PDA

View Full Version : Trumps Speech Tonight and Rex 84




PAF
01-08-2019, 08:53 AM
Thanks to devil21 for the reminder concerning Rex 84

I made this post on a gun forum hoping to wake others up out of their stupor:


Rex 84:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84

Trump: “I am pleased to inform you that I will Address the Nation on the Humanitarian and National Security crisis on our Southern Border. Tuesday night at 9:00 P.M. Eastern.“

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1082347305699889157


Private Property is the Essence of Liberty:

https://mises.org/library/private-property-essence-liberty


“Constitution-Free Zone” and Fed controlled land:

https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/constitution-free-zones.jpg


https://www.usacarry.com/forums/attachments/politics-and-news/19180d1546908115-picture-thread-trumped.jpg


America first. I am wondering if Trump is going to take this rare opportunity to talk to the people about preserving our precious Bill of Rights and the dire importance of retaining Property Rights which is the essence of liberty. Instead of giving control to the abusive Fed on a silver platter and growing corrupt government by leaps and bounds.

Nahhh.

But I do see more red in my eyes and on that map but it has nothing to do with “republican” values :-O

phill4paul
01-08-2019, 08:58 AM
You're not allowed to aid and abet criminals on your property. No matter how private. Either the owners take care of the problem or the government can. Their choice.

CCTelander
01-08-2019, 09:36 AM
You're not allowed to aid and abet criminals on your property. No matter how private. Either the owners take care of the problem or the government can. Their choice.


What "crime" is it that we're talking about, specifically?

devil21
01-08-2019, 10:52 AM
The fact that REX 84 was explicitly developed with a (paraphrased) "southern border invasion emergency" as the main basis is the particular similarity. Many other pieces fall into place, also, such as Oliver North now being head of the NRA, the midst of a government shutdown, wall rhetoric that seems very martial law-esque (though the truth is that we've been under technical martial law since the Civil War and associated perpetual emergency status since at least the 1930's), financial market shakiness, among others.

Anti Federalist
01-08-2019, 11:23 AM
America first. I am wondering if Trump is going to take this rare opportunity to talk to the people about preserving our precious Bill of Rights and the dire importance of retaining Property Rights which is the essence of liberty. Instead of giving control to the abusive Fed on a silver platter and growing corrupt government by leaps and bounds.

The bill of rights has specific provisions on how eminent domain takings can be done.


nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

A border barrier is public use.

As long as everybody is compensated justly for the takings, it's all legal.

I'm no fan of eminent domain takings, I'd much prefer private funding and state militia patrols.

But there it is.

CaptUSA
01-08-2019, 11:26 AM
You're not allowed to aid and abet criminals on your property. No matter how private. Either the owners take care of the problem or the government can. Their choice.

Uh oh. Time to turn ourselves in, then. I mean, since every one of us can been deemed a criminal by the State for one reason or another. Does it matter if we've been tried and convicted? Or is this for aiding and abetting suspects or the ones the State hasn't caught onto yet? Because if it's the latter, I've been aiding and abetting my whole family for years!

PAF
01-08-2019, 11:35 AM
The bill of rights has specific provisions on how eminent domain takings can be done.



A border barrier is public use.

As long as everybody is compensated justly for the takings, it's all legal.

I'm no fan of eminent domain takings, I'd much prefer private funding and state militia patrols.

But there it is.

Private Property —> Bill of Rights —> Freedom and Liberty

Without those, Private Property being foremost, you are subject to slavery no matter how you try to spin it.

Anti Federalist
01-08-2019, 01:37 PM
Private Property —> Bill of Rights —> Freedom and Liberty

Without those, Private Property being foremost, you are subject to slavery no matter how you try to spin it.

Right, and what property is private?

CaptUSA
01-08-2019, 01:43 PM
Wagging the dog, tonight. I'm sure it'll work, too. Oh, the dog loves it!

PAF
01-08-2019, 01:49 PM
Right, and what property is private?

Yes, top down government is best. I have been mistaken all along. We should in fact offer all of the land to the Fed and ask what they think is best. For our “protection”, of course.

I also propose that you change your screen name to Pro-Fed, since most of your responses to me have cemented that position.

No need for me to point to cases where folks have purchased property for cash, or paid off mortgages, and have had some success in “owning” their land. We should not be working toward that goal. That would be blasphemous on this TDS forum.

Anti Federalist
01-08-2019, 01:55 PM
No need for me to point to cases where folks have purchased property for cash, or paid off mortgages, and have had some success in “owning” their land. We should not be working toward that goal. That would be blasphemous on this TDS forum.

