherwise, to allow for the continued exploitation of our border is the real immorality.

Source link for the stats cited about declared emergencies since 1979 -
psmag.com/news/the-unite…