ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, August 02, 2017

President Congress

The Saker argues that the God-Emperor is participating in his own foreign policy neutering by the Congress:
I submit that the key to the correct understanding of the Russian response is in the fact that the latest US sanctions contain an absolutely unprecedented and, frankly, shocking feature: the new measures strip the President from the authority to revoke the sanctions. In practical terms, if Trump wanted to lift any of these sanctions, he would have to send an official letter to Congress which would then have 30 days to approve or reject the proposed action. In other words, the Congress has now hijacked the power of the Presidency to conduct foreign policy and taken upon itself to micromanage the US foreign policy.

That, my friends, is clearly a constitutional coup d’état and a gross violation of the principles of separation of powers which is at the very core of the US political system.

It also is a telling testimony to the utter depravity of the US Congress which took no such measures when Presidents bypass Congress and started wars without the needed congressional authority, but which is now overtly taking over the US foreign policy to prevent the risk of “peace breaking out” between Russia and the USA.

And Trump’s reaction?

He declared that he would sign the bill.

Yes, the main is willing to put his signature on the text which represents an illegal coup d’état against this own authority and against the Constitution which he swore to uphold.

With this in mind, the Russian reaction is quite simple and understandable: they have given up on Trump.

Not that they ever had much hope in him, but they always strongly felt that the election of Trump might maybe provide the world with a truly historical opportunity to change the disastrous dynamic initiated by the Neocons under Obama and maybe return the international relations to a semblance of sanity. Alas, this did not happen, Trump turned out to be an overcooked noodle whose only real achievement was to express his thoughts in 140 characters or less. But the one crucial, vital, thing which Trump absolutely needed to succeed in – mercilessly crushing the Neocons – he totally failed to achieve. Worse, his only reaction to their multi-dimensional attempts at overthrowing him were each time met with clumsy attempts at appeasing them.

For Russia is means that President Trump has now been replaced by “President Congress”.
Is he correct? Quite possibly. But remember, Donald Trump has a long history of making initial missteps and then correcting for them. It is far - FAR - too soon to count him down, let alone out.

Labels: ,

189 Comments:

Blogger Student in Blue August 02, 2017 10:04 AM  

"Ugh, how DARE those plebs elect someone not like us to the Presidency. We'll have to take over his position with all due haste."

Anonymous Jake Saga August 02, 2017 10:10 AM  

I really like the Saker, unlike some on the alt-right, but don't think he always gets the whole picture.

It's possible that Trump feels he simply has no choice but to sign the new sanctions bill. However, since he is in charge of executing the new law, as executive, he could certainly use his discretion to make sure it is as toothless as possible. The Russians would quickly notice this, allowing a de-escalation.

If Trump refused to sign the bill, Congress would override his veto, 100% certain. That would weaken him politically.

Anonymous A Former Spartan August 02, 2017 10:10 AM  

I like Saker, but he has a tendency to jump the gun on his analysis and go straight to despair. He also suffers the military/geopolitical analyst's disease of tending to ignore non-military/strategic issues affecting strategic outcomes, looking at the world in a sort of straightforward, power politics uber alles fashion. That becomes apparent to anyone listening to his interviews with Catherine-Austin Fitts. As you say, Vox, he MAY be right, but it remains early innings and the President is much more constrained in the exercise of power than most folks, even educated ones, understand.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother August 02, 2017 10:11 AM  

Is The Saker Russian?

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:12 AM  

Yeah, but some missteps can't be corrected, and this is one of them.

That being said, I'm still holding out for him having a card up his sleeve that will invalidate it, and hopefully make congress look like the traitorous cucked morons they are.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 10:13 AM  

That, my friends, is clearly a constitutional coup d’état and a gross violation of the principles of separation of powers which is at the very core of the US political system.

MUH CONSTITUTION

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:14 AM  

@2. Good luck with them overriding him. Something something something ...unconstitutional.

But then again, when has to constitution ever stopped anyone in the last hundred and fifty years?

Anonymous Gecko August 02, 2017 10:14 AM  

I don't know. His recent ending of the CIA program sending weapons to Syria seems like a pretty big deal to me. I'm pretty sure there's more to this, because that was not a "noodle" move.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:15 AM  

This is only going to change when people start getting shot.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 10:15 AM  

And Trump’s reaction?

He declared that he would sign the bill.

Yes, the main is willing to put his signature on the text which represents an illegal coup d’état against this own authority and against the Constitution which he swore to uphold.


Given that it was initially passed with more than enough votes to override a veto, vetoing it would have been a waste of political capital.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:17 AM  

@10. Josh, it's still an illegal bill though, is it not?

Blogger Shimshon August 02, 2017 10:19 AM  

There was no point in vetoing a bill that something like 99% of Congress voted for.

Anonymous Rocklea August 02, 2017 10:19 AM  

COG Ollie North style, General Kelly. Who knows.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 10:24 AM  


@10. Josh, it's still an illegal bill though, is it not?


No idea -- Congress passes sanctions frequently.

Anonymous c matt August 02, 2017 10:28 AM  

the disastrous dynamic initiated by the Neocons under Obama

Actually, under Bush the Elder, if not earlier.

The SCOTUS would have to rule on it at some point, I suppose, for it to be Uncon. I suppress the GE could sign it, and then simply not enforce it. That would then force Congress to bring it to the Courts. Hmm . . . not enforcing a law on the books, I think there is some precedent for that. If I were in Trump's shoes, I would veto and tell Congress that, if you think Russia's alleged actions were an "act of war" as many have bragged, then declare war on Russia, or STFU. Less than 140 characters.

Blogger Lew Rand August 02, 2017 10:28 AM  

I wonder who has standing on this if it were to be brought up to the courts...

Anyway, for some reason he still hasn't signed it. He may be going for a 'pocket veto' which means it will be law in 10 days regardless (unless Congress actually adjourns), but that would give him some standing to take it to court.

One branch of the government can't 'vote' itself new powers, even if its 100%. If that were the case, the Executive would win every time because its the only 'unified' branch.

This is far from fully played out.

Anonymous c matt August 02, 2017 10:28 AM  

suppose

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 10:29 AM  

If I were in Trump's shoes, I would veto and tell Congress that, if you think Russia's alleged actions were an "act of war" as many have bragged, then declare war on Russia, or STFU.

Congress would just override the veto

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:29 AM  

@14. Josh, it's not the sanctions that are the issue, it's the directive that strips power from the President.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:31 AM  

@16. Lew, I agree. This would seem to be the gist of it.

Anonymous Ricky V August 02, 2017 10:33 AM  

We deserve what we get for voting the Gay Old Pozz into Congress.

As long as the (((Republicans))) control Trump, then the Democrats get everything they want.

What is the solution? Primary purges in 2018? Start a new party? I have no idea.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:34 AM  

Hopefully he turns it around on them somehow, slapping their hands (or better, chopping them off) for the obvious overreach.

Blogger Nate August 02, 2017 10:34 AM  

we've seen a lot more mistakes lately than rebounds. Its time to go on a domestic policy winning streak.

Blogger S1AL August 02, 2017 10:34 AM  

Congress has the power "to regulate commerce with foreign nations". I don't see how this could possibly be construed as "unconstitutional".

Blogger Nate August 02, 2017 10:35 AM  

"Congress would just override the veto"

and it wouldn't matter. Congress cannot strip powers from the presidency by merely passing a law.

It would require a constitutional amendment.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 10:37 AM  

@14. Josh, it's not the sanctions that are the issue, it's the directive that strips power from the President.

I don't know enough specifically about the constitutionality and history of sanctions.

Blogger Cetera August 02, 2017 10:40 AM  

We're only a short way into this existential fight for the nation. As Vox says, "It is far - FAR - too soon to count him down, let alone out."

I have yet to see a single instance where GE Trump has let us down. Certainly he isn't perfect, he's going to make mistakes, and he's even going to lose some battles. One thing he doesn't do is rail and rant against the inevitable.

Rather, he takes the best deal he can get, and moves on. If he can't get a deal, he walks away. If he is stuck with a bad deal, he doesn't fret about it. He corrects it next time.

An unconstitutional law is unconstitutional whether he signs it, or has it implemented by veto override. When the SCOTUS gets around to reviewing it, it will either be declared unconstitutional, or they will let it slide like so many other unconstitutional laws.