By all means, I would love to hear success stories about people who have successfully kept their land and and homes and property with paying government rents.


I also propose that you change your screen name to Pro-Fed, since most of your responses to me have cemented that position.

LOL - All because I pointed out to you the mechanism in the Bill of Rights by which eminent domain can be used.

The Bill of Rights that is only in the CONstitution because of the ANTI Federalists.

But hey, health care is a right, including healthcare for migrant invaders, and somebody has to pay for it.

What better way than government rents, amirite?

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 03:59 PM
Yes, top down government is best. I have been mistaken all along. We should in fact offer all of the land to the Fed and ask what they think is best. For our “protection”, of course.

I also propose that you change your screen name to Pro-Fed, since most of your responses to me have cemented that position.

No need for me to point to cases where folks have purchased property for cash, or paid off mortgages, and have had some success in “owning” their land. We should not be working toward that goal. That would be blasphemous on this TDS forum.
Your ranting about the Bill of Rights and insulting AF is funny when you look at some of the other things you want government to do:


Companies fire employees for gifting.

Forget Term Limits. Nobody ever looks at records anyway, it would be the same revolving door.

The only solution:

Lobbying should be criminalized, not by fine, but rather very lengthy imprisonment.


Oh GOOD! Let's criminalize political speech and the right to petition for grievances!

That won't bring on tyranny, it will set us free!:sarcasm:

The border must be secured by some means and eminent domain is in the Bill of Rights, I don't support the wall but the wall is better than what you support.

PAF
01-08-2019, 04:16 PM
Your ranting about the Bill of Rights and insulting AF is funny when you look at some of the other things you want government to do:





The border must be secured by some means and eminent domain is in the Bill of Rights, I don't support the wall but the wall is better than what you support.

Why it’s Brother Fed! I’m glad you stopped by to teach me a thing or two :-) Maybe you’ll attend the next liberty gathering where you can sit RP down and set him straight as well :-)

Goooooo Fed!

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 04:22 PM
Why it’s Brother Fed! I’m glad you stopped by to teach me a thing or two :-) Maybe you’ll attend the next liberty gathering where you can sit RP down and set him straight as well :-)

Goooooo Fed!
Maybe you can explain to him about how the Feds should censor political speech and arrest people for exercising the right to petition for redress of grievances.

Get that beam out of your own eye buddy.

The border must be controlled and while a wall may not be the best solution at least it is Constitutional unlike your blatant embrace of government censorship and tyranny.

devil21
01-08-2019, 04:24 PM
The catch to the BoR and Eminent Domain is guess who determines what is "just compensation" under the current system, where no one really owns (alloidal title) their land in the first place? The same people that are paid by the same government that wants the land in the first place. When they say "just compensation" now, what it really means is "Whatever we offer you, shut up and take it or we'll enforce our ownership claim that you granted us and you might get even less and still be evicted."

The original intent of Eminent Domain has been thoroughly corrupted by the current legal system of real estate, compared to when the BoR was originally written. The simple fact is that now the land "owners" have no leverage other than making a stink. They have no legal claim to the land.

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 04:41 PM
Moments ago we got said answer when the WaPo reported (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pence-calls-on-democrats-in-congress-to-accede-to-wall-funding-demand-end-shutdown/2019/01/08/944291ac-1338-11e9-90a8-136fa44b80ba_story.html?utm_term=.e8a352cfe8f1)tha t while Trump will make a case to a national television audience Tuesday night for long-sought border wall funding, he is not expected to declare a national emergency that could empower him to move forward with construction without congressional consent.
The preview of Trump's speech came thanks to Vice President Pence, who offered unveiled some of Trump’s expected remarks during appearances on three morning television shows Tuesday, arguing that the United States is facing an “undeniable crisis” at its southern border and urging Democrats to “come to the table” to negotiate an end to an impasse over the wall that has led to a partial government shutdown.

“What I expect the president will do tonight is explain to the American people that we have a humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border,” Pence said on NBC’s “Today” show. “He’ll explain the need, not just to build a wall, which he’s determined to do, but also to provide our Border Patrol with additional resources, humanitarian and medical assistance, new technology.”
And while Pence did not rule out the possibility that Trump at some point would declare a national emergency and direct the military to construct a border wall, the vice president said repeatedly that the administration is seeking a negotiated solution with Congress.
Meanwhile, a senior White House official with knowledge of the speech said the plan is not to call for a national emergency but to further build a public case for the wall.

