Update from the Sunland
No.894
18.2.19 – 24.2.19
Blog version: http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/
To all,
The follow-up news items:
-- The President signed H.J. Res 31, funding the remainder of the federal government through the end of FY2019, and he signed an emergency declaration that was not available for reading before publication [893]. The text of his emergency declaration was made public early this week. I thought it sufficiently important to reprint the presidential proclamation and the cover letter.
Dear Madam Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)
Pursuant to section 201 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1621), I hereby report that I have exercised my authority to declare a national emergency in order to address the border security and humanitarian crisis that is threatening the United States. This declaration invokes section 12302 of title 10, United States Code, to allow the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of each relevant military department, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to order units or members of the Ready Reserve to active duty in order to assist and support the activities of the Secretary of Homeland Security at the southern border.
Further, I have invoked section 2808 of title 10, United States Code, and authorized the Secretary of Defense, and at his discretion, the Secretaries of the military departments, to exercise the authority under that section to engage in emergency construction as necessary to support the use of the Armed Forces and respond to the crisis at our southern border.
I am enclosing a copy of the Proclamation I have issued.
Sincerely,
DONALD J. TRUMP
The proclamation noted in the cover letter:
The current situation at the southern border presents a border security and humanitarian crisis that threatens core national security interests and constitutes a national emergency. The southern border is a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics. The problem of large-scale unlawful migration through the southern border is long-standing, and despite the executive branch’s exercise of existing statutory authorities, the situation has worsened in certain respects in recent years. In particular, recent years have seen sharp increases in the number of family units entering and seeking entry to the United States and an inability to provide detention space for many of these aliens while their removal proceedings are pending. If not detained, such aliens are often released into the country and are often difficult to remove from the United States because they fail to appear for hearings, do not comply with orders of removal, or are otherwise difficult to locate. In response to the directive in my April 4, 2018, memorandum and subsequent requests for support by the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense has provided support and resources to the Department of Homeland Security at the southern border. Because of the gravity of the current emergency situation, it is necessary for the Armed Forces to provide additional support to address the crisis.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 201 and 301 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601et seq.), hereby declare that a national emergency exists at the southern border of the United States, and that section 12302 of title 10, United States Code, is invoked and made available, according to its terms, to the Secretaries of the military departments concerned, subject to the direction of the Secretary of Defense in the case of the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. To provide additional authority to the Department of Defense to support the Federal Government’s response to the emergency at the southern border, I hereby declare that this emergency requires use of the Armed Forces and, in accordance with section 301 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1631), that the construction authority provided in section 2808 of title 10, United States Code, is invoked and made available, according to its terms, to the Secretary of Defense and, at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense, to the Secretaries of the military departments. I hereby direct as follows:
Section1. The Secretary of Defense, or the Secretary of each relevant military department, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, shall order as many units or members of the Ready Reserve to active duty as the Secretary concerned, in the Secretary’s discretion, determines to be appropriate to assist and support the activities of the Secretary of Homeland Security at the southern border.
Sec.2. The Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and, subject to the discretion of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretaries of the military departments, shall take all appropriate actions, consistent with applicable law, to use or support the use of the authorities herein invoked, including, if necessary, the transfer and acceptance of jurisdiction over border lands.
Sec.3. This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifteenth day of February, in the year of our Lord two thousand nineteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-third.
DONALD J. TRUMP
On the positive side of the ledger, the President cited the correct law. Further, the National Emergencies Act [PL 94–412; 90 Stat. 1255; 50 USC §§ 1601-1651; 14.9.1976] [630]. The relevant section as noted by the President is § 201 of 90 Stat. 1255, which states in toto:
SEC. 201.
(a) With respect to Acts of Congress authorizing the exercise, during the period of a national emergency, of any special or extraordinary power, the President is authorized to declare such national emergency. Such proclamation shall immediately be transmitted to the Congress and published in the Federal Register.
(b) Any provisions of law conferring powers and authorities to be exercised during a national emergency shall be effective and remain in effect
(1) only when the President (in accordance with subsection (a) of this section) specifically declares a national emergency, and
(2) only in accordance with this Act.
No law enacted after the date of enactment of this Act shall supersede this title unless it does so in specific terms, referring to this title, and declaring that the new law supersedes the provisions of this title.
Clearly, the law provides the authority to the President to declare national emergencies based on his judgment alone. Further, the law offers essentially no guidance to or constraint upon the President’s authority. The law assumes the President will act in a prudent, responsible and ethical manner.