In the meantime, Trump will continue his game. He may do a half-hearted and half-assed job of implementing the unconstitutional law, or he may ignore it. He may try to force judicial review, or not. He won't pick a losing fight, however. That is the one thing we can be absolutely assured of. Trump doesn't like to lose, and won't start something he absolutely knows he can't win.

Where does that leave us? Same place we were before. Gotta drain that swamp, and eliminate the swamp critters.

Blogger S1AL August 02, 2017 10:41 AM  

I'd also point to "Letters of Marque and Reprisal" (also given to Congress) cover any non-commerce sanctions. There's pretty clearly no constitutional coup here.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera August 02, 2017 10:42 AM  

I admit I don't understand this one. This is the second development that I see as a legitimate concern in Trump's reign. That said...the man has a way of winning, so I'll wait and hope.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 10:43 AM  

and it wouldn't matter. Congress cannot strip powers from the presidency by merely passing a law.

It would require a constitutional amendment.


I'm not sure that a constitutional power is being stripped from the president.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:45 AM  

@28. So you're saying that they're just putting it in the bill in order to make it look like they're winning something?

If so, gammas will gamma.

Blogger S1AL August 02, 2017 10:47 AM  

@Azure - I'd have to review previous sanctions laws to see if it's because of clarity or precedent or some other complex legal issue. I don't know enough about the history of sanctions bills, but I suspect that there may be ANOTHER law out there that allows the president to remove sanctions under specific conditions... I dunno. This looks like a complete non-troversy to me.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 10:49 AM  

@32. If the power belongs to congress, I'd suspect there's a precedent of previous executive overreach in that area. If not, it's either totally gamma, or a incremental coup.

Blogger Jack Ward August 02, 2017 10:49 AM  

Maybe Trump wants a constitutional crisis that would hit the SC. If most of congress voted for this thing what would be the endgame? Lets say the SC declared it unconstitutional; then, Trump could point to the whole of congress as a danger to the USA and send them all home asking the several governors to appoint new congress critters until a very special election could be held to replace them. Remember that Clancy novel where the congress was destroyed almost totally? There almost has to be something deeply creepy going on and I hope the GE is ahead of the curve.
You know, even Clancy probably could not or would not have written a fiction novel more intriguing that what has happened in the last 6 months or so.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 10:50 AM  

I'd suspect there's a precedent of previous executive overreach in that area

No shit

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 10:51 AM  

This is what happens when you put a person in the presidency who 1)thinks the country can be run like a business, 2) has never read the U.S. Constitution, 3) who's only foriegn policy experience is in hosting beauty contests overseas and 4) doesn't have a clue about the history of the country or the presidency.

Blogger Shimshon August 02, 2017 10:52 AM  

Anyone who thinks this is unconstitutional doesn't know what they're talking about. Many people on the right, back when the Constitution still mattered, did bemoan Congress' regular delegation of wide swaths of executive discretion to implementation and enforcement.

Obviously the choice of where Congress doubled down (Russia) is disturbing. All Trump did is acknowledge an inevitability by signing the law. We have no idea how he will react further.

Blogger S1AL August 02, 2017 10:53 AM  

Keep in mind that there are a lot of laws that allow the executive branch a TON of leeway to establish or remove standards, etc. This is why we have the raging "pen and phone" issue. Congress has given a lot of power over to the executive, even without actual legal overreach being considered.

Blogger VD August 02, 2017 10:54 AM  

Yeah, but some missteps can't be corrected, and this is one of them.

That's ridiculous. FFS, what is wrong with some of you? With every single setback, no matter how minor, it's right back to the doom and despair.

Grow a spine or have one surgically implanted if need be. If we lose one, we lose one. Fine. Then we get back up and fight the next round.

Blogger Shimshon August 02, 2017 10:55 AM  

@36 HSolo is your trolling on a volunteer or paid basis?

Blogger Jack Ward August 02, 2017 10:58 AM  

Since my comment @34 something else occurred to me. The rules of succession would make Ryan the President if something happens to Trump and Pence. And, Kelly was just made chief of staff, which surprised the heck out of me given how quickly that happened. Maybe Trump suspects something; and, I mean something really sinister. Hope not but the chess played at those levels is astoundingly complex. Kelly is a Marine and his oath is to the Constitution. Marines tend to take oaths seriously. Could Trump have been covering the countries butt with the Kelly appointment? After all, a chief of staff has considerable power. And, if anyone could have the trust of the military it would be Kelly, particularly if something really dramatic suddenly happened to Trump and Pence. Just saying.

Blogger Nate August 02, 2017 10:59 AM  

"That's ridiculous. FFS, what is wrong with some of you? With every single setback, no matter how minor, it's right back to the doom and despair."

This is a by-product of the savior complex a lot of people had with Trump. Not entirely unlike the Obama voters at this same time frame in his first term.

You were always realistic and while on the bandwagon, you still openly stated that Trump's chances of actual success were not great. I think a lot of people ignored that advice and built up a lot of unreasonable expectations.

Blogger Salt August 02, 2017 11:00 AM  

Quoting Vox -

"Did you seriously think we were going to be able to talk our way out of this?"

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2017 11:01 AM  

We are witnesses to the dropping of the mask by those who successfully overthrew the US government in 1963.

Since then we had a loose oligarchy made up of the hereditary monarchies running the CIA, the high-level military and the crime syndicate of large multinational corporations.

The satraps in finance/banking, Higher Ed and the media were empowered as long as they served one or more of the ruling triumvirate. The amount of wealth & power arrogated by the extended families running these governments-within-a-government make the wealth of 16th century kings look paltry.

There are no political solutions to gangene so deep. Separation of Powers was deader than a door nail since the appearance of executive agencies exercising their own rules making and administrative court systems almost 100 years ago.

We live in the Time of the Apogee of the State.

Anonymous Grayman August 02, 2017 11:02 AM  

Yeah, but some missteps can't be corrected, and this is one of them.

Rule of law is dead. Look how many illegal actions were taken by each of the last 3 presidents yet nary a peep. If nothing else trump can always use the patriot act declare any congressmen who refuse to undo the act enemy combatants and drone them as an example!

He could also do things as simple as cutting off all O-care related payments to EVERYONE until he gets what he wants. There are lots of ways the president can cause a lot of pain if he chooses to.

Blogger Shimshon August 02, 2017 11:03 AM  

Trump made use of a "signing statement," like his predecessors. Regardless of whatever harsh language the law may use, in the end, it may be very laxly enforced.

Anonymous Grayman August 02, 2017 11:04 AM  

@44 DC

Bingo! that also means that there is no solution that doesn't involve kinetic engagement.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2017 11:05 AM  

I often find it interesting to imagine what a relatively objective historian will write of these times, having achieved the observer status we have of events centuries or more ago.

Assuming, of course, mankind still exists, and does so above the level of the typical Somali or Mayan.

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 11:06 AM  

" If we lose one, we lose one. Fine. Then we get back up and fight the next round."

It's not just "one". It's two and three and four and five and six and.....

Flynn. Mooch. Healthcare. Special Counsel. Media war. Leaks. Russia Sanctions. Travel Ban. Sessions recusal.

There is a degree of incompetence at the executive branch today that we haven't seen in a very long time. And there is no indication that Trump has any ability to adapt to circumstances. He certainly can't beat the media, which continues to uncover his and his administration's bumbling lies. He can't get the congress or republicans to do his will.

Blogger S1AL August 02, 2017 11:08 AM  

HSolo is reinforcing my impression that Scott Adams really gets the current scenario. It went from Hitler to Incompetent pretty suddenly. I wonder how long it's going to be until step 3.

Blogger Nate August 02, 2017 11:08 AM  

"There is a degree of incompetence at the executive branch today that we haven't seen in a very long time."

its not incompetence. its resistance.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2017 11:09 AM  

@ Grayman, nothing will change much until the mass delusion underlying this absurd monetary system dispels.

Then, when the members of the triumvirate suddenly go to war against each other in a contest over the crumbs in the empty cupboard, all hell will surely break loose.

They are accustomed to power and ease fully parallel to "Let them eat cake" hubris.

Blogger modsquad August 02, 2017 11:10 AM  

Congress is supposed to have more power than the president, Trump signing such a bill would be more constitutional, not less. It's a lot more expensive to bribe hundreds of congresmen and senators than one executive-order signing (Barry) president.

Anyway, it'd be easy enough to kill the bill by tacking on a rider stating Israel is to face the same sanctions as Russia.