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-08/trump-will-not-invoke-emergency-powers-build-border-wall-tv-address-report

devil21
01-08-2019, 04:52 PM
^^^^^^
He may not declare it during the speech but it'll be important to check out any paperwork that comes out of the WH afterward. Any such declaration/executive action relies on the written word, not the spoken word. It's always the written stuff that matters.

PAF
01-08-2019, 04:57 PM
I’ll continue to lean on the side of Liberty. I’m not volunteering giving the government anything. If they use eminent domain and people cheer it on, so be it. Hopefully someday the people will come around and start taking back this government from the bottom up.

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 04:59 PM
I’ll continue to lean on the side of Liberty. I’m not volunteering giving the government anything. If they use eminent domain and people cheer it on, so be it. Hopefully someday the people will come around and start taking back this government from the bottom up.
Like you lean on the side of liberty when it comes to political speech and the right to petition for redress of grievances?

I don't think I will entrust you with the preservation of MY liberty.

Anti Globalist
01-08-2019, 05:31 PM
Hope Trump says something about ending the federal war on drugs and ending the welfare state but I won't count on it.

A Son of Liberty
01-08-2019, 05:58 PM
I don't think I will entrust you with the preservation of MY liberty.

Oh, but you will. You don't have a choice, slick. He's a voter just like you, and his vote counts exactly as much as yours does.


There's the rub.

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 06:07 PM
Oh, but you will. You don't have a choice, slick. He's a voter just like you, and his vote counts exactly as much as yours does.


There's the rub.
Anarchists vote?

I thought that was against your religion?

In any case I won't have to entrust the preservation of my liberty to him because you anarchists will never win an election and if you did manage to impose anarchy on my country I would exercise my right to self defense and set up a government.

A Son of Liberty
01-08-2019, 06:11 PM
Our "religion". lol

r3volution 3.0
01-08-2019, 06:17 PM
For the Trumpkins who want Trump to declare a national emergency, what will be the explanation/excuse if he doesn't?

...something something Deep State, something something drugs in the spray tan?

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 06:26 PM
For the Trumpkins who want Trump to declare a national emergency, what will be the explanation/excuse if he doesn't?

...something something Deep State, something something drugs in the spray tan?
He is still milking the shutdown, using an emergency to build the wall would end the shutdown.

dannno
01-08-2019, 08:13 PM
Right off the bat with a troll...

"My fellow Americans, I am ah-speaking to you."

AuH20
01-08-2019, 08:18 PM
'Expensive wall' Really Schumer?

PAF
01-08-2019, 08:19 PM
Even a busted up clock is right twice a day.

Pelosi voted against Patriot Act. She opposes the wall.

Stay tuned for more anti-liberty solutions, I don’t know a politician on either side who actually worries about “waste of money”.

enhanced_deficit
01-08-2019, 08:23 PM
Nothing new.
PS, no mention of DTS or $38B foreign aid to foreign countries with US taxpyers funded walls (#USWillPayForTheWall (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?529979-US-Senate%92s-First-Bill-in-Midst-of-Shutdown-to-ensure-38B-Aid-to-Israel-and-no-boycotts&p=6731319&viewfull=1#post6731319)).

AuH20
01-08-2019, 08:24 PM
Schumer is a rat fink bastard and it goes back to the Waco Investigation.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR8UbTVIhOc

euphemia
01-08-2019, 08:26 PM
Nancy Pelosi has been nipped and tucked and shot so full of Botox she looks like she saw a rat.

Thanks to Jeff Foxworthy for the description.

AuH20
01-08-2019, 08:27 PM
CBS news gives up.

https://external-preview.redd.it/_fYoPfpfzvmpgl31UDfN3pV2UDjXnYAG0zwP6cvq2L0.png?au to=webp&72e2f770

Anti Globalist
01-08-2019, 08:27 PM
I really do hope Schumer gets the worse form of any disease because he makes me sick.

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 08:31 PM
Schumer is a rat fink bastard and it goes back to the Waco Investigation.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR8UbTVIhOc

https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi0.wp.com%2Ftastyislandhawaii.com %2Fimages10%2Fchuckecheese%2Fchuckecheese_anime.jp g&f=1

Origanalist
01-08-2019, 08:40 PM
Schumer is a rat fink bastard and it goes back to the Waco Investigation.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR8UbTVIhOc

That is a insult to Rat Fink.

https://wallpapercave.com/wp/k5hRxhB.jpg

AuH20
01-08-2019, 08:40 PM
https://i.redd.it/0vforrhc3b921.jpg

CaptUSA
01-08-2019, 08:51 PM
https://i.redd.it/0vforrhc3b921.jpg

How about we kick out the drunken uncle who keeps standing in the window with goodies telling the people outside to come inside? Or maybe we could kick out the nephew who has been firebombing the houses of the people outside?? I bet there'd be a whole lot less people outside trying to get inside if we properly managed our own house.