In this instance, the issue is the validity of the extant situation as a national emergency with the context and spirit of the law. The President offers no facts beyond his anecdotal statements. Taken in the light of his penchant for exaggeration, inflation and outright falsehood, the BIC’s public statements have no weight; thus, the declaration must be challenged. Just because the President can do something does not mean he should. Sixteen states, so far, have filed legal challenges to the basis for his unilateral declaration, i.e., there is no emergency other than in the BIC’s imagination. It is truly unfortunate that this President has brought us down to such doubt, suspicion and skepticism, but this is contemporary life, as we know it today.
-- The BIC publicly stated he would postpone planned tariff increases against goods from the PRC [844], since substantial progress has been made in negotiations with the Chinese. I really want this to be true. I have never been a proponent of tariffs. If the BIC is successful in realigning the commercial relationship with the PRC, it would be a significant accomplishment long overdue. This little sign of progress is encouraging and deserves recognition as such.
An interesting Wall Street Journal editorial opinion offers worthy public debate.
“The FBI’s Trump Panic – McCabe reveals how officials contemplated a bureaucratic coup.”
by The Editorial Board
Wall Street Journal
Published: Feb. 18, 2019; 11:49 a.m. ET
I respect their opinion, but unfortunately, there are significant elements with which I disagree. Yet, one particular thought kept popping up in my little pea-brain. I ask just one question: what if Andrew McCabe was (is) correct?
I categorically reject the notion and political spin suggesting that McCabe was part of some vast, Deep State, bureaucratic coup d’état attempt. The facts alone support McCabe’s concern. Further, the acting Director of the FBI had an obligation to pursue a counterintelligence investigation into the BIC’s conduct. Failure to investigation would have been dereliction of duty. Based on the public facts alone, I think it is far more likely that McCabe was correct than he might have been misguided or premature.
The Special Counsel’s report is reportedly going to be delivered to the Attorney General next week. Hopefully, the delivery information is true. But, that only begins the he disclosure process. Then, we wait to see what the Attorney General decides regarding what Congress and We, the People, should see. We have a long way to go. As much as I hope the Special Counsel’s report is definitive, evidentiary and conclusive, I fear it will not be so. The best possible outcome for the report is there was no criminal conduct in the BIC’s campaign—foolish, naïve, unwitting and capricious, perhaps. Anything other than exoneration will thrust us into a constitutional crisis of one degree or another. I am not eager for that potential to be realized; yet, as the Spanish like to say, Que Será, Será.
Oh my, how the ironic wheel turns! For all the yammerings Republicans have spewed forth in recent decades and the concerted efforts by Republican politicians to favorably affect voting in the name of curtailing election fraud, the most blatant case of election fraud since the 1948 Senate election in Texas and the 1960 Presidential election in Illinois is still playing out from the 2018 election in House District 9 in North Carolina. Before the state’s election board, the Republican candidate finally acknowledged the mounting evidence of serious election fraud and endured his own son’s testimony against the conduct of his father’s campaign. A rather shady operative working for the Republican candidate organized a broad effort to collect absentee ballots from unwitting citizens, and then cast those ballots for their candidate, contaminating the entire election. The final vote count was close enough that those absentee ballots became significant to the outcome determination. As a consequence, the Board voted unanimously to hold a whole new election for just that seat—very costly but necessary. Unfortunately, the citizens resident in the North Carolina 9th District will be without representation in the House of Representatives for many more months to come. This kind of criminal conduct is in the same bucket as gerrymandering, voter suppression, voter intimidation, and the myriad of illegal and at best unethical election shenanigans.
Now, all that stated, let us not forget that the earlier two instances of election fraud were in favor of Democratic Party candidates. Both parties have history in this arena. This may sound a bit naïve; however, We, the People, want this foolish, divisive, corrosive, political nonsense to stop—all of it, not just absentee ballot mining and illegal voting. No citizen has the right or power to defer her or his vote; you either vote or you do not, full stop!
Comments and contributions from Update no.893:
Comment to the Blog:
“The tantrums are not over. This specific series continues unless Congress stops the emergency declaration and overrides the veto or the legal process eventually stops the Chump. You underestimate what ‘mentally challenged’ people might do in this unique situation. Of course, an emergency declaration with a statement that, ‘I didn't need to do this’ may become another count in a long indictment/bill of impeachment.
“By the way, ‘collusion’ is not a legal term. ‘Obstruction of justice’ is. Also, Hillary and her supporters in the Democratic Party are unsavory at best, but that has no bearing on Chump except that they lost the election largely due to their own manipulations.”
My response to the Blog:
Oh my, you got that right in spades. The BIC’s tantrums continue his very morning, and they will undoubtedly continue for the rest of his life; he’s derived far too much attention from them to feed his ego. One future blessing, when he is no longer in office, we can ignore his damnable tweets and public statements as irrelevant.