Blogger Salt August 02, 2017 11:11 AM  

Forget the Rule of Law. It's dead. @44 dc.sunsets is right, "We are witnesses to the dropping of the mask by those who successfully overthrew the US government in 1963."

The question then becomes one of the military. How many divisions does Congress have?

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2017 11:11 AM  

Trump is a transition figure. His Administration is a signal.

The details are interesting, but largely irrelevant. The future is already baked in.

Anonymous Jack August 02, 2017 11:12 AM  

On the one hand, according to muh consta-too-shun, the President should hold far less power than he has wielded for the past several decades. He shouldn't have the power to send the country to war, for example, though I'm not sure what the divinely inspired document says about the lifting of sanctions.

On the other hand, we are in a late stage of the game where an incredibly corrupt congress has led to the rise of someone that I WANT to wield that excess power. Hail Caesar!

Anonymous Grayman August 02, 2017 11:13 AM  

He can't get the congress or republicans to do his will

He has the entire deepstate organization as well as the other 2 branches of gov stacked against him. Anyone short of a iron handed dictator who executes heretics for breakfast is going to be stymied by that level of entrenched resistance.
On top of that, the average joe is NOT READY to see how the sausage is made and breaking up those dens of thieves and whores throws open the doors tot he sausage factory in a big way.
As DC had pointed out, until the social mood changes there will be very little pressure from the core population of the nation. Once the social mood does change there will be pressure from the core population, but it will still be the extremist on both sides of the political spectrum that drive the real conflicts. The "moderate" rarely gets a say in matters once the extreme ends of the political spectrum are sufficiently energized.

Blogger Phelps August 02, 2017 11:14 AM  

Pass the bill and then just ignore it. It worked for Obama.

Congress would have to sue him to force him to enforce it, and that would be just as bad for them as overriding a veto would be for him.

Blogger pnq8787 August 02, 2017 11:15 AM  

If Trump signs this, that's a cuck move.

Blogger Ransom Smith August 02, 2017 11:16 AM  

This is why you always play strategy games.
They teach you that losing ground doesn't always mean losing the war.

You regroup and plan a new attack.
And don't get bogged down in stupid minutia.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2017 11:16 AM  

@ Salt, my question has ALWAYS been, "Is the domestic military viable?" And a follow-up: Will we see a military coup in a crisis?

I honestly don't know if the US military, with its boondoggle geegaws meant only to line MIC corporate pockets, is any more effective than was the Red Army when Gorbachev left power.

The CIA et.al. can murder people, but run a nation openly? I doubt it.

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 11:17 AM  

"He has the entire deepstate organization as well as the other 2 branches of gov stacked against him. Anyone short of a iron handed dictator who executes heretics for breakfast is going to be stymied by that level of entrenched resistance."

A better, more talented, more experienced politician would make it work.

Anonymous Koanic August 02, 2017 11:18 AM  

His Majesty the God Emperor would never lose a veto.

The cucks wish to reverse his election?

Very well. Let's see how they fare in theirs.

Anonymous Orville August 02, 2017 11:19 AM  

@49 There is a degree of incompetence in your trolling that we haven't seen in a very long time.

Ditto what S1AL said. In another 6 months Trump will look competent (sadly so to the haters). Trump is a systems guy, so there will be glitches and mis-steps, that WILL get corrected.

Anonymous Grayman August 02, 2017 11:23 AM  

@62 A better, more talented, more experienced politician would make it work.

And that would be the exact problem. There is no "politician" that isn't a degenerate whore for one of those established interests. As such that is a guarantee that nothing changes. The established interests have negotiated territory with each other and put on a good show to keep everyone distracted.
Its really very easy, anyone the "establishment" is willing to work with is functionally an enemy agent at this point. That only leaves 2 options for an outsider challenging the status quoe like Trump. You can try and play by the rules, as Trump is doing. Or you can go Pinochet 2.0. Pinochet will come, he comes after trump. Trump is the lefts best chance at peace, which they have no interest in.

Anonymous Michael Maier August 02, 2017 11:23 AM  

How can Trump LOSE any "political capital" by way of a veto?

That's utterly retarded.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2017 11:23 AM  

@ Grayman, exactly. The masses NEVER matter. Mood does, as it animates action among the leavening of change agents.

No molecule of H2O can boil before the pot is already hot.

We aren't there yet. We'll know when we are:
-stocks plunging.
-interest rates piling higjer.
-one crisis cascade after another.
-bank problems approach critical mass.
-pension fund after pension fund is declared insolvent.

Oh, yes, we'll know when the beginning of the next phase has arrived.

Anonymous NotGump August 02, 2017 11:26 AM  

What Trump has done is known as picking your battles.

Blogger pnq8787 August 02, 2017 11:26 AM  

Trump signed it. He's officially a cuck!

Blogger Mr.MantraMan August 02, 2017 11:27 AM  

Notice the blurb on Drudge about legal immigration, I did. And tackling anti-white discrimination at the Universities, I did

Anonymous Grayman August 02, 2017 11:28 AM  

DC

the military issue is interesting from a strategic perspective. History would suggest that if the US military is turned inward, that for all of its might and terror, it will fare poorly. AN additional challenge is that previously, military engagements would have been in foreign lands with no real possibility or reprisal against the soldiers homes and families. Use the US military against the population and everyone is fair game. Soldiers are much less enthusiastic when the blowback can literally hit you at home.

Anonymous basementhomebrewer August 02, 2017 11:37 AM  

Grayman wrote:DC

the military issue is interesting from a strategic perspective. History would suggest that if the US military is turned inward, that for all of its might and terror, it will fare poorly. AN additional challenge is that previously, military engagements would have been in foreign lands with no real possibility or reprisal against the soldiers homes and families. Use the US military against the population and everyone is fair game. Soldiers are much less enthusiastic when the blowback can literally hit you at home.


It's hard to say what would happen but for sure DC and various major bases around the country would become fortresses. So many resources would be dedicated to locking those cities down it would be hard to say what the military would spare to actually control the populace else where.

That's where things could get nasty because they might decide to just wholesale start killing the general populace outside of those fortresses because they can't spare the manpower to police it when they are too worried about their own homes and families.

Blogger Salt August 02, 2017 11:37 AM  

Grayman wrote:Use the US military against the population

Use the military against domestic enemies, those who have betrayed their Oaths of Office. Some people will say such is subjectively arguable, but objectively the black letter of the Constitution cannot be denied.

Blogger Shimshon August 02, 2017 11:38 AM  

This is why I can't take libertarians seriously anymore.

"A libertarian President would have vetoed the bill and put the onus on Congress to override the veto--with perhaps a speech to the nation on why sanctions are evil."

Robert Wenzel says Trump should scold Congress. Those who support Trump already know he's against the bill or further sanctions with Russia. I'd rather he do something constructive rather than pointlessly posture and pontificate.

Something useful, like @70 points out above: "Notice the blurb on Drudge about legal immigration, I did. And tackling anti-white discrimination at the Universities, I did"

I noticed too.

Anonymous c matt August 02, 2017 11:39 AM  

A better, more talented, more experienced politician would make it work.

Hahahahahaha. No such creature exists - the only ones that "make it work" are either part of the deep state or do its bidding, not because they work against it. Seriously, are you being paid by McStain or Hildebeast for your time here?

Anonymous Mark Auld August 02, 2017 11:40 AM  

Well said,are you trying to scare the daylights out of me?

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 11:41 AM  

Robert Wenzel says Trump should scold Congress.

Perhaps a harshly worded letter hand delivered to the speaker of the house

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 11:41 AM  

"What Trump has done is known as picking your battles."

It's a problem when you keep losing the battles you choose to fight.

Anonymous a_peraspera August 02, 2017 11:43 AM  

"There is a degree of incompetence at the executive branch today that we haven't seen in a very long time."


It was easy for Obama to look competent because the entire Congress and Deep State agreed with everything he was doing and thus never resisted him, never leaked to the press, no judge ever ruled against him.

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 11:46 AM  

"A better, more talented, more experienced politician would make it work.

Hahahahahaha. No such creature exists - the only ones that "make it work" are either part of the deep state or do its bidding,"

This must be a joke. Trump has the House and the Senate, declares for months that he wants to dismantle Obamacare, then can't get it done. You know why? He doesn't understand healthcare, he's lazy, he doesn't command respect within his own party, he has no ability to think creatively where legislation is concerned.