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 08:54 PM
How about we kick out the drunken uncle who keeps standing in the window with goodies telling the people outside to come inside? Or maybe we could kick out the nephew who has been firebombing the houses of the people outside?? I bet there'd be a whole lot less people outside trying to get inside if we properly managed our own house.
We would be even richer and the burglars would still come.

CaptUSA
01-08-2019, 08:57 PM
We would be even richer and the burglars would still come.

You're right. Better to be poorer and lure them in with free goodies instead. At least then we can pretend like we're outraged. :rolleyes:

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 09:00 PM
You're right. Better to be poorer and lure them in with free goodies instead. At least then we can pretend like we're outraged. :rolleyes:
Better to throw out the two loons AND buy a security system, a fence, a dog and locks.

dannno
01-08-2019, 09:06 PM
How about we kick out the drunken uncle who keeps standing in the window with goodies telling the people outside to come inside? Or maybe we could kick out the nephew who has been firebombing the houses of the people outside?? I bet there'd be a whole lot less people outside trying to get inside if we properly managed our own house.

Clone yourself a few hundred times, if I can place them all in POTUS and Senate and Congress I'll take it no questions asked.

Swordsmyth
01-08-2019, 09:12 PM
Clone yourself a few hundred times, if I can place them all in POTUS and Senate and Congress I'll take it no questions asked.
How will we put him in office with all the Demoncrat voters flooding over the border?

dannno
01-10-2019, 12:58 AM
I recommend skipping the Trump part and going straight to the Dems


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tN3792r4tA

Schifference
01-10-2019, 02:59 AM
The bill of rights has specific provisions on how eminent domain takings can be done.



A border barrier is public use.

As long as everybody is compensated justly for the takings, it's all legal.

I'm no fan of eminent domain takings, I'd much prefer private funding and state militia patrols.

But there it is.

I just figured it out. Treat the border wall like a sidewalk. The property owner has to pay to put in a sidewalk and has to keep it clean and unobstructed. If the property owner fails to shovel snow off of said sidewalk the property owner gets fined. Very simple solution. Legislate that all property on southern border must have approved fencing. Property owners must put in the fence or have lien for cost of fence put on the property. Put all illegal immigration entry issues on the property owner. If someone crosses into USA on your property, property owner gets fined. Government could offer a one time deal to have fence erected with tax subsidy. If Property owner refuses, slap them with fines, penalties, and build the fence anyway for them and charge them for it.
As the creative juices of legislation flow from my brain to my keyboard it even gets simpler. It is even easier than that for the federal government. Legislate that states are required to make sure that the border has fencing and is maintained. Fine the states if they don't maintain the fencing. Have the states deal with the property owners. Don't worry about the wall. Monitor and document illegal crossings via satellite or drones. Fine the state for every illegal they allow to cross said line in the sand. States can then legislate that individual property owners need to do....... and fine individual property owners. Levy fines and take over properties when tax liens are not paid.
Could legislate a new alphabet organization. The BMA. Border Management Authority.

The key to border security is more legislation! Taxes! Fines! Even Imprisonment!

Why should someone in Kansas have to pay for a wall or fence in Texas or California. Those people own their property! Have them care for it and secure it!

TheTexan
01-10-2019, 03:24 AM
I just figured it out. Treat the border wall like a sidewalk. The property owner has to pay to put in a sidewalk and has to keep it clean and unobstructed. If the property owner fails to shovel snow off of said sidewalk the property owner gets fined. Very simple solution. Legislate that all property on southern border must have approved fencing. Property owners must put in the fence or have lien for cost of fence put on the property. Put all illegal immigration entry issues on the property owner. If someone crosses into USA on your property, property owner gets fined. Government could offer a one time deal to have fence erected with tax subsidy. If Property owner refuses, slap them with fines, penalties, and build the fence anyway for them and charge them for it.
As the creative juices of legislation flow from my brain to my keyboard it even gets simpler. It is even easier than that for the federal government. Legislate that states are required to make sure that the border has fencing and is maintained. Fine the states if they don't maintain the fencing. Have the states deal with the property owners. Don't worry about the wall. Monitor and document illegal crossings via satellite or drones. Fine the state for every illegal they allow to cross said line in the sand. States can then legislate that individual property owners need to do....... and fine individual property owners. Levy fines and take over properties when tax liens are not paid.
Could legislate a new alphabet organization. The BMA. Border Management Authority.

