DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Congress reaches deal on Russia Sanctions

I know you dont feel Americans should speak english Swish, but if you wish to communicate, you're going to have to stop speaking goat.

so not only do you look like a goat, but you can translate the language for me now?

you are a person with many skills, Eve.

I dont even think google translate will help.

well it certainly doesn't help you land a dude, speaking goat is some pagan stuff right there. lemme find out you be on that druid lifestyle.

His or everybody elses

President Trump signed the Russian Sanctions Bill today.

President Trump has signed a bill imposing new sanctions on Russia, ending immediate hopes of a reset of U.S. relations with the Kremlin and marking a defeat for his administration, which had expressed concerns that the legislation infringed upon executive power.

In a statement outlining his concerns, Trump called the bill “seriously flawed,” primarily because it limits his ability to negotiate sanctions without congressional approval.

“By limiting the Executive’s flexibility, this bill makes it harder for the United States to strike good deals for the American people, and will drive China, Russia, and North Korea much closer together,” Trump said in a statement on Wednesday morning. “The Framers of our Constitution put foreign affairs in the hands of the President.

“This bill will prove the wisdom of that choice,” he added.

Trump tears. #snowflake

1. The Legislation is completely within the power of Congress, and is part of the system of checks and balances. Which part of the Constitution's presidential powers did they infringe upon? Sure, he has the power to enter into treaties...with the advice and consent of the Senate.

2. It was in his Constitutional power to veto it...

But it wasn't in Trump's 'power' to veto it because he wanted so badly to sign a bill into law! He's been waiting with his pen since being elected!

No one, not me, not the President said it was unConstitutional. If it was, the Supremes would look at it.
He simply said "The Framers of our Constitution put foreign affairs in the hands of the President."

Where did I make any assertion that something was unconstitutional...?

You were thinking it when you typed what you did.

Not at all. I was actually surprised you said that and had to go reread my post to make sure I didn't have some brain lapse where I'd say something like that. Never did. My points stand.

Yea, that brain lapse thingy, that's what happened to me on this one.

Your points stand.

Just clicking

How come Trump signed a bill that he said was unconstitutional?

He claims it to be unconstitutional, he's not a lawyer, the Congress, passed it in a fashion that makes it Veto proof, is made up of mostly lawyers. You'd think they'd know what is and isn't.

I'll tell you what I think (can't prove yet). I think he's in bed with Putin and he didn't want these sanctions for personal business reasons so he was trying to cover his butt with Putin.

33% approval rating should say it all...

In his more formal statement, Trump said one example of a problem with the bill is language that he said would "displace the president's exclusive constitutional authority to recognize foreign governments." He said that language conflicts with a Supreme Court ruling.

The language in question is sections 253 and 257 of the bill. The first says the U.S. government does not recognize territorial changes put into place through force, including invasions and occupations of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine.

The second section says it's U.S. policy to "never recognize the illegal annexation of Crimea."

Trump also criticized section 216 of the bill, which gives Congress the ability to change the law "outside the constitutionally required process," because it creates a review period that "precludes the president from taking certain actions."


That section gives Congress the right to review a decision by Trump to waive sanctions against Russia.

"I nevertheless expect to honor the bill's extended waiting periods to ensure that the Congress will have a full opportunity to avail itself of the bill's review procedures," he said.

Trump listed several other sections of the bill that he said would require him to deny certain people entry into the United States, and have no exception for his authority to receive ambassadors.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-...article/2630400

Putins puppet at it again ... ....

Now we're actually having a good, substantive conversation.

Here's the other side of the constitutionality...the Congress has the constitutional right to regulate commerce with foreign nations. As far as I know, economic sanctions are a commercial regulation.

It has also been contested in court whether the president has EXCLUSIVE authority in recognizing foreign nations, especially what Trump is asserting is only an implication of the constitutional provision of receiving ambassadors.

I don't know what Section 216 says specifically. So I'd need to see that before examining its implications. As far as giving Congress the right to review a decision by Trump to waive sanctions against Russia...I don't see how that's unconstitutional.

The true fact of the matter is that Congressional powers are going to collide at certain times...which is kind of the whole point of checks and balances.

This is all aside from the fact it was still in Trump's constitutional power to veto.

Yea we were. Sorry about that.

I am curious if Congress ever limited a President like this before.

I know they have passed Bills on a subject that the President signed or vetoed but were limitations ever before included to tie a Presidents hands?

I can see where this could become something for the Supremes down the road.

Don't let it happen again!

I'm not sure why Trump did this .. hes extending an olive branch to people that will just shove it up his butt ...

It has to be to take that bullet out of the collusion gun ... thats all I can think of ....

Very possibly. He said he signed it out of hope for unity.

Yeah an eye on the business end of an AK. Good idea.

The fishing is good there...
https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4ea_1501895304