Obama got it done!

Anonymous Trend Sniffer August 02, 2017 11:46 AM  

President Lesbian would be firing nukes instead of sanctions.

Blogger VD August 02, 2017 11:47 AM  

It's a problem when you keep losing the battles you choose to fight.

As you obviously know, since you keep losing them here.

Blogger VD August 02, 2017 11:48 AM  

Trump has the House and the Senate

Case in point. You don't even understand the most basic facts of the situation.

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 11:49 AM  

I am a Scott Adams sock puppet

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 11:50 AM  

"It was easy for Obama to look competent because the entire Congress and Deep State agreed with everything he was doing and thus never resisted him,"

Where have you been for the past 8 years. The GOP consistently and completely resisted Obama. Not a single REpublican voted for Obamacare....But it got passed. Didn't it. The GOP continually opposed nearly every Obama initiative, often with success.

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 11:50 AM  

Orange Cheeto Hitler is a dummie

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2017 11:52 AM  

@71 Grayman, this is as I suspected, but I have no experience in that gig so am flying blind. Other than visiting the whiz-bang Naval Air Stations on two coasts, the Lower 48 presence of the military always struck me as kind of sad, almost a time-warp from the post-war period, lots of peeling paint and whatnot.

It is clear to me that the .mil served two purposes: The one discussed by Smedley Butler (muscle for the corporate cabal) and as a kind of middle-class welfare system (a condition now taken over by employment in the Medical-Industrial-Insurance-Complex.) Today's military looks way too like a Coalition-of-the-Fringes Make-work program (e.g., every photo I see of uniformed soldiers is stuffed with Mestizos, Blacks and Asians.)

Obviously, the Legions are spread out everywhere BUT the USA, so I have a very difficult time imagining the military being able to organize much more than a large pot-luck dinner, not to mention filling in should the spontaneous organization of food distribution break down under some sort of Venezuela-like spasm of chaos.

Americans can be criticized on many specifics, but I think childlike naivete regarding the competence of the Central Government in a time of crisis is unmeasurably large. The response to Katrina was a bloody embarrassment, and the takeaway was, "be prepared to take care of yourself, but know that those in "Authority" regard your self-sufficiency as intolerable and they'll treat you accordingly if you're dumb enough to reveal you don't need them."

I think that when the crisis truly hits, lots of people will sit, waiting for "help" to arrive from the Big Cargo God in the Sky. Some will see the chaos as an opportunity to take or destroy what they envy. But what we won't see (or hear about) are those who quietly go about their lives, routing around obstacles and performing the Three S's on anyone, private, official or even uniformed, who sticks their nose where it's not invited.

Trump's Admin is a sideshow. We're fast approaching the point where "National Politics" moves to most people's "Don't Give A Rat's Tail End" list. Like a university degree, all signs point to old important things becoming irrelevant things.

Blogger Dedd Sirius August 02, 2017 11:55 AM  

I consider myself a colonist establishing a new nation and culture in this land of America. I'm proactive. Not lamenting an idyllic past that is slipping away, but rather exulting in a new opportunity.

Our culture and our descendants will prevail and we will dominate the next epoch of history.

Anonymous krymneth August 02, 2017 11:55 AM  

Veto would do nothing useful. Correct action is to sign the bill, do as you like anyhow, them win in the Supreme Court that this is legislative overreach, which is a strong case.

Assuming Congress even has the cajones to sue the administration anyhow. Most of Congress's "resistance" has been doing nothing.

Blogger exfarmkid August 02, 2017 12:01 PM  

12. Shimson "There was no point in vetoing a bill that something like 99% of Congress voted for.

Trump does *not* have to sign it *or* veto it - remember the 10 day rule. Congress is forcing the situation with an overwhelming majority, but the President doesn't have to help them.

Blogger dc.sunsets August 02, 2017 12:01 PM  

@72 That's where things could get nasty because they might decide to just wholesale start killing the general populace outside of those fortresses because they can't spare the manpower to police it when they are too worried about their own homes and families.

Everyone's families are large (if you look at the extended side.) I simply see no zeal for gassing entire areas. The Chinese junta got around this by organizing their army by region, so that if you wanted Region A kicked, you sent Region B's army divisions.

No such organization exists for the USA, as best I can tell. Despite the Diversity, Inc. nature of the rank-and-file of the .mil, I don't see things going quite that way. [What I much more feared (and fear) is a .mil of Reaper drones operated by extended family organizations within the CIA, et.al. Organizations obsessed with trust issues easily begin to resemble the clannish behavior of Mideast Satrapies. I have absolutely NO DOUBT that the highest echelons of the Intelligence Apparatus are bastions of nepotism. Keeping it "ALL IN THE FAMILY" isn't just for the Rothschilds.]

Blogger tuberman August 02, 2017 12:03 PM  

Isn't this at least twice and maybe three times Saker vomited FUD? There was definitely those Syrian air strikes, and I believe one other before this?


Trolls like roaches leavings are rapidly spreading.

Blogger Johnny August 02, 2017 12:04 PM  

krymneth wrote:Veto would do nothing useful. Correct action is to sign the bill, do as you like anyhow, them win in the Supreme Court that this is legislative overreach, which is a strong case.

Just to agree with you. See what the Supremes do with it. But beyond that the whole thing is disgusting. We are losing constitutional governance regardless of how this works through the system.

Anonymous DissidentRight August 02, 2017 12:09 PM  

Vetoing would have been a symbolic, morale-boosting action in line with the admin's battles against the Russian hacking narrative.

Blogger tuberman August 02, 2017 12:10 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 12:11 PM  

Given that it was initially passed with more than enough votes to override a veto, vetoing it would have been a waste of political capital.

Yes, it would be taking a stand, but an impotent one. A conservative would certainly do that (not on this bill, but on a bill he opposed that he knew would be overriden), but it's not really Trump's style. He may figure he has a better way to handle it.

I don't think I get this yet, though, maybe because I'm still getting used to the idea that a large chunk of Congress is chomping at the bit for war with Russia.

Its time to go on a domestic policy winning streak.

Announcement from Trump and/or Sessions on immigration in 3.... 2....

Also, apparently the DoJ is going after affirmative action in college admissions. Did anyone, even the most optimistic Trumpkin, think that would be happening at all, let alone 6 months in? I sure didn't.

Blogger Lew Rand August 02, 2017 12:13 PM  

Well its signed, so now we have the opening of the chess game. Doubt he can even challenge it in court at this point.

What are the Russia and EU moves going to be? How will it affect the board at this point since those moves would be against the establishment?

Anonymous Orville August 02, 2017 12:25 PM  

Trump is a "plate spinner" in regards to policies and actions. If one falls to the floor so what, he has fifteen others spinning with the net result that over time his success ratio keeps climbing. And with the increased cred, he has more pull and influence on future endeavors.

Blogger SemiSpook37 August 02, 2017 12:26 PM  

This situation, to me, is that he was damned if he did sign it, and damned if he vetoed it. People are correct that he'd lose a bunch of capital vetoing the bill. Granted, I'm not happy about it in either case, but I get it.

And to the gammas going on about "muh GOP", did it ever occur to you that this first two year period was going to be the most difficult of this administration, based on the folks currently in charge of both the House and Senate? Trump was already at a disadvantage because he wasn't part of the standard party candidate pool; the reality is that wasn't going to change overnight simply because he was elected.

There's a fine line between best possible outcome vs. setting the bar too damned high. Even if Trump doesn't win on everything out of the gate, he knows enough to circle back and press hard enough to eventually get what he wants.

Blogger Ingot9455 August 02, 2017 12:31 PM  

Don't be dumb because of a poor memory, HSolo.
The beginning of Obama's administration was far worse than this, no matter how fawned over it was by the press.
Trying to hire communists like Van Jones and getting spanked?
13 months to pass Obamacare when he had 60 Senators?
Losing the House, then the Senate?
Fast and Furious? Libya?

If Obama had been a halfway competent administrator we would be in a dozen times deeper screw than we are now.