The key to border security is more legislation! Taxes! Fines! Even Imprisonment!

Why should someone in Kansas have to pay for a wall or fence in Texas or California. Those people own their property! Have them care for it and secure it!

That's a great point. The whole point of property rights, is to have someone accountable for the things you tell them they have to do with their property.

+rep

Makes Interesting Points
01-10-2019, 04:55 AM
Guys, I noticed something amazing during Trump's Wall nation address. While I was watching it, I was wondering why he seemed to be using past mediocre arguments for the Wall, instead of using new or stronger arguments. I was wondering why he seemed to only mention rare events such as illegal immigrant assaults, and trying to use those to show it's terrible problem. I was getting worried, because I could tell while watching it that the Dems would obviously rebut almost all his illegal immigration complaints as being a very small percentage of what goes on. He seemed to be fear mongering. Then it hit me.

What if, just what if, Trump was intentionally trying to make himself look like a fear monger? The motive - to get the liberal part of the country to think with a libertarian or conservative mindset. Think about it. He just tricked all the Democrats and liberals into responding to him with,

"But Trump, illegal immigration deadly crime is very small compared to the reality of what almost all immigrants are. It's worth having many people be able to come in, because I'm for freedom."

HMM, sounds to me just like what pro-gun freedom people say in the 2nd amendment debate! What will happen when liberals start self reflecting on this opinion of theirs? Trump also got Democrats to actually oppose something which would even save lives in America, oppose it for financial reasons. What's this, Democrats having to use a fiscally conservative response, since costing money and "being unnecessary" is the main downside?
Liberals are now forced to use the heart of libertarianism and conservatism to disagree with a conservative Trump position, even if they aren't genuinely being libertarian or conservative. If Trump had chose better, more conservative or libertarian arguments for the Wall in his address, then the public would have responded with mainly liberal ideology, such as "we need to care about people's feelings above everything" like usual. Now however, people are forced to think in ways that aren't as set in an ideology. This is planting a seed of thought freedom in people's minds that could help people be less automatically liberal in the future.


TL;DR Trump may have intentionally used fear-instilling arguments for the Wall instead of his best arguments, in order to make people respond outside of their set ideology and encourage free thought.

Btw I'm a paleocon and I currently support The Wall.

TheTexan
01-10-2019, 05:44 AM
Guys, I noticed something amazing during Trump's Wall nation address. While I was watching it, I was wondering why he seemed to be using past mediocre arguments for the Wall, instead of using new or stronger arguments. I was wondering why he seemed to only mention rare events such as illegal immigrant assaults, and trying to use those to show it's terrible problem. I was getting worried, because I could tell while watching it that the Dems would obviously rebut almost all his illegal immigration complaints as being a very small percentage of what goes on. He seemed to be fear mongering. Then it hit me.

What if, just what if, Trump was intentionally trying to make himself look like a fear monger? The motive - to get the liberal part of the country to think with a libertarian or conservative mindset. Think about it. He just tricked all the Democrats and liberals into responding to him with,

"But Trump, illegal immigration deadly crime is very small compared to the reality of what almost all immigrants are. It's worth having many people be able to come in, because I'm for freedom."

HMM, sounds to me just like what pro-gun freedom people say in the 2nd amendment debate! What will happen when liberals start self reflecting on this opinion of theirs? Trump also got Democrats to actually oppose something which would even save lives in America, oppose it for financial reasons. What's this, Democrats having to use a fiscally conservative response, since costing money and "being unnecessary" is the main downside?
Liberals are now forced to use the heart of libertarianism and conservatism to disagree with a conservative Trump position, even if they aren't genuinely being libertarian or conservative. If Trump had chose better, more conservative or libertarian arguments for the Wall in his address, then the public would have responded with mainly liberal ideology, such as "we need to care about people's feelings above everything" like usual. Now however, people are forced to think in ways that aren't as set in an ideology. This is planting a seed of thought freedom in people's minds that could help people be less automatically liberal in the future.


TL;DR Trump may have intentionally used fear-instilling arguments for the Wall instead of his best arguments, in order to make people respond outside of their set ideology and encourage free thought.

Btw I'm a paleocon and I currently support The Wall.

You make an interesting point.