You are probably correct, but I give “mentally challenged” citizens far more credit than I do the BIC.
Yes, I well know that collusion is not a crime.
I am not aware of any other political campaign (successful or not) at any level or at any time in history seeking the assistance of a foreign government to influence an election of their behalf. The BIC’s public statement: “Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” [27.7.2016], is a rather clear and blatant statement. I expect that statement and many others to be featured in the Special Counsel’s report and findings. The accumulated facts speak volumes. However, I shall not accuse the BIC of collusion or conspiracy until I see the Special Counsel’s report.
I listened to the 60 Minutes interview with Andrew McCabe; he is far more believable than the BIC, and his words are quite chilling.
Another contribution:
“Currently in Oxfordshire within spitting distance of the WW2 airfield at Bicester-it’s still in use as a private glider unit. Going across later to have a look around. Of course they’re using the original hangars that can hold rather a lot of gliders!
“Yes read quite extensively on NASA’s Opportunity-what an amazing piece of kit she turned out to be and it took a Martian dust storm to quell her activities. I would like to think that another strong wind may clear the PV panels and she’ll fire up again-who knows. Will future mankind venture forth and dust her down? Of course certainly. Let’s write a futuristic story telling the world of that venture. (I’ll supply the feather duster.)”
My reply:
RAF Bicester . . . interesting history. I’d never heard of No. 1 Camouflage Unit; that must’ve been fun. Let me know if you find anything interesting on your visit.
There is always that potential for Curiosity; however, I suspect a wind strong enough to clear off the solar panels would probably carry more dust. Personally, I think future humans will indeed visit the machine, perhaps not in my remaining lifetime. There is always hope. I would love to see that event happen.
My very best wishes to all. Take care of yourselves and each other.
Cheers,
Cap :-)
2 comments:
The National Emergencies Act is inexplicably naive. Why would Congress ever fail to retain the power to end or prevent the national emergency status?
The investigations roll on. I'll point out that prior impeachment proceedings brought lesser crises than other events such as closures of government sectors. Also, the New York State authorities' convictions cannot be pardoned by the President.
The 25th Amendment action contemplated by Andrew McCabe and his team would have been part of their duty under the Constitution. The phrase “bureaucratic coup” is merely another ridiculous abuse of language.
The North Carolina 9th District election tampering stands out for its crude approach. Formal allegations of electronic vote tampering arose in 2016 in Michigan and more recently in Texas. That kind of thing is harder to detect and may be impossible to prove. Any one of those allegations involves far more votes than any allegations of improper registration of “illegals” that have entered the legal system.
Good morning to you, Calvin,
I will not use those words “inexplicably naive” with respect to Congress’s intent in passing the National Emergencies Act. Like so many of our laws, legislators assume the reasonable and considered application of the law by the Executive Branch and specifically prosecutors before the bar. Again, like many laws, Congress took a wide definition in order to allow the President the maximum flexibility in application of the law. To be blunt, the law has stood in good stead for 40 years, multiple presidents, and numerous invocations. What Congress did not (and could not perhaps) anticipated is a president like the BIC. The fault is not the law; the fault belongs entirely to the BIC—he abused the law. I expect the Judiciary will find to that end as well. Congress chose to enact the National Emergencies Act to expedite assistance to citizens in need during natural disasters and such; that is a worthy objective. Just a related FYI: the declaration of war against Japan (and days later, against Germany and Italy) took mere hours (less than a day) to craft, vet, pass, present to the President, and get signed into law. The days of that kind of swift, bipartisan, congressional action seem to be long gone.
Good point on investigations. The prevailing DoJ guidance regarding prosecution of a sitting president applies to only federal law. To my knowledge, I am unaware of any president being charged with violations of state law or prosecuted for such violations. The BIC may well establish that precedent. Regardless, we are headed into very rough constitutional waters thanks directly to the oh-so-great-snake-oil-salesman-in-chief.
I absolutely agree. Accusations of a bureaucratic coup de état are indeed a gross abuse of language. McCabe did everything by the book including informing bipartisan congressional leadership. History will eventually record McCabe as a patriot and a scapegoat. He has conducted himself with dignity and nobility in stark, dramatic contrast to the BIC and his henchmen.
Again, I agree completely with your assessment of vote tampering. Absentee ballots and voting by mail is a distinct vulnerability of our current systems. Convenience = vulnerability. However, since counting absentee ballots is generally manual, it often comes into play when the electronic voting on Election Day is close.
“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”
Cheers,
Cap
Post a Comment