Anonymous Grayman August 02, 2017 12:36 PM  

@DC

Look at how heavily armed the US civilian population is...

the US civillian population is more heavily armed then any army. In 1 year alone enough private firearms were bought to outfit the entire chinese and Indian armies combined. 1 billion rounds purchased in 3 Months

The US military engaging the civilian population will make Afghanistan look like a picnic, there would be 100's of "Fallujah's"

https://infogalactic.com/info/Second_Battle_of_Fallujah


Matt bracken wrote a story that about a scenario as well Bracken: What I Saw At The Coup

Air power can harass, but not control ground. you need boots on the ground for that and that is not easy. They can fortify the power centers all they want, they would lose the rest of the nation (yes lots of people on both sides would be dead).

Oh, and Northcomm already has plans to pull soldiers from one region of the US to deploy in a different region, to avoid family vulnerability

Blogger Michael Neal August 02, 2017 12:38 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 12:39 PM  

Some people aren't happy unless they're miserable. Winning makes them nervous, feeling like something is missing or something bad is sneaking up on them and they can't see it coming. New misery makes them feel like life is back to normal and meeting their expectations again, so they wrap themselves in it like a warm, comfy blanket.

Blogger VFM #7634 August 02, 2017 12:43 PM  

and it wouldn't matter. Congress cannot strip powers from the presidency by merely passing a law.

It would require a constitutional amendment.


Ideally, Trump could have SCOTUS declare Congress' new Muh Russia sanctions unconstitutional.

Blogger Frank Brady August 02, 2017 12:44 PM  

As one who supported the Trump candidacy from its inception, I lost confidence in him several months ago. I have hoped against hope that Vox's continued belief that Trump's conduct in the foreign policy arena was an elegant and brilliant strategy, designed to smoke out internal opponents and neuter Swamp denizens was correct. This morning's signing of the sanctions bill was the last straw for me.

At this juncture, there appear to be three possible explanations:

1. Trump is politically naive and has been outmanuevered by the neo-con-RINO branch of the Washington party.
2. Trump meant well but is being held hostage by the same folks.
3. Trump was a phoney from the beginning and we've all been played.

In any case, Washington is in its full-throttle ready for the next big war mode. There is nothing standing in its way.

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 12:46 PM  

This is why I can't take libertarians seriously anymore.

Indeed. They (and conservatives) always think the perfect speech will sway the people to their cause. Secret Kings. I guess they didn't notice that after Galt's 64-page radio speech, the country went right on to hell. The masses didn't rise up against the looters, chanting "A is A!" as they led them to the gallows.

@49 There is a degree of incompetence in your trolling that we haven't seen in a very long time.

That's funny, since it's surely the same troll that keeps changing its name every day or two, which means it's getting worse with practice.

Anonymous Kreator August 02, 2017 12:48 PM  

Like you said, Vox, the narrative shifted from "Trump is literally Hitler that will lead us to war with Russia." to "Trump is incompetent."

I wonder what else the fake news media, the niggerjews and other phonies are going to try to do and discredit the GE while he keeps pushing whatever he wishes to pass under the table.

"Trump's bankrupt and he will bankrupt USA?" Nah, even the most retarded dindu would blame the Jews first before that.

Blogger Cassandros the Elder August 02, 2017 12:49 PM  

Congress cannot strip powers from the presidency by merely passing a law.

If the bill is unconstitutional, the president's signature does not fix it. The President, current or future, could later disavow the bill as unconstitutional and act accordingly. Then it would be up to the USSC (assuming the president is still obeying the Court in such matters by then) or political pressure to prevent him from doing so.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 12:52 PM  

As one who supported the Trump candidacy from its inception, I lost confidence in him several months ago.
...
This morning's signing of the sanctions bill was the last straw for me.


So you supported candidate trump for two years only to bail on president trump after six months?

OpenID dreadilkzee August 02, 2017 12:53 PM  

The law can always be challenged in the supreme court regardless if Trump signs it or not. And even if the court says it is valid POTUS still has executive power to throw monkey wrenches into the deal.

Some of this may also be Trump telling Russia, I don't like you working against my election, at least if this is true (realDonaldTrump: In other words, Russia was against Trump in the 2016 Election - and why not, I want strong military & low oil prices. Witch Hunt! )

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 12:54 PM  

In any case, Washington is in its full-throttle ready for the next big war mode. There is nothing standing in its way.

Washington was much more in war mode back in April.

Blogger Frank Brady August 02, 2017 12:59 PM  

@109 Josh (the gaytest thing here) wrote: So you supported candidate trump for two years only to bail on president trump after six months?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I bailed on him after he surrounded himself with Swamp creatures, failed to stop our invasion of Syria, failed in his efforts to stop leaks, and--most importantly--acted to confirm the totally false "Russian Meddling" myth that his opposition is using to destroy him. Trump's feckless acqiuesence to the War Party has set us on the road to World War. He should have vetoed the "Sanctions" and asked his Attorney General to prosecute John McCain, Lindsey Grahm, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for war crimes of which they are clearly guilty on the public record.

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 1:03 PM  

This morning's signing of the sanctions bill was the last straw for me.

Oh, please. Do you think we're all senile? This was you on April 9 of this year:

"The establishment criminals are now in full speed neo-con lunatic mode, careening toward WWIII! Trump must go and the insane Washington leadership of both parties with him. We are on the edge of disaster. Wake the fuck up!"

And here's you in March 2016:

"Trump's AIPAC speech was an unqualified disaster. He "outHillaried" Hillary in obsequiousness. I had hopes--but it appears that a Trump presidency will NOT bring about an end to the Israeli tail wagging the American poodle. How disappointing and disgusting!"

You've been "last straw"ing for over a year now.

I might not hate the defeatists so much if so many of them didn't lie to try to justify it and drag others into it with them.

Anonymous Gen. Kong August 02, 2017 1:03 PM  

Salt wrote:
Forget the Rule of Law. It's dead. @44 dc.sunsets is right, "We are witnesses to the dropping of the mask by those who successfully overthrew the US government in 1963."

The question then becomes one of the military. How many divisions does Congress have?


Probably zero, but that's not the real question either - unless you're talking about toy soldiers. The actual question is 'how many divisions to the hereditary oligarchs have?' That's an unknown number which can only be guessed at, but given the mass infusion of foreigners, SJWs, dindus and feministas into the military at all levels starting in the Clinton era they can count on a fair number to carry out their ultimate orders. Perhaps the coming civil ware will start in the military. We've already seen the oafcuckers in action so don't be surprised to see other "patriots" behave in similar ways.

Blogger pyrrhus August 02, 2017 1:05 PM  

Totally correct. The Commander-in-chief cannot constitutionally be stripped of his authority by Congress or the courts...If Trump doesn't fight this, or better yet announce that he will simply ignore such blatantly unconstitutional acts, his presidency can turn into a joke.

Anonymous The Original Arrogant Penguins Fan August 02, 2017 1:06 PM  

Keep in mind, the "Russians Rigged the Elections" boogeyman is also hanging over Trump's head in this decision making. A veto or refusal to sign would surely be presented as circumstantial evidence that he was in on the Russian hacking and is covering for them. Could they push it as far as an indictment or even impeachment proceedings? Probably not. But it does loom large. That is just a fact whether we like it or not.

Muh guess? Trump doesn't care because Russian is in on the fun anyway. After all, what is a war between two tax farms, farming for the same globalist regime? It's all gravy for the usual suspects anyhow.

Muh evidence? Vladimir "Organic Soybeans" Putin could put a stop to this craziness with one phone call to his European buddies offering them more booty than what the Pentagon is offering - and the "sanctions" would be the laughing stock of the world, if they aren't already.

But, of course, he doesn't. Curious, very curious.

Anonymous Uncle John's Band August 02, 2017 1:07 PM  

@ 105

Or 4. Trump is being predictably opposed by those who have opposed him all along, and, on the balance, doesn't perceive value in a veto.

Admittedly, it is doubtful he foresaw the monomaniacal, potentially suicidal, intensity of the opposition.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 1:07 PM  

You've been "last straw"ing for over a year now.

From the studio that brought you THE LAST SHIP, starring Adam Baldwin, get ready for the THE LAST STRAW, starring Alec Baldwin as both Donald Trump and Frank Brady.

Blogger Josh (the gayest thing here) August 02, 2017 1:10 PM  

If Trump doesn't fight this, or better yet announce that he will simply ignore such blatantly unconstitutional acts, his presidency can turn into a joke.

Greetings fellow alt right kids

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd August 02, 2017 1:14 PM  

basementhomebrewer wrote:That's where things could get nasty because they might decide to just wholesale start killing the general populace outside of those fortresses ...

So, you think that they will attack their own supply chain? They are stupid, but are they that stupid? Ignore the certainty that their families would be targeted in revenge: how long can a modern military keep going after they blow up their own logistics tail?

Anonymous Andrew E. August 02, 2017 1:22 PM  

This sanctions bill seems like a big yawn to me. After all, we're going to war with Russia. That possibility was squashed when the Establishment lost the R primary and then the general election. Sanctions bill are all they can do until 2020.

Anonymous Andrew E. August 02, 2017 1:23 PM  

After all, we're going to war with Russia.

After all, we're NOT going to war with Russia.

Anonymous Whitey Whiteman III August 02, 2017 1:28 PM  

More positive news from Trump, for those who care to notice: Merit based immigration bill.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-trump-is-pushing-for-a-merit-based-1501681787-htmlstory.html

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd August 02, 2017 1:28 PM  

Andrew E. wrote:After all, we're NOT going to war with Russia.

From your lips to God's ears. However, Congress can declare war, and there are a great many Dems and Gay Old Pedophiles in Congress who are slavering to do just that.

Blogger VD August 02, 2017 1:28 PM  

At this juncture, there appear to be three possible explanations:

1. Trump is politically naive and has been outmanuevered by the neo-con-RINO branch of the Washington party.
2. Trump meant well but is being held hostage by the same folks.
3. Trump was a phoney from the beginning and we've all been played.


You left out 4. Don't waste time fighting a battle you won't win.

Blogger James Dixon August 02, 2017 1:29 PM  

> Northcomm already has plans to pull soldiers from one region of the US to deploy in a different region, to avoid family vulnerability

Yeah. That's going to work so well.

Blogger Cassandros the Elder August 02, 2017 1:31 PM  

More positive news from Trump, for those who care to notice: Merit based immigration bill.

Maybe a step away from the worst of all possible worlds, but why is replacing America's existing technology workers with foreigners a good thing?

Anonymous SigOther August 02, 2017 1:34 PM  

Generally speaking, Congress can delegate powers and require reporting, but "report back for approval by Congress" is likely a violation of separation of powers and the delegation of duties doctrine/SCOTUS gloss. Especially in a "traditional executive" field like foreign policy.

Anonymous Thales August 02, 2017 1:35 PM  

The alternative is for Congress to pass it over his head with a 2/3 majority. How would that look? Not good. Might as well sign it and fight that fight when it's ripe.

Blogger ZhukovG August 02, 2017 1:37 PM  

Signing this bill is precisely what the GE needed to do. Tsar Vladimir The Great, knows exactly what our God Emperor is up against and would no doubt agree that this is the correct choice.

I will say it again and again if necessary. President Trump is not the future, the Alt-Right is. Donald Trump has never been vital to our ultimate victory.

This is not to say that the GE hasn't been helpful. If anything he has provided us with an embarrassment of riches.

--His election campaign provided us with national and international publicity.

--His election buys us precious time to build our strength for what lies ahead.

--His tweets draw attention away from us and to himself.

--He has drawn out our enemies and forced them to expose themselves. The more the Globalists resist, the more powerful we become.

--He has already accomplished much and everything he manages to do is just icing on the cake.

But remember, ultimately he just buys us time.

As for HSolo, responding to it would be the intellectual equivalent of a romantic evening with a two bit Tijuana prostitute.

Ad Victoriam, Ave Imperator Trump!

Anonymous Gen. Kong August 02, 2017 1:37 PM  

@124.
From your lips to God's ears. However, Congress can declare war, and there are a great many Dems and Gay Old Pedophiles in Congress who are slavering to do just that.

Not really. There hasn't been an actual declared war since the Banana Empire signed the UN Treaty in the wake of WW II. They have to have UN approval now to go to war, and since Russia has a permanent seat on the security council said approval is unlikely. The same treaty band letters of marque and reprisal, which is one of the reasons they've not been employed since the 19th century. That all being said, there's no denying the Gay Old Pedos and their fellow swamp-creatures who wear the D-jerseys are totally depraved and will do whatever their masters tell them to do. Guess the Los Pollos (((Soros))) decided to threaten their supply of Haitian pizza. That would a fine term for the Gay Old Pedos in congress - Los Pollos (((Soros))). Someone needs to toss a pizza on their roof.

Anonymous Whitey Whiteman III August 02, 2017 1:38 PM  

>why is replacing America's existing technology workers with foreigners a good thing


Various different smart peoples in small numbers is much better long-term than hordes of dumb people all from the same ethnic group.

Blogger tublecane August 02, 2017 1:39 PM  

@121-"After all, we're going to war with Russia. That possibility was squashed..."

What possibility?

Blogger tublecane August 02, 2017 1:44 PM  

@124-What if Congress threw a war and no president showed up? Could they impeach Trump for just ignoring them? Is that a high crime or misdemeanor?

Or does the CIA activate its secret tranny syndicate in the armed forces, which will take over like Tom Cruise in Valkyrie failed to do. Then they'll run the war without him.

Or they can always replace Trump with Fake Trump, like Kevin Kline in Dave. Mike Pence, unlike Ben Kingsley, won't stand in the way.

Blogger APL August 02, 2017 1:45 PM  

"God-Emperor is participating in his own foreign policy neutering by the Congress .. "

If the presidential powers are set out in the constitution, and the Senate is attempting to subvert the constitution - there is a defined means to ammend the constitution - this bill doesn't seem to be it.

Then it really doesn't matter if Trump signs the bill, it's still unconstitutional.

Anonymous SigOther August 02, 2017 1:47 PM  

HSolo, how is George Soros as an employer? Does he still pay you shills in blood-soaked singles?

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother August 02, 2017 1:48 PM  

So 75% of the military will be based in Texas?

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable August 02, 2017 1:49 PM  

Oh, please. Do you think we're all senile?

Okay, that was just fan-freakin'-tastic, Cail. Totally amused. Under ordinary circumstances, I wouldn't have the energy myself to dig that up, but I suspect in the current climate I need to start finding it.

Well done.

Anonymous SigOther August 02, 2017 1:52 PM  

Fake Americans like HSolo have to go back.

Anonymous SigOther August 02, 2017 2:00 PM  

I can't tell if HSolo is Scott Adams trying to force proof of his prediction of the progress of Trump Derangement Syndrome, or just another DNC paid shill.

Anonymous Grayman August 02, 2017 2:07 PM  

@126 Yeah. That's going to work so well.

Agreed, i never said it was a good idea, just that they openly war gamed it.

Blogger Nate August 02, 2017 2:08 PM  

"You left out 4. Don't waste time fighting a battle you won't win."

also 5... none of this matters as much as fixing immigration and repairing and rebuilding the US military.

Both of which are going well.

Anonymous SigOther August 02, 2017 2:09 PM  

"Trump has the house and Senate"? No, the opposition Uniparty has the house and Senate... You know, the people paying you to be a shill.

Blogger S1AL August 02, 2017 2:11 PM  

And 6: Sanctions are clearly within the purview of Congress, and this is a non-issue.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd August 02, 2017 2:12 PM  

Nate wrote:... none of this matters as much as fixing immigration and repairing and rebuilding the US military.

Both of which are going well.


We really do have a lot to be grateful for. We probably aren't going to be able to vote our way out of this, but we are certainly getting a reprieve.

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 2:17 PM  

why is replacing America's existing technology workers with foreigners a good thing?

It's not, but the overall bill sounds like a step in the right direction. Get some, then go for more. The important thing is that legal immigration is now on the table for reduction, not just drunk-driving, drug-smuggling illegals. And most people didn't even notice the shift; something that was a hate crime a couple years ago now sounds reasonable.

Blogger Student in Blue August 02, 2017 2:18 PM  

@142. Nate

And the wall. Then again, you did say fixing immigration.

Still, it's great to see progress such as soil testing by Engineer Corp, budgetting, and the like. That amount of preparation for a construction project is heartening, as it probably won't be built shoddy.

Anonymous CarpeOro August 02, 2017 2:24 PM  

As Nate and Vox pointed out, there are a lot of weak sister posts in this thread. Buck up, grow a pair, etc. could be thrown out here but I'll do a favor for those who have forgotten what it is like to fail at first. The instant gratification mentality doesn't work for what really matters. The recovery of the nation matters - some may argue not much but I served and took the oath seriously. It isn't going to be one battle at Manassas and the war is over.

That being said, it is entirely possible that Congress is buying rope wholesale from Trump and there are many "moderates" that will hang themselves with it.

Anonymous SigOther August 02, 2017 2:39 PM  

You mean January 2025, not 2020.

Blogger JaimeInTexas August 02, 2017 2:40 PM  

Trump needs to veto. And, if the veto is overwritten, then send his solicitor general to the SCOTUS and challenge on the grounds that it unconstitutionally usurps Executive authority.
Co-equal branches:
Congress: 1
Executive + Judicial: 2

Inter-state and international commerce regulation has nothing to do with controlling executive foreign policy. That is done via congressional ratification process. But not before.

Blogger S1AL August 02, 2017 2:47 PM  

"Inter-state and international commerce regulation has nothing to do with controlling executive foreign policy. That is done via congressional ratification process. But not before."

Cite the clause in the constitution that says the President has control over sanctions. I've already cited one that gives it to Congress, and there are a couple more that might actually be more comprehensive.

Anonymous Commander Koenig August 02, 2017 2:56 PM  

In Schelling terms, it's a kind of advantage. Even if the Congressional order contains no (constitutional) legal force, Trump can present it to the Russians as though it does and exact more concessions in any future negotiations with them by claiming he has to clear whatever they offer with Congress. In some scenarios, it makes for a better bargaining position. An interesting legal question is whether signing the bill hurts his case in court should he need to send the Solicitor General to have it overturned.

Blogger Dave August 02, 2017 2:59 PM  

Trump needs to veto.

Too late, he's already signed it. But he said the bill is significantly flawed, so that's almost like vetoing it.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 02, 2017 3:08 PM  

@41 Jack Ward

The rules of succession would make Ryan the President if something happens to Trump and Pence. And, Kelly was just made chief of staff, which surprised the heck out of me given how quickly that happened. Maybe Trump suspects something; and, I mean something really sinister.
---

There are several places, including Infowars, who have been saying they are now moving for an assassination of Trump. Recent comments from Al Gore even hint at this.

Blogger Dirtnapninja August 02, 2017 3:08 PM  

Trump is merely one human. He is not a savior. He will not be the messiah, and has a nontrivial chance of being overthrown by the deepstate. Remember, perfect is the enemy of good, and some victories are better than none.

We are involved in a cultural and political insurgency against something that is far stronger than we are and has had 3 generations to put itself into power. It wont go quickly or easily. We are going to lose far more often than we win until we have pushed the system from its equilibrium.

Like any insurgent you take the wins you can take, shrug off the losses and carry on until final victory.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 02, 2017 3:13 PM  

Whitey Whiteman III wrote:Various different smart peoples in small numbers is much better long-term than hordes of dumb people all from the same ethnic group.
I presume you don't work in IT.
What we are getting is hordes of low-IQ Hindus colonizing our computer industry.

Blogger Elder Son August 02, 2017 3:16 PM  

Josh (the gayest thing here) wrote:That, my friends, is clearly a constitutional coup d’état and a gross violation of the principles of separation of powers which is at the very core of the US political system.

MUH CONSTITUTION


This dumb-assery.

LMAO. And now you know why they get away with it. Instead of defending it, you mock it. Probably the same class of sheeple who are pissed at the constitution, and the Founders, that it was not written with a "self-enforcing" clause.

What you had: See Benjamin Franklin.

How to keep it: See Thomas Jefferson.

Proclaiming "MUH CONSTITUTION" is a cop-out to NOT do, what is necessary to keep it.

But I am sure, right after the Great Meme wars have concluded in your freedumb and libertard, you will create another constitution that will be better, and self-enforcing. And then all will be right in U.S.A. Bigly.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 02, 2017 3:19 PM  

@66 Michael Maier
How can Trump LOSE any "political capital" by way of a veto?

That's utterly retarded.
---

Really the one bad thing I could see coming from it is giving #FakeNews another topic to claim Trump is a failure.

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 3:23 PM  

Stephen Miller to the press: One more question.
News bot: Blah blah blah rift Trump Sessions blah blah.
Miller: The president has confidence in his Cabinet.... Since that wasn't a question on the topic, I'll take one more real question.

Ha. Then some idiot started quoting the Statue of Liberty plaque. Seriously. Miller gave him a history lesson, and the guy had no idea what he was talking about.

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 3:29 PM  

Wow, Miller just tore into some reporter for suggesting that only white English immigrants could know English. Said it was insulting, stopped just short of calling him racist. Great rhetoric. Man, I've been wishing for so long that a politician would kick their asses this way.

Sarah Sanders kinda kicks ass too. She drips with contempt for these people. She's making them wait while she reads a letter to the president from a kid and responds to it. Brilliant.

Blogger Cassandros the Elder August 02, 2017 3:32 PM  

Various different smart peoples in small numbers is much better long-term than hordes of dumb people all from the same ethnic group.

Who said anything about small numbers? And again, why is replacing any American workers a good thing? Agreed that is sounds like a small step in the right direction, but it's still culturally toxic and costs American jobs. Good jobs in this case. They shouldn't come here, and the ones already here have to go back.

Anonymous AB.Prosper August 02, 2017 3:33 PM  

dc.sunsets wrote:Trump is a transition figure. His Administration is a signal.

The details are interesting, but largely irrelevant. The future is already baked in.


Exactly. Trumps jobs are to soften up the other side, make them take off the masks they wear and is to buy time for us to get hard, get good, get smart and get equipped

Its not to win or to restore anything. It can't be done and even if the .Alt Right could take over tomorrow and avoided infighting and you know actually ruled, it would be decades before the US would be restored.

That said on a purely Constitutional basis as I understand it , trade is the preview of Congress . They can sanction anyone they want for any reason they want including dumb ones and take away extra powers they granted the White House as they wish.

The only surprise is the bipartisan nature of this but again maybe I shouldn't have been and its good that people understand we only have one ruling party and its the problem . The Far Left got this years ago, we should too.

Anonymous Whitey Whiteman III August 02, 2017 3:35 PM  

>I presume you don't work in IT.

True. And, to be clear, I think they all need to go back. But, I do also think this is actually a big step in the right direction, as it would essentially overturn 50 years of policy.

Anonymous HSolo August 02, 2017 3:46 PM  

"I can't tell if HSolo is Scott Adams trying to force proof of his prediction of the progress of Trump Derangement Syndrome, or just another DNC paid shill."

Or the more likely scenario....The only person commenting here who has a grasp of the reality of Trump's incompetence.

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 3:50 PM  

giving #FakeNews another topic to claim Trump is a failure.

It's weird how hard it is to let go of the idea that this matters. We're so used to the idea that Republicans have to react to bad press, because they almost always have in our lifetimes.

Sometimes I have to stop and remind myself: you know, even if they convince every single American that Mooch's 10-day stay means the White House is disorganized and Trump is incompetent, that doesn't actually prevent him from walking into the Oval Office and signing bills and orders or talking to foreign leaders or whatever else was on his agenda for the day. It doesn't have to affect him at all, if he doesn't let it. The only way the media can actually stop him is if it can convince enough Americans to overthrow him, with pitchforks or impeachment, and they're a long way from that.

So in reality, if he doesn't let it get to him, doesn't let pride make him think he has to explain himself, he can use any negative stories as misdirection. Let the media think you're on the ropes, let them think they're onto something important that's going on between you and your Cabinet or you and Russia, and then go ahead and do your job while they're yelling at your press secretary about that stuff.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 02, 2017 3:54 PM  

Whitey Whiteman III wrote:>I presume you don't work in IT.

True. And, to be clear, I think they all need to go back. But, I do also think this is actually a big step in the right direction, as it would essentially overturn 50 years of policy.
I'm glad for the direction, I'm very angry that "killing H1b" has turned into "must pay at least 1.5x the state's median income.
This does nothing to rescue High-Tech, from the Hindu Horde, it does little to fix the real immigration problem we have, and it does nothing for me personally.

Anonymous Whitey Whiteman III August 02, 2017 4:02 PM  

>"must pay at least 1.5x the state's median income."

Which the low IQ brown hordes have brought down. That really is a kick in the balls.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 02, 2017 4:15 PM  

HSolo wrote:Or the more likely scenario....The only person commenting here who has a grasp of the reality of Trump's incompetence.

Or, even more likely, an emotionally unstable and incontinent gamma loser who desperately needs Trump to be incompetent to validate his unearned and completely unjustified idea that he is somehow superior.

OpenID dreadilkzee August 02, 2017 4:46 PM  

Whitey Whiteman III wrote:>I presume you don't work in IT.

True. And, to be clear, I think they all need to go back. But, I do also think this is actually a big step in the right direction, as it would essentially overturn 50 years of policy.


I do work in IT and we still have lots of very smart white people who could do the work of these very smart Asian people. India would do better to keep their smart people and make competing products, but they cannot because of their own culture/government.

We would not suffer if they were not here. If anything we might actually look at cultivating the talent we already have. I have some really brilliant youth at my church and the biggest thing holding them back is companies investing in them or them figuring a way to invest/market themselves.

Right now companies take the easy way and deprive foreign countries of their smart people so they can have them cheaply. Just ask former IT workers at Disney.

Anonymous Orville August 02, 2017 4:46 PM  

HomoSolo, the only thing you have a firm grasp on is Soros's dick.

Blogger Were-Puppy August 02, 2017 5:02 PM  

@123 Whitey Whiteman III

More positive news from Trump, for those who care to notice: Merit based immigration bill.
---

I've been on Gab and Twitter calling this a half measure.

It's a good step, but it won't do diddly against H1B and things like that.

Hopefully it will put a beatdown on chain migration and anchor babies. The requirement to speak English is a nice cherry on top.

Blogger Frank Brady August 02, 2017 5:15 PM  

@113. Cail Corishev

You are a pathetic brain-dead idiot. My misgivings have been growing for months now, but I've reserved final judgement until now. Your worship of "The Donald" is as incredible as your willingness to ignore devastating actions that contradict promises he made on the campaign trail and pose a grave threat to what little remains of the American nation.

I hope I am wrong in my appraisal of him--but the evidence is mounting that he is not what you (and I) and so many who voted for him hoped. Repeatedly shooting yourself in the foot is not a brilliant strategy.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 02, 2017 5:25 PM  

Frank Brady wrote:You are a pathetic brain-dead idiot.

Gamma boy caught lying and goes ballistic.
Stop lying, Frank. Then maybe you'd have a chance to improve yourself. Once you can admit your faults, you can actually become someone worthy of respect.
As it is now, you're meme fodder.

Anonymous Kreator August 02, 2017 5:27 PM  

Frank Brady wrote:@113. Cail Corishev

You are a pathetic brain-dead idiot. My misgivings have been growing for months now, but I've reserved final judgement until now. Your worship of "The Donald" is as incredible as your willingness to ignore devastating actions that contradict promises he made on the campaign trail and pose a grave threat to what little remains of the American nation.

I hope I am wrong in my appraisal of him--but the evidence is mounting that he is not what you (and I) and so many who voted for him hoped. Repeatedly shooting yourself in the foot is not a brilliant strategy.


The only thing you had appraisal for, was Soros' cock. Jus' sayin'.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash August 02, 2017 5:32 PM  

Frankie:"Hello fellow Trump supporters. You know, I've supported Trump wholeheartedly for 2 years, but this latest disappointment is too much. I have to now abandon him because he has [betrayed|failed|used|fooled] us, and I am very very angry indeed about this latest [betrayal|failure|exploitation|lie]!!!"
Cail: "Odd, you said exactly the same thing 6 months ago"
Frankie "DIE IN A FIRE RAAAAACISS HOMOPHOBIGOT CIS-NORMATIVE SEXIST ANTI-SEMITIC SHITLORD!!!
That was actually just tremulous misgivings, not wholhearted rejection!"

Sure, Frankie, sure.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 5:33 PM  

@39. VD, I'm not saying it's a mortal misstep or something, I'm just saying it's hard to go back on your word. Did you not read the next line I wrote?

Blogger Cail Corishev August 02, 2017 5:36 PM  

It's hard to follow this translation, but there are signs that US troops will soon be pulling out of a base on the Syrian border and turning it over to the Russians.

It's almost like the president is still the Commander in Chief.

Blogger Cetera August 02, 2017 5:39 PM  

@112:
Cetera wrote:Yes, that's true, ladies and gentleman. Trump is only keeping his promises 88% of the time! What an absolute bastard he is! Impeach him! Tar and feather him! Make him pay! He's a traitor, I tell you! He's going to turn on you! He's going to let you down! Who wants someone that doesn't complete 100% of their agenda in the first 7% of his term! The ignominy! The unmitigated gall!

tl,dr: Frank is a cuck.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/06/alt-right-or-else.html#c8154165925057234950

Blogger papabear August 02, 2017 5:56 PM  

Hope Solo needs to stick to playing soccer.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 6:00 PM  

And it doesn't really matter anyway, I suppose, considering that the "tying Trump's hands" clause appears to be pointless theater in the first place.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine August 02, 2017 6:02 PM  

@178. Cetera, dayum, that's nice.

Blogger Ken Prescott August 02, 2017 8:02 PM  

And for all the autistic screeching about Congress somehow usurping power from the Executive, the power to regulate interstate and international commerce is a legislative power, not an executive power (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3).

Blogger JaimeInTexas August 02, 2017 11:46 PM  

Define regulate?

Blogger peter blandings August 03, 2017 9:01 AM  

the power to regulate interstate and international commerce is a legislative power, not an executive power (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3).
the argument could be made that the economic sanctions imposed on russia by obama were not a matter of commerce, but rather a matter of foreign policy, since they harmed u.s. economic interests as well as russian and were expressly admitted to be an instrument of foreign policy. any act that knowingly harms your own interests could not possibly fall under the heading of commerce. that would be a contradiction in terms. the same is true of these new sanctions passed by both houses of congress. they are expressly admitted to be an act of foreign policy and therefore are in fact usurping the authority of the executive branch to conduct such policy. trump made a catastrophic mistake by signing the sanctions bill.

instead, he should have lifted the sanctions imposed by obama immediately, then pocket vetoed the bill, and then commandeered air and cable time for an hour and a half of prime time from both the broadcast networks and all cable and media outlets for the next ten days to inform the american people that the charges against russia regarding ukraine and crimea are nothing but lies, which they indeed are. during these communications he could have also asked the american people if they were willing to sacrifice their lives and the lives of their children for ukraine, the most corrupt shithole on the planet outside of africa. i should be working with bannon Goddamn it.

Blogger Ken Prescott August 03, 2017 10:03 AM  

The problem, Mr. Blandings, us that ANY law Congress makes in regulating commerce, whether interstate or international, inevitably harms the interests of one or more Americans, and thus harms "U.S. economic interests." Your construction essentially nullifies an expressly granted power under the Constitution. It is rather silly.

Blogger Ken Prescott August 03, 2017 10:12 AM  

Everything from setting tariff rates to prohibiting trade in specified goods to prohibiting trade with specific nations.

Blogger Ken Prescott August 03, 2017 10:14 AM  

Oh, and your foreign policy exemption doesn't hold water, else a President could override immigration law by screeching "MUH FOREIGN POLICY!" and import a few million vibrants...

Blogger Frank Brady August 03, 2017 12:30 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Frank Brady August 03, 2017 12:35 PM  

Everyone is free to believe that Donald Trump is an exceptionally brilliant strategist and he may well be—but perhaps not in the way many here seem to think (or hope?). Does it not trouble any of Mr. Trump’s True Believers that so many of his “grand strategies” are indistinguishable from the policy objectives of his Establishment “opponents”?
• Continuing the wars of aggression in Syria (and Yemen) sanctions the slaughter of non-combatants, further subverts the concept of national sovereignty and advances the bi-partisan neo-conservative War Party’s agenda.
• Signing the Sanctions bill against Russia, Iran, and North Korea does the same thing. Worse, it has the President endorsing the War Party’s utterly false claims of Russian aggression in Syria and the Ukraine and Democrat claims of Russian “meddling” in the U.S. Presidential election. This latter claim will undercut the legitimacy of Trump’s electoral victory in the minds of many in the mass public.
• Finally, on July 26, the President called upon Congress to increase the national debt ceiling, yet another betrayal of the principles upon which Candidate Trump so vigorously campaigned. “"To ensure that we have robust economic growth and promote fiscal discipline, the Trump administration believes it's important to raise the debt ceiling as soon as possible," said White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders.

The greatest risk is large scale war and a financial calamity that will have Establishment propaganda organs trumpeting blame (pun intended) for allegedly conservative policies that are not in play.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts