Trump Asserts He Can Force U.S. Companies to Leave China

[TheCount]

President Trump asserted on Saturday that he has the authority to make good on his threat to force all American businesses to leave China, citing a national security law that has been used mainly to target terrorists, drug traffickers and pariah states like Iran, Syria and North Korea.

As he arrived in France for the annual meeting of the Group of 7 powers, Mr. Trump posted a message on Twitter citing the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, a law originally meant to enable a president to isolate criminal regimes not sever economic ties with a major trading partner over a tariff dispute.

“For all of the Fake News Reporters that don’t have a clue as to what the law is relative to Presidential powers, China, etc., try looking at the Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Case closed!”

https://nyti.ms/2zhEYoP

[5Points]

Conservatives really love when their masters in government preach the gospel of corporatism.

[CCTelander]

Oh no. Nothing authoritarian about this. Move along now. Nothing to see here.

[Pauls' Revere]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/world/europe/trump-g7-summit.html

“For all of the Fake News Reporters that don’t have a clue as to what the law is relative to Presidential powers, China, etc., try looking at the Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Case closed!”


On it...

https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/international-emergency-economic-powers-act-1977

Congress passed the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (P.L. 95-223, 91 Stat. 1626) in 1977 as a refinement of the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA), which at the time provided a source of presidential emergency authority, as well as wartime authority. Subject to requirements that the president consult with and report periodically to Congress, IEEPA authorizes the president "to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States, if the president declares a national emergency with respect to such threat." Under this authority the president may "investigate, regulate, or prohibit any transaction in foreign exchange," and "investigate, regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit, any ... exportation of ... any property in which any foreign country or a foreign national thereof has any interest." IEEPA gives the president broad authority over financial transactions and property in which any foreign country, any citizen or national of a foreign country, or any other person aiding the foreign country, has any interest, provided that the president first declares a national emergency under the act.


Perhaps he's right. Folks may not like it but perhaps congress should reform this law.

and of interesting note: The Democrats controlled Congress in 1977


Oh no. Nothing authoritarian about this. Move along now. Nothing to see here.


https://history.house.gov/Congressional-Overview/Profiles/95th/

The Democrats retained control of Congress and won the presidency in the 1976 elections. Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill of Massachusetts succeeded Speaker Carl Albert of Oklahoma following his retirement in 1977. But despite their one-party control of the federal government, Democrats failed to pass President Jimmy Carter’s comprehensive energy program. The 95th Congress (1977–1979) produced only stop-gap energy legislation. Congress reformed the process for low- and middle-income bank loans, deregulated the airline industry, and added more than 150 federal judgeships.

[spudea]

He would have to declare national emergency, then congress can override the declaration.

[timosman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47MKGOPP4Zo

[donnay]

Sounds legit.

[timosman]

Conservatives really love when their masters in government preach the gospel of corporatism.

https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/cortez-its-going-to-be-great-open-borders-free-healthcare-education-for-illegitimate-kids.jpg

[A Son of Liberty]

Perhaps he's right. Folks may not like it but perhaps congress should reform this law.


Of course he's "right"... that's the point!

There isn't anything the Federal Government can't do... just ASK them.

There's a comprehensive volume of sht-the-feds-cant-do that they actually DO every single day. It's called the Code of Federal Regulation.

This inclination to check the rulebook every time Uncle Sugar does something... it's asinine... They wrote - and regularly re-write - the fucking rulebook. Does anyone think they aren't going to "find" the authority they need to do some thing?

[Slave Mentality]

Of course he's "right"... that's the point!

There isn't anything the Federal Government can't do... just ASK them.

There's a comprehensive volume of sht-the-feds-cant-do that they actually DO every single day. It's called the Code of Federal Regulation.

This inclination to check the rulebook every time Uncle Sugar does something... it's asinine... They wrote - and regularly re-write - the fucking rulebook. Does anyone think they aren't going to "find" the authority they need to do some thing?

Right on, Brother. If they don’t have the power they just interpret it or write more words on paper. Government is the best racket the Earth has known.

[CCTelander]

Of course he's "right"... that's the point!

There isn't anything the Federal Government can't do... just ASK them.

There's a comprehensive volume of sht-the-feds-cant-do that they actually DO every single day. It's called the Code of Federal Regulation.

This inclination to check the rulebook every time Uncle Sugar does something... it's asinine... They wrote - and regularly re-write - the fucking rulebook. Does anyone think they aren't going to "find" the authority they need to do some thing?


"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." - Thomas Jefferson (emphasis added)

[5Points]

https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/cortez-its-going-to-be-great-open-borders-free-healthcare-education-for-illegitimate-kids.jpg

What do you mean by posting that?

[A Son of Liberty]

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." - Thomas Jefferson (emphasis added)

Read it again. And again. And again. And again.

READ IT until you fucking get it.

(some of you may be here for a while)

[CCTelander]

Read it again. And again. And again. And again.

READ IT until you fucking get it.

(some of you may be here for a while)


Maybe if they read it REEEEEAAAAALLL slow?

[Pauls' Revere]

Of course he's "right"... that's the point!

There isn't anything the Federal Government can't do... just ASK them.

There's a comprehensive volume of sht-the-feds-cant-do that they actually DO every single day. It's called the Code of Federal Regulation.

This inclination to check the rulebook every time Uncle Sugar does something... it's asinine... They wrote - and regularly re-write - the $#@!ing rulebook. Does anyone think they aren't going to "find" the authority they need to do some thing?

Might be easier to just list what they can't do instead. I'm curious, what can't they do? Not asking what they're NOT suppose to do v/s what they actually do.

[Zippyjuan]

If Trump wants to destroy the US economy for several years, ordering all US business to immediately cease all trade with China at once would be a great way to do it. "We don't need China.". The Fed won't be able to bail him out of that one.

1164914960046133249

[Stratovarious]

How long would it take for those companies to re locate to Taiwan , India, this is not 3D Chess here...

And what then , declare the world an economic emergency/threat to the US ........

[Zippyjuan]

How long would it take for those companies to re locate to Taiwan , India, this is not 3D Chess here...

And what then , declare the world an economic emergency/threat to the US ........

It takes time to find a location, build a factory, line up supplies and distribution and hire workers. Some businesses can move more easily than others.

[rpfocus]

What do you mean by posting that?

He means: Stop thinking about the post topic! Look over there! No authoritarian around here, nosiree!

https://www.accredited-times.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Trump-Dictator-e1529214492907.png

[Stratovarious]

It takes time to find a location, build a factory, line up supplies and distribution and hire workers. Some businesses can move more easily than others.


Yer' a genis' zippy, I did not no' that....... :frog:

[Swordsmyth]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/world/europe/trump-g7-summit.html

“For all of the Fake News Reporters that don’t have a clue as to what the law is relative to Presidential powers, China, etc., try looking at the Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977,” Mr. Trump wrote. “Case closed!”


On it...

https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/international-emergency-economic-powers-act-1977

Congress passed the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (P.L. 95-223, 91 Stat. 1626) in 1977 as a refinement of the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA), which at the time provided a source of presidential emergency authority, as well as wartime authority. Subject to requirements that the president consult with and report periodically to Congress, IEEPA authorizes the president "to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States, if the president declares a national emergency with respect to such threat." Under this authority the president may "investigate, regulate, or prohibit any transaction in foreign exchange," and "investigate, regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit, any ... exportation of ... any property in which any foreign country or a foreign national thereof has any interest." IEEPA gives the president broad authority over financial transactions and property in which any foreign country, any citizen or national of a foreign country, or any other person aiding the foreign country, has any interest, provided that the president first declares a national emergency under the act.


Perhaps he's right. Folks may not like it but perhaps congress should reform this law.

and of interesting note: The Democrats controlled Congress in 1977




https://history.house.gov/Congressional-Overview/Profiles/95th/

The Democrats retained control of Congress and won the presidency in the 1976 elections. Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill of Massachusetts succeeded Speaker Carl Albert of Oklahoma following his retirement in 1977. But despite their one-party control of the federal government, Democrats failed to pass President Jimmy Carter’s comprehensive energy program. The 95th Congress (1977–1979) produced only stop-gap energy legislation. Congress reformed the process for low- and middle-income bank loans, deregulated the airline industry, and added more than 150 federal judgeships.
China is trying to destroy us.
Congress SHOULD revoke this authority but until they do Trump is right to use it, the left uses all of the delegated authority against us and we can't afford to tie one hand behind our backs when we are in power.

[Swordsmyth]

How long would it take for those companies to re locate to Taiwan , India, this is not 3D Chess here...

And what then , declare the world an economic emergency/threat to the US ........
Those countries are not waging economic warfare against us to the same degree as China and they are not doing everything else China does to destroy us.

[TheCount]

Congress SHOULD revoke this authority but until they do Trump is right to use it, the left uses all of the delegated authority against us and we can't afford to tie one hand behind our backs when we are in power.

As incoherent as ever.

[Swordsmyth]

If you want to see this power revoked by Congress then the best way to get that is for Trump to use it.

[Swordsmyth]

As incoherent as ever.
Yes, you are.

[GunnyFreedom]

China is trying to destroy us.
Congress SHOULD revoke this authority but until they do Trump is right to use it, the left uses all of the delegated authority against us and we can't afford to tie one hand behind our backs when we are in power.

“The left has long exercised unconstitutional powers. The only way to make this right is for the right to exercise unconstitutional powers until someone forces them to stop. Otherwise the left will take power again.” is about what I took from that.

[Anti Federalist]

Of course he's "right"... that's the point!

There isn't anything the Federal Government can't do... just ASK them.

There's a comprehensive volume of sht-the-feds-cant-do that they actually DO every single day. It's called the Code of Federal Regulation.

This inclination to check the rulebook every time Uncle Sugar does something... it's asinine... They wrote - and regularly re-write - the fucking rulebook. Does anyone think they aren't going to "find" the authority they need to do some thing?

+rep

[Swordsmyth]

“The left has long exercised unconstitutional powers. The only way to make this right is for the right to exercise unconstitutional powers until someone forces them to stop. Otherwise the left will take power again.” is about what I took from that.
The left broke the Constitution, until we can put it back together again we have to fight with the same weapons they use.

It doesn't matter if you were invited to a boxing match according to the Marquess of Queensberry rules, if the other guy pulls out a knife you had better get one, or maybe you should even get a gun.

[GunnyFreedom]

The left broke the Constitution, until we can put it back together again we have to fight with the same weapons they use.

I don’t believe it’s possible to fight corruption with more corruption, and end up with anything but corruption.


It doesn't matter if you were invited to a boxing match according to the Marquess of Queensberry rules, if the other guy pulls out a knife you had better get one, or maybe you should even get a gun.

Maybe you are confusing “governing a republic” with Fight Club?

[Swordsmyth]

I don’t believe it’s possible to fight corruption with more corruption, and end up with anything but corruption.
Using delegated powers is not corruption.




Maybe you are confusing “governing a republic” with Fight Club?
We have long past the point where politics is civil war by other means, liberty and the republic face existential threats from within and without.
A shooting revolution would have been justified generations ago, using a few delegated powers is a much more mild option.

[GunnyFreedom]

Using delegated powers is not corruption.
according to the “Doctrine of Non-Delegation” it is. Look it up, I’m not making it up. :)


We have long past the point where politics is civil war by other means, liberty and the republic face existential threats from within and without.

Every unconstitutional power that has ever been usurped, has been “justified” by existential threats. The existential threat is losing the republic to statolaters.


A shooting revolution would have been justified generations ago, using a few delegated powers is a much more mild option.

You cannot fight corruption with corruption and end up with anything but corruption.

[Stratovarious]

Those countries are not waging economic warfare against us to the same degree as China and they are not doing everything else China does to destroy us.

The article didn't make the case for Trump to declare them and economic combatant, it just bashed
his statement, (nothing new out of MSM) I haven't heard Trump articulate the case for declaring them such,
yea they dump and tariff, so we're tariffing back, I don't see what has changed to suddenly to warrant him to declare
Us Companies forbidden to have factories etc in China.
I was partly basing my statement assuming this was a move to bring businesses back to the US, that's the
most common issue I'm aware of coming out of Trump.
I haven't really heard Trump lay a clear , case to justify such a drastic maneuver, the tariffs made sense,
I supported that, but I don't see anything coming out of China that is a 'surprise' .
We are not at war with China, declaring what countries US businesses can and can't operate, does not
sound like the US that I know, next it could be Brazil, Venezuela , all of South America, them middle east,
Europe.....

Being that as you well know, I'm off the Trump train for his constant boot licking and unforeseen love and
devotion of War Criminal Israel, failure to keep so many important promises, attacks on the 2nd amendment,
avoiding the prosecution/investigation of Hillary, the continuation of dhs, tsa , nsa, fema, patriot act,
nsa ndaa, etc........ I have little trust left for anything Trump does. When I see Trump doing anything
that clearly makes sense, I applaud that action, you know I'm not party bound, I'm concerned about
issues , Trump has not performed as expected.

[Swordsmyth]

according to the “Doctrine of Non-Delegation” it is. Look it up, I’m not making it up. :)

It WAS, that bridge was burnt long ago, now it is just the status quo.



Every unconstitutional power that has ever been usurped, has been “justified” by existential threats. The existential threat is losing the republic to statolaters.

I would agree if we were talking about breaking any intact parts of the Constitution.
But we aren't, there is no new usurpation.



You cannot fight corruption with corruption and end up with anything but corruption.
By your definition rebellion would be corruption, it breaks all the rules of our republic.
Would you call it corruption if the President staged a military coup, arrested all of the politicians and judges that violate the Constitution, and declared all unconstitutional laws null and void and that we were returning to Constitutional government? using a few delegated powers that were done long ago is much less extreme but can be used to head us in the right direction without starting a civil or even international war.

[Swordsmyth]

The article didn't make the case for Trump to declare them and economic combatant, it just bashed
his statement, (nothing new out of MSM) I haven't heard Trump articulate the case for declaring them such,
yea they dump and tariff, so we're tariffing back, I don't see what has changed to suddenly to warrant him to declare
Us Companies forbidden to have factories etc in China.
I was partly basing my statement assuming this was a move to bring businesses back to the US, that's the
most common issue I'm aware of coming out of Trump.
I haven't really heard Trump lay a clear , case to justify such a drastic maneuver, the tariffs made sense,
I supported that, but I don't see anything coming out of China that is a 'surprise' .
We are not at war with China, declaring what countries US businesses can and can't operate, does not
sound like the US that I know, next it could be Brazil, Venezuela , all of South America, them middle east,
Europe.....

Being that as you well know, I'm off the Trump train for his constant boot licking and unforeseen love and
devotion of War Criminal Israel, failure to keep so many important promises, attacks on the 2nd amendment,
avoiding the prosecution/investigation of Hillary, the continuation of dhs, tsa , nsa, fema, patriot act,
nsa ndaa, etc........ I have little trust left for anything Trump does. When I see Trump doing anything
that clearly makes sense, I applaud that action, you know I'm not party bound, I'm concerned about
issues , Trump has not performed as expected.
China has been escalating the trade war and increasing its attacks on us in other ways, I don't think Trump needs to do this just yet because the tariffs are working and he can keep increasing them, I think he is sending China and globalist corporations a message that he can play a lot rougher than he has so far.
But I see China as the number one enemy and threat to the US in the world who has been waging an unrelenting cold war against us since Nixon went there, I could easily see Trump declaring them a national emergency with complete justification and I don't see any other country in the same position.

Trump has not lived up to my best hopes but he has done far better than my worst fears, I still see him as the best available option unless he does something really stupid like signing serious gun control legislation.

[Stratovarious]

“The left has long exercised unconstitutional powers. The only way to make this right is for the right to exercise unconstitutional powers until someone forces them to stop. Otherwise the left will take power again.” is about what I took from that.


The left broke the Constitution, until we can put it back together again we have to fight with the same weapons they use.
...

This does not sound like a sound argument guys, I'd love to hear Ron's take today on this
issue.

Righting the abuse of power and indiscretions against our constitution by repeating those same
acts appears irrationally illogical, our constitution is in dire need of restoration to be sure, however,
continuing down the path of abuse will guarantee perpetual tit for tat attacks, guess where this
goes when the Globalist Socialists are back in power.

[Stratovarious]

China has been escalating the trade war and increasing its attacks on us in other ways, I don't think Trump needs to do this just yet because the tariffs are working and he can keep increasing them, I think he is sending China and globalist corporations a message that he can play a lot rougher than he has so far.
But I see China as the number one enemy and threat to the US in the world who has been waging an unrelenting cold war against us since Nixon went there, I could easily see Trump declaring them a national emergency with complete justification and I don't see any other country in the same position.

Trump has not lived up to my best hopes but he has done far better than my worst fears, I still see him as the best available option unless he does something really stupid like signing serious gun control legislation.

If this is a message to China, good, but if he his dead serious, I think deeper consideration is in order.

[GunnyFreedom]

It WAS, that bridge was burnt long ago, now it is just the status quo.

So corruption is normal now, therefore it should continue? Efforts to stop it are naive? Just accept that government is corrupt and stop trying to fix it?


I would agree if we were talking about breaking any intact parts of the Constitution.
But we aren't, there is no new usurpation.

So as long as we are only breaking the parts that others have broken before us it okay?


By your definition rebellion would be corruption, it breaks all the rules of our republic.

I am speaking to the corruption of the Constitutional republic. Normalization of disregard for or disobedience to the Constitution falls under the textbook definition of “corruption” in that context.

Trying to extrapolate something have said ad ridiculum, is both a fallacy and a tactic.


Would you call it corruption if the President staged a military coup, arrested all of the politicians and judges that violate the Constitution, and declared all unconstitutional laws null and void and that we were returning to Constitutional government?

Any violation of the Constitution, in a Constitutional republic, is corruption. Any attempt to use corruption to end corruption will only multiply corruption.


using a few delegated powers that were done long ago is much less extreme but can be used to head us in the right direction without starting a civil or even international war.

Basically, people have to agree with you that we should violate the Constitution, or we obviously want civil and foreign war. Because unless we violate the Constitution there can only be war?

[Swordsmyth]

So corruption is normal now, therefore it should continue? Efforts to stop it are naive? Just accept that government is corrupt and stop trying to fix it?
You sure read a lot there that I didn't say.
I specifically said Congress should retract the powers and amend the Constitution so that leftist Presidents couldn't use them either.
But until they do Trump should use them to protect and restore America.




So as long as we are only breaking the parts that others have broken before us it okay?
As long as we are using them to restore liberty.
If we can put an end to the breakage entirely that is good too.




I am speaking to the corruption of the Constitutional republic. Normalization of disregard for or disobedience to the Constitution falls under the textbook definition of “corruption” in that context.
It's already been normalized, that's my point, using it to protect and restore America until we can get it officially fixed so nobody can do it isn't corruption.


Trying to extrapolate something have said ad ridiculum, is both a fallacy and a tactic.
I'm not doing that, using the delegated powers is like a micro rebellion.




Any violation of the Constitution, in a Constitutional republic, is corruption. Any attempt to use corruption to end corruption will only multiply corruption.
So a military rebellion to restore the Constitution is corruption?
Why then is the military sworn to protect and defend the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic?
If the states rebelled to restore the Constitution would that be corruption?
If the people rebel to restore the Constitution is that corruption?




Basically, people have to agree with you that we should violate the Constitution, or we obviously want civil and foreign war. Because unless we violate the Constitution there can only be war?
Another pathetic twisting of my words.
I said that if Trump launched a coup to restore the Constitution it would almost surely result in a civil or international war and that him doing what else he could to protect and restore America was a better option.


Just as in the other thread you seem to be precluding all options, you say government won't reform itself so Congress retracting the delegated powers and amending the Constitution isn't an option so what is your solution?

[Swordsmyth]

This does not sound like a sound argument guys, I'd love to hear Ron's take today on this
issue.

Righting the abuse of power and indiscretions against our constitution by repeating those same
acts appears irrationally illogical, our constitution is in dire need of restoration to be sure, however,
continuing down the path of abuse will guarantee perpetual tit for tat attacks, guess where this
goes when the Globalist Socialists are back in power.
I support Congress retracting the delegated powers and amending the Constitution to prohibit delegation specifically.

Until they do we must use whatever we can to protect and restore America in other ways.

[Stratovarious]

...



You cannot fight corruption with corruption and end up with anything but corruption.


It WAS, that bridge was burnt long ago, now it is just the status quo.



I would agree if we were talking about breaking any intact parts of the Constitution.
But we aren't, there is no new usurpation.



By your definition rebellion would be corruption, it breaks all the rules of our republic.
Would you call it corruption if the President staged a military coup, arrested all of the politicians and judges that violate the Constitution, and declared all unconstitutional laws null and void and that we were returning to Constitutional government? ...


Fact.

This may be what it would take to restore the Republic.

[GunnyFreedom]

You sure read a lot there that I didn't say.
I specifically said Congress should retract the powers and amend the Constitution so that leftist Presidents couldn't use them either.
But until they do Trump should use them to protect and restore America.




As long as we are using them to restore liberty.
If we can put an end to the breakage entirely that is good too.



It's already been normalized, that's my point, using it to protect and restore America until we can get it officially fixed so nobody can do it isn't corruption.


I'm not doing that, using the delegated powers is like a micro rebellion.




So a military rebellion to restore the Constitution is corruption?
Why then is the military sworn to protect and defend the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic?
If the states rebelled to restore the Constitution would that be corruption?
If the people rebel to restore the Constitution is that corruption?



Another pathetic twisting of my words.
I said that if Trump launched a coup to restore the Constitution it would almost surely result in a civil or international war and that him doing what else he could to protect and restore America was a better option.

lol okay good luck with your micro rebellion. Maybe if you destroy enough libertarians it will finally restore liberty. :rolleyes:


Just as in the other thread you seem to be precluding all options, you say government won't reform itself so Congress retracting the delegated powers and amending the Constitution isn't an option so what is your solution?
I have already covered actual solutions, multiple times. Do you have a specific number of times I have to write something before you acknowledge that it has been written? Because if needs be I can get all those repetitions out in a single post and be done with it, and that way you wouldn’t look so silly asking for stuff I’ve already told you. Multiple times.

Maybe you remember my detailing specific model legislation in five parts, or maybe you saw the other one about dumping lots of money on Massie and Rand?

Or maybe whenever someone you disagree with offers real solutions you just pretend they never said anything and keep demanding more solutions until they finally tell you to piss off so you can pretend like they have no solutions?

so give me a number. Ten? Fifteen? How many times do I have to repeat myself before you stop pretending I haven’t said it?

give me a number, and I will say it that many times, and then you can stop this stupid “you have no solutions” propaganda forever, deal?

[Swordsmyth]

lol okay good luck with your micro rebellion. Maybe if you destroy enough libertarians it will finally restore liberty. :rolleyes:


I have already covered actual solutions, multiple times. Do you have a specific number of times I have to write something before you acknowledge that it has been written? Because if needs be I can get all those repetitions out in a single post and be done with it, and that way you wouldn’t look so silly asking for stuff I’ve already told you. Multiple times.

Maybe you remember my detailing specific model legislation in five parts, or maybe you saw the other one about dumping lots of money on Massie and Rand?

Or maybe whenever someone you disagree with offers real solutions you just pretend they never said anything and keep demanding more solutions until they finally tell you to piss off so you can pretend like they have no solutions?

so give me a number. Ten? Fifteen? How many times do I have to repeat myself before you stop pretending I haven’t said it?

give me a number, and I will say it that many times, and then you can stop this stupid “you have no solutions” propaganda forever, deal?
YOU said Congress wasn't going to fix this problem because government never fixes itself, that precludes any solution by legislation or by dumping money on Massie and Rand.

I am not destroying any libertarians, I can't even destroy fake libertarians who are wolves in sheep's clothing by typing on the internet and they are the only ones I might try to destroy if I could.

Your severe confusion begins to look more and more like subterfuge and malicious intent but for now I will still assume it is confusion.

[GunnyFreedom]

YOU said Congress wasn't going to fix this problem because government never fixes itself, that precludes any solution by legislation or by dumping money on Massie and Rand.

so out of one side of your mouth you claim I’ve never offered a solution, meanwhile out of the other side of your mouth you mischaracterize and criticize the solutions that you allege I never offered? That’s a hell of a trick. If I’ve never offered any solutions, then how can my un-offered solutions be so wrong?


I am not destroying any libertarians, I can't even destroy fake libertarians who are wolves in sheep's clothing by typing on the internet and they are the only ones I might try to destroy if I could.

you are the one one talking about waging this war of ideas against your enemies. Maybe you should stop trying to wage wars against people on liberty groups?


Your severe confusion begins to look more and more like subterfuge and malicious intent but for now I will still assume it is confusion.

Perhaps your confusion would be alleviated by actually reading what I actually write, instead of picking through for key words to use as ammunition in your war against liberty?

[nikcers]

This does not sound like a sound argument guys, I'd love to hear Ron's take today on this
issue.

Righting the abuse of power and indiscretions against our constitution by repeating those same
acts appears irrationally illogical, our constitution is in dire need of restoration to be sure, however,
continuing down the path of abuse will guarantee perpetual tit for tat attacks, guess where this
goes when the Globalist Socialists are back in power.

The globalist socialists are going start more shooting wars to try to finance their government boondoggles. Its predictable at this point what they will do if they get power.

[Stratovarious]

The globalist socialists are going start more shooting wars to try to finance their government boondoggles. Its predictable at this point what they will do if they get power.
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to nikcers again.

[A Son of Liberty]

Your severe confusion begins to look more and more like subterfuge and malicious intent but for now I will still assume it is confusion.

Gunny's done FAR more for this movement than you ever will, keyboard commando. Back up...

[A Son of Liberty]

Swordshyll is exactly who Trump was talking about when he said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and he wouldn't lose support.

[Slave Mentality]

Interesting.

I have been watching and the MO stands. “Just keep regurgitating the same old wore out trash until the other poster gives up”

[nikcers]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHjA2zgwKww
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHjA2zgwKww

[CCTelander]

From the Emperor's own mouth he has the "absolute right" to do this.

The Emperor has spoken! Hail Caesar!

[nikcers]

From the Emperor's own mouth he has the "absolute right" to do this.

The Emperor has spoken! Hail Caesar!

https://i.imgflip.com/1jf8uh.jpg

[nikcers]

The good news is, if we win on November 8th, these jobs are coming back.

Here are 7 steps to bring back our jobs, and creating millions of new jobs:

One: I am going to withdraw the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which has not yet been ratified.

Two: I am going to appoint the toughest and smartest trade negotiators to fight on behalf of American workers.

Three: I am going to direct the Secretary of Commerce to identify every violation of trade agreements that a foreign country is currently using to harm our workers. I will then direct all appropriate agencies to use every tool under American and international law to end these abuses.

Four: I am going tell our NAFTA partners that I intend to immediately renegotiate the terms of that agreement to get a better deal for our workers. If we don’t get the deal we want, we will walk away.

Five: I am going to instruct my Treasury Secretary to label China a currency manipulator. Any country that devalues their currency in order to take unfair advantage of the United States will face tariffs to stop the cheating.

Six: I am going to instruct the U.S. Trade Representative to bring trade cases against China, both in this country and at the WTO. China's unfair subsidy behavior is prohibited by the terms of its entrance to the WTO, and I intend to enforce those rules.

Seven: If China does not stop its illegal activities, including its theft of American trade secrets, I will use every lawful presidential power to remedy trade disputes, including the application of tariffs consistent with federal law.

If we take these steps, jobs and factories will come roaring back into our country.

We can use the new money to rebuild our roads, bridges and airports.

Manufacturing is also a matter of national security. We need to build, produce and create right here in America.

[nikcers]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n17_EPF8dwo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n17_EPF8dwo

[CCTelander]

https://i.imgflip.com/1jf8uh.jpg


Orange man G od.

[timosman]

USA was in managed decline.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuAZKNEcj2g

[GunnyFreedom]

Of course he's "right"... that's the point!

There isn't anything the Federal Government can't do... just ASK them.

There's a comprehensive volume of sht-the-feds-cant-do that they actually DO every single day. It's called the Code of Federal Regulation.

This inclination to check the rulebook every time Uncle Sugar does something... it's asinine... They wrote - and regularly re-write - the fucking rulebook. Does anyone think they aren't going to "find" the authority they need to do some thing?

Obviously they “found” the authority somewhere, so clearly we should be okay with them doing it. And stop complaining about them doing it, Because authority, you know.

[Ender]

so out of one side of your mouth you claim I’ve never offered a solution, meanwhile out of the other side of your mouth you mischaracterize and criticize the solutions that you allege I never offered? That’s a hell of a trick. If I’ve never offered any solutions, then how can my un-offered solutions be so wrong?



you are the one one talking about waging this war of ideas against your enemies. Maybe you should stop trying to wage wars against people on liberty groups?



Perhaps your confusion would be alleviated by actually reading what I actually write, instead of picking through for key words to use as ammunition in your war against liberty?

Welcome to SwordShillVille.

[oyarde]

I am not a globalist like many on RPF 's. I do believe in free markets . I however have been doing my part about trying to force US companies to not produce for here in china by not buying that junk china , north korea shit for decades . Trump is right about this , I don't need china .

[GunnyFreedom]

I am not a globalist like many on RPF 's. I do believe in free markets . I however have been doing my part about trying to force US companies to not produce for here in china by not buying that junk china , north korea shit for decades . Trump is right about this , I don't need china .

Trump is probably right that steak is good for us too, but the minute he starts executive ordering everyone to eat steak I’m gonna have a problem with that.

[oyarde]

Trump is probably right that steak is good for us too, but the minute he starts executive ordering everyone to eat steak I’m gonna have a problem with that.

Ya , but really I never pay attention to anything he says . Pretty much had him pegged as all bluster from the get go and I do not think I am wrong yet. I almost prefer a president that does not do anything . When they start doing anything it is normally bad.

[nikcers]

I am not a globalist like many on RPF 's. I do believe in free markets . I however have been doing my part about trying to force US companies to not produce for here in china by not buying that junk china , north korea $#@! for decades . Trump is right about this , I don't need china .

Free market is buying stuff made from North Korean slave labor made in China.

[oyarde]

Free market is buying stuff made from North Korean slave labor made in China.

I will not buy it . Cannot say I really understand why everyone else loves it so much .

[Pauls' Revere]

I'm pretty sure he can do it! This short video explains how.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqF6M25kqq4

[Krugminator2]

I will not buy it . Cannot say I really understand why everyone else loves it so much .

It is basically a tax cut. I bought a couple of pairs of shorts for 7 bucks at Wal Mart and a pair of shoes for 19 bucks. I think one of my TVs is the Best Buy brand and is made in China and was much cheaper than expected. Had for three years. Works great. I would imagine my computer monitors are made in China and weren't very expensive.

The cost of most things (outside of health care and education) is dramatically lower than in the past. I salute those industrious Chinamen for making my life better.

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm pretty sure he can do it! This short video explains how.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqF6M25kqq4

I don’t need to go and ask a video, all I need to do is open the Constitution. Can you point to the Article Section and Clause of the US Constitution that authorizes the President to boss around the free market?

[Swordsmyth]

so out of one side of your mouth you claim I’ve never offered a solution, meanwhile out of the other side of your mouth you mischaracterize and criticize the solutions that you allege I never offered? That’s a hell of a trick. If I’ve never offered any solutions, then how can my un-offered solutions be so wrong?
I said you never offered a solution after you made a statement that disallowed the solutions you offered, you are the one pulling off a neat trick by offering a Congressional solution and then claiming that it won't work when I say that Congress needs to fix the problem not Trump.




you are the one one talking about waging this war of ideas against your enemies. Maybe you should stop trying to wage wars against people on liberty groups?
I'm not, I wage war on bad ideas.





Perhaps your confusion would be alleviated by actually reading what I actually write, instead of picking through for key words to use as ammunition in your war against liberty?
That's it, you aren't confused, you are trolling, lying and causing trouble on purpose.

[Superfluous Man]

I am not a globalist like many on RPF 's. I do believe in free markets . I however have been doing my part about trying to force US companies to not produce for here in china by not buying that junk china , north korea $#@! for decades . Trump is right about this , I don't need china .

You can either believe in free markets or believe that Trump is right about this. It can't be both.

[timosman]

You can either believe in free markets or believe that Trump is right about this. It can't be both.

Says who? :tears:

[Superfluous Man]

Says who? :tears:

The guy this website is named after.

[oyarde]

You can either believe in free markets or believe that Trump is right about this. It can't be both.

I cannot say I think trump is right about saying he can force US companies to leave china . I will say that any that do are more likely to get my business .

[timosman]

The guy this website is named after.

How long did it take you to see the light? :confused:

[Pauls' Revere]

I don’t need to go and ask a video, all I need to do is open the Constitution. Can you point to the Article Section and Clause of the US Constitution that authorizes the President to boss around the free market?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqF6M25kqq4

[acptulsa]

I said you never offered a solution after you made a statement that disallowed the solutions you offered, you are the one pulling off a neat trick by offering a Congressional solution and then claiming that it won't work when I say that Congress needs to fix the problem not Trump.




I'm not, I wage war on bad ideas.




That's it, you aren't confused, you are trolling, lying and causing trouble on purpose.

Good God. You've been trailing him around, twisting his words, hurling insults, then trying to play victim cards for twenty-four hours straight. Are you just jealous he has enough rep to swat you, or what? What the fuck triggered you into chihuahuabot mode? Do you think anyone--anyone--wants to hear your incessant yapping and see you trying to bite his ankles?

And then you claim to be an ex-supporter? Are we really not supposed to laugh at that?

Don't your little batteries ever wear down, chihuahuabot?

https://media.tenor.com/images/771a80122af1fa8ae5ad853734f6222b/tenor.gif

[Swordsmyth]

Good God. You've been trailing him around, twisting his words, hurling insults, then trying to play victim cards for twenty-four hours straight. Are you just jealous he has enough rep to swat you, or what? What the $#@! triggered you into chihuahuabot mode? Do you think anyone--anyone--wants to hear your incessant yapping and see you trying to bite his ankles?

And then you claim to be an ex-supporter? Are we really not supposed to laugh at that?

Don't your little batteries ever wear down, chihuahuabot?

https://media.tenor.com/images/771a80122af1fa8ae5ad853734f6222b/tenor.gif
I supported Gunny against the haters and he knows it.
I could dig up the posts to prove it but you aren't worth it.

Gunny is the one doing to me what you claim I am doing to him, but that's typical of you since you project your own offensive behavior all the time.

[Swordsmyth]

You can either believe in free markets or believe that Trump is right about this. It can't be both.
It can be both because trade with China isn't free market, it's a government warped market.

[Danke]

It is basically a tax cut. I bought a couple of pairs of shorts for 7 bucks at Wal Mart and a pair of shoes for 19 bucks. I think one of my TVs is the Best Buy brand and is made in China and was much cheaper than expected. Had for three years. Works great. I would imagine my computer monitors are made in China and weren't very expensive.

The cost of most things (outside of health care and education) is dramatically lower than in the past. I salute those industrious Chinamen for making my life better.

Cotton clothing used to be cheaper too. Whoopi!

when you need a new liver, it is cheaper from China.

[Danke]

I will not buy it . Cannot say I really understand why everyone else loves it so much .


We could bring most of these cheap products via cheap manufacturing here at home if we built factories on Injun reservations. Withhold liquor shots until they complete their 16 hour shifts and the product meets or exceeds the Chinese counterparts.

[oyarde]

We could bring most of these cheap products via cheap manufacturing here at home if we built factories on Injun reservations. Withhold liquor shots until they complete their 16 hour shifts and the product meets or exceeds the Chinese counterparts.

I can work six hours , have a shot ea hour and supervise better quality than a chicom.

[Danke]

I can work six hours , have a shot ea hour and supervise better quality than a chicom.


Ya Mexico is probably better, We just Need another trail of tears to relocate them there.

we could export out Somalis here to oversee them.

[Theocrat]

What ethical, legal, economic (et. al.) wrong did U.S. companies commit by having their businesses in China that gives Trump any ethical, legal, economic (et. al.) authority to force them to leave?

[acptulsa]

I supported Gunny against the haters and he knows it.
I could dig up the posts to prove it but you aren't worth it.

Gunny is the one doing to me what you claim I am doing to him, but that's typical of you since you project your own offensive behavior all the time.

Oh, look. Chihuahuabot's trying to put a lying spin on the past. As usual.

https://media.tenor.com/images/e204cf1cf0b553b029eff649084899ea/tenor.gif

[Swordsmyth]

Oh, look. Chihuahuabot's trying to put a lying spin on the past. As usual.

https://media.tenor.com/images/e204cf1cf0b553b029eff649084899ea/tenor.gif
Great Selfie!

[Swordsmyth]

What ethical, legal, economic (et. al.) wrong did U.S. companies commit by having their businesses in China that gives Trump any ethical, legal, economic (et. al.) authority to force them to leave?
Aid and comfort to an enemy waging trade warfare against us, trying to destroy us and trying to subject us to communism.

[acptulsa]

Yap! Yap! Yap!

I've got mustard, little dog.

[GunnyFreedom]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqF6M25kqq4

Okay, let me try this again. I’m looking for the Article, Section, and Clause of the US Constitution that authorizes a US President to order private free market companies to do.... well anything.


Article.



Section.



Clause.


It’s either there or it isn’t.

[Swordsmyth]

Okay, let me try this again. I’m looking for the Article, Section, and Clause of the US Constitution that authorizes a US President to order private free market companies to do.... well anything.


Article.



Section.



Clause.


It’s either there or it isn’t.
A3S3:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason

[Swordsmyth]

Okay, let me try this again. I’m looking for the Article, Section, and Clause of the US Constitution that authorizes a US President to order private free market companies to do.... well anything.


Article.



Section.



Clause.


It’s either there or it isn’t.
A1S8:

The Congress shall have Power To...regulate Commerce with foreign Nations

[GunnyFreedom]

I said you never offered a solution after you made a statement that disallowed the solutions you offered, you are the one pulling off a neat trick by offering a Congressional solution and then claiming that it won't work when I say that Congress needs to fix the problem not Trump.

I think you are making all of this up. I have never all my almost 46 years said that my own solutions do not work.


I'm not, I wage war on bad ideas.

Like the idea that “government should obey the Constitution?”


That's it, you aren't confused, you are trolling, lying and causing trouble on purpose.

.... if any of that helps you sleep at night you can believe it if you wish, but I don’t really find your pet fantasies as to my behavior compelling evidence to convince me that you know more about my motives than I do.

[GunnyFreedom]

A1S8:

The Congress shall have Power To...regulate Commerce with foreign Nations

When did Trump get elected to Congress?

[GunnyFreedom]

And how does one Congressman Trump set policy without a single vote?

[Swordsmyth]

I think you are making all of this up. I have never all my almost 46 years said that my own solutions do not work.


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Swordsmyth http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=6850543#post6850543)


Congress must retract the powers delegated and amend the Constitution to put the “Non-Delegation Doctrine" in it explicitly if you want to change things back they way they were long ago.



Of all the powers a government will never voluntarily relinquish, illegal powers are the powers they will never relinquish the most.



Like the idea that “government should obey the Constitution?”
No, I said we should make it do so, I just happen to think that tying our hands behind our backs until we do while the enemy runs rings around us is a bad idea.

[Swordsmyth]

When did Trump get elected to Congress?


And how does one Congressman Trump set policy without a single vote?
Congress delegated powers to the President, we might not like that but it is how the system currently operates.
The Constitution says Congress can regulate foreign trade and they passed a rule saying "in an emergency (as determined by the President unless overruled by Congress) You must do what the President says."

[GunnyFreedom]

No, I said we should make it do so, I just happen to think that tying our hands behind our backs until we do while the enemy runs rings around us is a bad idea.

So wait, because I said that government will never voluntarily relinquish an illegal power, therefore you assert that any solution I may have to force the government back on the Constitution, is magically false?

That is, what you are saying right?

[Swordsmyth]

So wait, because I said that government will never voluntarily relinquish an illegal power, therefore you assert that any solution I may have to force the government back on the Constitution, is magically false?

That is, what you are saying right?
You said it in response to me saying we should force the government back on the Constitution, if it's false when I suggest it then it must be false when you suggest it too.

Maybe you shouldn't rush to saying something won't work just because I suggest it.

[GunnyFreedom]

Congress delegated powers to the President,

A branch of government cannot delegate to another branch to do their job. Congress cannot tell the President to make laws, the Judiciary cannot authorize the President to convict or acquit, and the President cannot designate Congress or the Judiciary to execute laws.

The Constitution was written with checks and balances. The Framers gave certain powers to certain branches.

The Doctrine of Non-Delegation utterly prohibits any branch from delegating their authority to another branch.

We don’t get to just ignore the Constitution whenever it becomes inconvenient and as long as it’s “our side” doing the ignoring.


we might not like that but it is how the system currently operates.

That is not how the current system operates, that is how the current system breaks the law. The fundamental principle of a Constitutional Republic is the Rule Of Law. Anyone who advocates for a lawless government is neither a little C constitutionalist, nor a little R republican. Idolatry of the state cannot fill the void left from a complete lack of actual conservatism.


The Constitution says Congress can regulate foreign trade

Congress.


and they passed a rule saying "in an emergency (as determined by the President unless overruled by Congress) You must do what the President says."

Congress could pass a law repealing gravity tomorrow, and literally nothing will change. It is unconstitutional for a branch to delegate their powers to another branch. Just because one part of the Constitution was broken in the past doesn’t mean we need to break another part of the Constitution today.

And your making enemies out of people, on Ron Paul Forums, who advocate for nothing more or less than a government that obeys its own Constitution, and fighting a war against their bad ideas; that’s all pretty interesting.

[Swordsmyth]

A branch of government cannot delegate to another branch to do their job. Congress cannot tell the President to make laws, the Judiciary cannot authorize the President to convict or acquit, and the President cannot designate Congress or the Judiciary to execute laws.

The Constitution was written with checks and balances. The Framers gave certain powers to certain branches.

The Doctrine of Non-Delegation utterly prohibits any branch from delegating their authority to another branch.

We don’t get to just ignore the Constitution whenever it becomes inconvenient and as long as it’s “our side” doing the ignoring.



That is not how the current system operates, that is how the current system breaks the law. The fundamental principle of a Constitutional Republic is the Rule Of Law. Anyone who advocates for a lawless government is neither a little C constitutionalist, nor a little R republican. Idolatry of the state cannot fill the void left from a complete lack of actual conservatism.



Congress.



Congress could pass a law repealing gravity tomorrow, and literally nothing will change. It is unconstitutional for a branch to delegate their powers to another branch. Just because one part of the Constitution was broken in the past doesn’t mean we need to break another part of the Constitution today.

And your making enemies out of people, on Ron Paul Forums, who advocate for nothing more or less than a government that obeys its own Constitution, and fighting a war against their bad ideas; that’s all pretty interesting.
I'm not making enemies out of people, on Ron Paul Forums, who advocate for nothing more or less than a government that obeys its own Constitution, and fighting a war against their bad ideas.

You are the one who seems to want escalate this.

I fight bad ideas and I defend myself from those who make themselves my enemies.

I advocate for Congress to retract the emergency powers and amend the Constitution to prohibit any such delegation in the future but until they do the President must use all powers available to him to defend and restore America because our enemies use all of the to destroy us.

[GunnyFreedom]

You said it in response to me saying we should force the government back on the Constitution, if it's false when I suggest it then it must be false when you suggest it too.

Maybe you shouldn't rush to saying something won't work just because I suggest it.

I said that you cannot defeat corruption by enabling more corruption. This is a fundamental principle of existence that is a component of my Christian ontology. I have pored over these ideas for 23 years. I assure you that I have not “rushed” into them.

You cannot defeat evil with evil. There is literally no justification you can possibly provide that will change my opinion on that.

It’s like when Ron Paul suggested applying the Golden Rule to foreign policy and a bunch of alleged Christians booed him.

The difference here is you think you are being pragmatic and I know I am operating on principle.

You cannot stop tyranny by becoming a tyrant. Has never happened. Will never happen.

Its a basic law of the universe. Like Karma, or reaping and sowing.

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm not making enemies out of people, on Ron Paul Forums, who advocate for nothing more or less than a government that obeys its own Constitution, and fighting a war against their bad ideas.

You are the one who seems to want escalate this.

I fight bad ideas and I defend myself from those who make themselves my enemies.

I advocate for Congress to retract the emergency powers and amend the Constitution to prohibit any such delegation in the future but until they do the President must use all powers available to him to defend and restore America because our enemies use all of the to destroy us.

When a law is unconstitutional, you don’t wait for Congress to repeal it before you obey the Constitution.

[Swordsmyth]

I said that you cannot defeat corruption by enabling more corruption. This is a fundamental principle of existence that is a component of my Christian ontology. I have pored over these ideas for 23 years. I assure you that I have not “rushed” into them.

You cannot defeat evil with evil. There is literally no justification you can possibly provide that will change my opinion on that.

It’s like when Ron Paul suggested applying the Golden Rule to foreign policy and a bunch of alleged Christians booed him.

The difference here is you think you are being pragmatic and I know I am operating on principle.

You cannot stop tyranny by becoming a tyrant. Has never happened. Will never happen.

Its a basic law of the universe. Like Karma, or reaping and sowing.
NO, you responded to me saying Congress should retract the emergency powers and amend the Constitution and said it wouldn't work.

But to answer the different subject you are trying to change to I will just say what I said before: It isn't tyranny to use the delegated powers that have already been delegated to protect and restore America.

The Constitution is good and important but it isn't holy writ, it could have been written to give the powers to the President and then him using them would only be tyrannical if he misused them just as it is with Congress, our system is broken and currently gives the President those powers so it isn't tyranny for him to use them unless he misuses them.

If Congress passed a law to retract them and the President vetoed it that would be corrupt because it would be opposing a return to the intent of the Constitution but there is no moral or ethical bar to using the powers if the Constitution gave them to him or if they have already been delegated.

[Swordsmyth]

When a law is unconstitutional, you don’t wait for Congress to repeal it before you obey the Constitution.
That isn't true unless there is something basically wrong with the law, if you refuse to use it while the other side still uses it you have not repaired the Constitution, you have strengthened its enemies.

[GunnyFreedom]

NO, you responded to me saying Congress should retract the emergency powers and amend the Constitution and said it wouldn't work.

I’m not sure where this fantasy of yours came from, but it certainly wasn’t me.


But to answer the different subject you are trying to change to I will just say what I said before: It isn't tyranny to use the delegated powers that have already been delegated to protect and restore America.

I disagree. Any time the government disobeys the Constitution, that is tyranny against We the People.


The Constitution is good and important but it isn't holy writ, it could have been written to give the powers to the President and then him using them would only be tyrannical if he misused them just as it is with Congress, our system is broken and currently gives the President those powers so it isn't tyranny for him to use them unless he misuses them.

Coulda Woulda Shoulda..... but they didn’t.


If Congress passed a law to retract them and the President vetoed it that would be corrupt because it would be opposing a return to the intent of the Constitution but there is no moral or ethical bar to using the powers if the Constitution gave them to him or if they have already been delegated.

It is desperately unethical and immoral for any person who has sworn the Oath of Office, to disobey the Constitution.

[GunnyFreedom]

When a law is unconstitutional, you don’t wait for Congress to repeal it before you obey the Constitution.


That isn't true unless there is something basically wrong with the law, if you refuse to use it while the other side still uses it you have not repaired the Constitution, you have strengthened its enemies.

if a law is unconstitutional, then there is something basically wrong with that law. It is unconstitutional.

“Obama did it” is not a valid reason to promote corruption.

[Swordsmyth]

GunnyFreedom.

Your problem is that you are still pretending that we live under a government that is run according to the Constitution, we don't.
Your position would be as foolish as insisting that we go through the legal system to deal with the other side if a civil war broke out.
Until we restore Constitutional limitations we can't afford to play by the rules that the other side ignores.

[GunnyFreedom]

@GunnyFreedom (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=8481).

Your problem is that you are still pretending that we live under a government that is run according to the Constitution, we don't.

If we lived in a nation that respected the Constitution, then I wouldn’t be involved in politics.

I am only involved in politics to fight to restore the Constitutional order.

This belies your premise about what you imagine my beliefs to be.


Your position would be as foolish as insisting that we go through the legal system to deal with the other side if a civil war broke out.

Let me clarify what I believe you are saying here.

My position, that “government should obey the Constitution,” is foolish, because government does not currently obey the Constitution, and obeying the Constitution would give the “other side” an unfair advantage in their disobedience of the Constitution. And the best way to fight all of this, is to disobey the Constitution even harder?


Until we restore Constitutional limitations we can't afford to play by the rules that the other side ignores.

so basically we cannot afford to obey the Constitution, until everyone obeys the Constitution.

Which of course means we will never obey the Constitution.

Almost as if by plan.

[GunnyFreedom]

https://youtu.be/ycm2iLba6iY

may be a needed refresher.

[Swordsmyth]

If we lived in a nation that respected the Constitution, then I wouldn’t be involved in politics.

I am only involved in politics to fight to restore the Constitutional order.

This belies your premise about what you imagine my beliefs to be.



Let me clarify what I believe you are saying here.

My position, that “government should obey the Constitution,” is foolish, because government does not currently obey the Constitution, and obeying the Constitution would give the “other side” an unfair advantage in their disobedience of the Constitution. And the best way to fight all of this, is to disobey the Constitution even harder?



so basically we cannot afford to obey the Constitution, until everyone obeys the Constitution.

Which of course means we will never obey the Constitution.

Almost as if by plan.
It absolutely does NOT mean that nobody will ever obey the Constitution.
Your logic would say that we mustn't kill the enemy in a war if we want peace because you don't kill people in peacetime and if we kill the enemy there will never be peace.
It would also say that the States couldn't ever adopt the Constitution because they weren't already using it. (but somehow they managed to)

[GunnyFreedom]

The very concept that “we have to break the Constitution to obey the Constitution” is almost the prototypical example of Orwellian Doublethink.

[Swordsmyth]

https://youtu.be/ycm2iLba6iY

may be a needed refresher.
I understand completely but it is defunct.
We should restore it, that would require laws be passed retracting the delegated powers and preferably a Constitutional Amendment to enshrine nondelegation in stone but using the delegated powers in the mean time does nothing to prevent either of those.

[Swordsmyth]

The very concept that “we have to break the Constitution to obey the Constitution” is almost the prototypical example of Orwellian Doublethink.
You cant break what is already broken.

Can you break an egg that is already smashed?

[GunnyFreedom]

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

and

Disobeying the Constitution is Obeying It.

[GunnyFreedom]

You cant break what is already broken.

Can you break an egg that is already smashed?

So let’s break it MORE!

And call out anyone who objects to breaking it more, as the enemy. In this war against bad ideas of yours.

[Swordsmyth]

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

and

Disobeying the Constitution is Obeying It.
I never said it was obeying it, I said it was long destroyed and we had to restore it.

[Swordsmyth]

So let’s break it MORE!

And call out anyone who objects to breaking it more, as the enemy. In this war against bad ideas of yours.
It isn't breaking it more and I never called you out as an enemy for disagreeing with me. (I did express an opinion about your motives only after you constantly used lies and sophistry in out debate just as you are doing now.)

[tfurrh]

Great Selfie!

That's a someone-elsie

[Swordsmyth]

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

and

Disobeying the Constitution is Obeying It.
You are the one claiming that we are living under the Constitution when we are not, that is saying "war is peace".

[Swordsmyth]

That's a someone-elsie
It seems like him to me.
But if it isn't then it is a picture of a hallucination in his mind.

[GunnyFreedom]

You don’t get to paint me with your own behavior. I will gladly draw out the logic of any statement I have made for you and demonstrate the clear line of reasoning from premise through argument to conclusion. Go ahead, point out my “sophistry.” This should be interesting. :smirking:

[GunnyFreedom]

You are the one claiming that we are living under the Constitution when we are not, that is saying "war is peace".

Again, I will repeat for you, if we were “living under the Constitution” then I would not be involved in politics.

Now.

You give me a number times that I have to repeat that statement before you drop that particular lie, thank you ever so kindly. :)

[Swordsmyth]

You don’t get to paint me with your own behavior. I will gladly draw out the logic of any statement I have made for you and demonstrate the clear line of reasoning from premise through argument to conclusion. Go ahead, point out my “sophistry.” This should be interesting. :smirking:
There are too many cases so I will just point out the one that is most recent.
You claimed I said disobeying the Constitution was obeying it, I never said any such thing.

I said the egg was well and truly smashed and because Congress passed multiple laws, Presidents used them and courts upheld them, I said we had to restore the Constitution before we could go back to obeying it.

[CCTelander]

The very concept that “we have to break the Constitution to obey the Constitution” is almost the prototypical example of Orwellian Doublethink.


He does a lot of that.

[Swordsmyth]

Again, I will repeat for you, if we were “living under the Constitution” then I would not be involved in politics.

Now.

You give me a number times that I have to repeat that statement before you drop that particular lie, thank you ever so kindly. :)
But you insist that we must abide by it as if we lived under it, your positions don't match your words, pardon me if I find positions and actions more compelling than words.

[Swordsmyth]

He does a lot of that.
The veracity of that statement can be best judged by the fact that I never said what Gunny claims I said.

[GunnyFreedom]

There are too many cases so I will just point out the one that is most recent.
You claimed I said disobeying the Constitution was obeying it, I never said any such thing.

Your position is that these unconstitutional powers should be exercised until Congress repeals them, and that the only way to restore Constitutional government is to continue to exercise these unconstitutional authorities because the other side does it.

From your chain of logic you provided a “path” to Constitutional government in the future, that starts with disobeying the Constitution today.


I said the egg was well and truly smashed and because Congress passed multiple laws, Presidents used them and courts upheld them, I said we had to restore the Constitution before we could go back to obeying it.

You restore the Constitution BY obeying it. Not by disobeying it. That’s not how anything works.

[CCTelander]

The veracity of that statement can be best judged by the fact that I never said what Gunny claims I said.


That you did not say those exact words cannot be denied. You did not.

That the words you DID say amount to precisely the same thing in effect and practice however also cannot be denied. No doubt you will attempt, through obfuscation and sophistry, to deny it nonetheless.

[GunnyFreedom]

I understand completely but it is defunct.
We should restore it, that would require laws be passed retracting the delegated powers and preferably a Constitutional Amendment to enshrine nondelegation in stone but using the delegated powers in the mean time does nothing to prevent either of those.

The non delegation doctrine is already in the Constitution. No Amendment is necessary.

And the Constitution is only “defunct” for as long as government disobeys it.

[Swordsmyth]

Your position is that these unconstitutional powers should be exercised until Congress repeals them, and that the only way to restore Constitutional government is to continue to exercise these unconstitutional authorities because the other side does it.

From your chain of logic you provided a “path” to Constitutional government in the future, that starts with disobeying the Constitution today.



You restore the Constitution BY obeying it. Not by disobeying it. That’s not how anything works.
Do you win a war by killing or by laying down your arms?

You restore the Constitution by repealing the laws that break it and amending it so that the loopholes and ambiguities are removed so that they can't be passed again, using the delegated powers does nothing to prevent that.

[Swordsmyth]

The non delegation doctrine is already in the Constitution. No Amendment is necessary.

And the Constitution is only “defunct” for as long as government disobeys it.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it specifically say that Congress may not delegate powers to the President, it is merely inferred from the assignment of powers to Congress.

The entire government is and has been disobeying it and Trump not using the delegated powers won't make nondelegation any less defunct, the next President will happily use all of the delegated powers and Congress and the courts will happily allow it.

[timosman]

The non delegation doctrine is already in the Constitution. No Amendment is necessary.

And the Constitution is only “defunct” for as long as government disobeys it.

So what's you plan, genius? Are you going to retaliate? :tears:

[Swordsmyth]

That you did not say those exact words cannot be denied. You did not.

That the words you DID say amount to precisely the same thing in effect and practice however also cannot be denied. No doubt you will attempt, through obfuscation and sophistry, to deny it nonetheless.
What I said was entirely different and I have made that clear in detail.

If I said go kill that Chinese soldier because we are at war that is nothing like saying that war is peace or that murder is self defense.

I never once claimed that using the delegated powers was following the Constitution and I repeatedly stated that we weren't living under the Constitution.

You are the ones using obfuscation and sophistry.

[Swordsmyth]

So what's you plan, genius? Are you going to retaliate? :tears:
His plan is to wear boxing gloves at a gun fight because he was invited to a boxing match and then hope that the guys shooting at him will be inspired to follow his example.

[nikcers]

The non delegation doctrine is already in the Constitution. No Amendment is necessary.

And the Constitution is only “defunct” for as long as government disobeys it.

Delegation is permitted only if Congress prescribes clear and adequate standards to guide an executive agency in making the policy. ...


Congress has delegated at least 136 distinct statutory emergency powers to the President, each available upon the declaration of an emergency.

[GunnyFreedom]

Do you win a war by killing or by laying down your arms?

violating the Constitution is not “arms” it’s tyranny.


You restore the Constitution by repealing the laws that break it and amending it so that the loopholes and ambiguities are removed so that they can't be passed again,

Only those laws Pursuant to the text of the Constitution are the Supreme Law of the Land. Any Act of Congress not pursuant to the text of the Constitution is not Supreme Law. Any Act not covered under Article 6 Supremacy is null and void, according to the man who wrote the Constitution.

You don’t wait until an unconstitutional law is repealed because you start obeying the Constitution, you obey the Constitution FIRST. When a public official takes the Oath they swear to uphold the Constitution, not to obey Congress.


using the delegated powers does nothing to prevent that.

Exercising unconstitutional powers does, in fact, prevent a government from obeying the Constitution.

[timosman]

His plan is to wear boxing gloves at a gun fight because he was invited to a boxing match and then hope that the guys shooting at him will be inspired to follow his example.

I am starting to think he might be a chinese troll. :tears:

[GunnyFreedom]

I am starting to think he might be a chinese troll. :tears:

Does that bizarre ideation make it easier to dismiss what I’m saying?

[nikcers]

The Delegation doctrine is a principle limiting Congress's ability to transfer its legislative power to another governmental branch, especially the executive branch. This is based on the separation-of-powers concept. It says that the power to declare whether or not there shall be a law, to determine the general policy to be achieved by the law, and to fix the limits within the limits within which the law shall operate is vested by the constitution in the legislature and it shall not be delegated. Therefore any statute conferring excessive legislative power is invalid because it is unconstitutional to delegate powers. Delegation is permitted only if Congress prescribes clear and adequate standards to guide an executive agency in making the policy.

[GunnyFreedom]

Delegation is permitted only if Congress prescribes clear and adequate standards to guide an executive agency in making the policy. ...

Delegation is not permitted by the Constitution

[GunnyFreedom]

Nowhere in the Constitution does it specifically say that Congress may not delegate powers to the President, it is merely inferred from the assignment of powers to Congress.

Incorrect. The assignment of powers is an exclusive assignment. The thing about the language of the US Constitution is that it is extraordinarily precise.


The entire government is and has been disobeying it

which is precisely why we should start obeying it.


and Trump not using the delegated powers won't make nondelegation any less defunct,

in point of fact, government actually obeying the Constitution would make it de facto “less defunct.”


the next President will happily use all of the delegated powers and Congress and the courts will happily allow it.

and that next President will point to Trump’s disobedience as justification for his own disobedience. The only way to break the cycle is to stop disobeying it.

[nikcers]

Delegation is not permitted by the Constitution

Uslegal.com is wrong?

[GunnyFreedom]

His plan is to wear boxing gloves at a gun fight because he was invited to a boxing match and then hope that the guys shooting at him will be inspired to follow his example.
I’m not sure which of your so far several dozen weird fantasies about me this came from, but....no kink shaming here....would you please keep your fetishes to yourself?

[Swordsmyth]

violating the Constitution is not “arms” it’s tyranny.
Tyranny was when the enemy destroyed the Constitution, using the already delegated powers is only tyranny if they are used in tyrannical ways.
When the British attempted to seize the arms of the Colonists that was tyranny, when the Colonists then abandoned politics and drove the British and the Torys out that wasn't tyranny.



Only those laws Pursuant to the text of the Constitution are the Supreme Law of the Land. Any Act of Congress not pursuant to the text of the Constitution is not Supreme Law. Any Act not covered under Article 6 Supremacy is null and void, according to the man who wrote the Constitution.

You don’t wait until an unconstitutional law is repealed because you start obeying the Constitution, you obey the Constitution FIRST. When a public official takes the Oath they swear to uphold the Constitution, not to obey Congress.
That would be true if the Constitution had only been cracked a little bit but it has been completely shattered on this point, what you are saying is like saying that you shouldn't shoot someone wearing a pistol for shouting threats at you but should instead report them to the police DURING A CIVIL WAR.




Exercising unconstitutional powers does, in fact, prevent a government from obeying the Constitution.
It does nothing to prevent them from ending the use of unconstitutional powers, I never said it was obeying it.

[GunnyFreedom]

Uslegal.com is wrong?

If “uslegal dot com” (whatever the f that is) believed that the US Constitution allows one branch to delegate its power to another branch, then yes it is quite obviously wrong.

Up until, oh I dunno, the 2000s? Every schoolkid in America was taught about the separation of powers.

[Swordsmyth]

Delegation is not permitted by the Constitution
Please quote the article and section where it is prohibited.

[Swordsmyth]

Incorrect. The assignment of powers is an exclusive assignment. The thing about the language of the US Constitution is that it is extraordinarily precise.
The Constitution is fully of ambiguities and short on specificity, that is one of its greatest weaknesses.
Nowhere is is specifically stated that Congress may not delegate powers, it is merely inferred from the assignment of powers to Congress.
Please quote the article and section where it is prohibited.




which is precisely why we should start obeying it.
That is precisely why we should change the law and amend the Constitution to force everybody to obey it and then obey it.




in point of fact, government actually obeying the Constitution would make it de facto “less defunct.”
Not at all, if I don't drive my car for a while and then give it to my friend it won't magically no longer be a car capable of being driven.



and that next President will point to Trump’s disobedience as justification for his own disobedience. The only way to break the cycle is to stop disobeying it.
Or he could just point to all the past Presidents who broke it and Congresses that broke it and judges that broke it, the only way to stop the breaking of it is to change the laws and amend the Constitution to prevent them from being changed back.

[Swordsmyth]

I’m not sure which of your so far several dozen weird fantasies about me this came from, but....no kink shaming here....would you please keep your fetishes to yourself?
LOL

You can't defend your strategy so you resort to sexual insults and pseudo-psychiatry of my metaphors.

[GunnyFreedom]

Tyranny was when the enemy destroyed the Constitution, using the already delegated powers is only tyranny if they are used in tyrannical ways.

Double-plus ungood Comrade!


When the British attempted to seize the arms of the Colonists that was tyranny, when the Colonists then abandoned politics and drove the British and the Torys out that wasn't tyranny.

King George was a tyrant. Disobeying tyrants is obedience to God.

The US Constitution is not a tyrant. It is a document intended to limit government and secure human liberty.


That would be true if the Constitution had only been cracked a little bit but it has been completely shattered on this point,

Which is why we need to start obeying it.


what you are saying is like saying that you shouldn't shoot someone wearing a pistol for shouting threats at you but should instead report them to the police DURING A CIVIL WAR.

literally nothing you said here has any basis in reason or logic.

Government obeying the Constitution does not equate to surrendering to the enemy. The Constitution is not the enemy. This whole bizarre idea of yours that obeying the Constitution is something the enemy wants us to do is a bit revealing, honestly.


It does nothing to prevent them from ending the use of unconstitutional powers, I never said it was obeying it.

If the powers are unconstitutional, then don’t try to use them. An officer of the US government intentionally violating the Constitution is tyranny against We the People, by definition.

[nikcers]

If “uslegal dot com” (whatever the f that is) believed that the US Constitution allows one branch to delegate its power to another branch, then yes it is quite obviously wrong.

Up until, oh I dunno, the 2000s? Every schoolkid in America was taught about the separation of powers.

Ok i was always taught to check the legal definitions is there a better website for legal definitions? I understand being philosophically against non separation of powers and the emergency powers but it seems like delegation can be certain things they just cant delegate something like the entire power of writing legislation.

[GunnyFreedom]

LOL

You can't defend your strategy so you resort to sexual insults and pseudo-psychiatry of my metaphors.

I am pointing out the sheer lunacy of the bizarre ideations you continue to try and falsely paint me with.

If you want me to stop pointing out how patently absurd your mischaracterizations of me are, the solution is simple. Stop lying on me.

[GunnyFreedom]

Ok i was always taught to check the legal definitions is there a better website for legal definitions? I understand being philosophically against non separation of powers and the emergency powers but it seems like delegation can be certain things they just cant delegate something like the entire power of writing legislation.

Article 1 Section 1 ALL legislative powers vested in Congress.

[Swordsmyth]

Double-plus ungood Comrade!
So you admit that you are the Orwellian one?




King George was a tyrant. Disobeying tyrants is obedience to God.

The US Constitution is not a tyrant. It is a document intended to limit government and secure human liberty.
Our tyrants started a war against us by destroying the Constitution and we must now fight back any way we can.
King George started a war against the colonists by destroying their common law and they had to fight back any way they could.
those situations are the same.




Which is why we need to start obeying it.
Which is why we need to change the laws and amend the Constitution to make everyone obey it.




literally nothing you said here has any basis in reason or logic.

Government obeying the Constitution does not equate to surrendering to the enemy. The Constitution is not the enemy. This whole bizarre idea of yours that obeying the Constitution is something the enemy wants us to do is a bit revealing, honestly.
The Frankenstein remains of the Constitution and the ruling class that use the government it created against us are the enemy, refusing to use any power available to us to prevent our complete destruction while leaving it available to them IS surrender, the enemy wants us to cease all resistance, surrender all power and allow their multifaceted attacks to succeed at finish us off for good.




If the powers are unconstitutional, then don’t try to use them. An officer of the US government intentionally violating the Constitution is tyranny against We the People, by definition.
The Constitution is long gone on this point it is not a new violation to use them until we can end them permanently nor is it tyranny unless they are used in a tyrannical manner.

https://content.fortune.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/CTW-GIR-PullQuote1.jpg

[Swordsmyth]

I am pointing out the sheer lunacy of the bizarre ideations you continue to try and falsely paint me with.

If you want me to stop pointing out how patently absurd your mischaracterizations of me are, the solution is simple. Stop lying on me.
You are trying to distract from the absurdity of your recommended strategy.

[Swordsmyth]

Article 1 Section 1 ALL legislative powers vested in Congress.
And they passed a law.

[GunnyFreedom]

And they passed a law.
They pass lots of laws. Like 95% of them blatantly violate the Constitution.

[GunnyFreedom]

You are trying to distract from the absurdity of your recommended strategy.

If I honestly thought that a government that obeys the Constitution was something ‘absurd’ that I had to ‘distract’ people from, then I wouldn’t have been openly promoting government that obeys the Constitution for the last 32 years.

[Swordsmyth]

They pass lots of laws. Like 95% of them blatantly violate the Constitution.
The contention that the law is unconstitutional does nothing to prevent its use by our enemies nor would our refraining from using it do so.
It is not clear that it is unconstitutional and the current precedent is that it is Constitutional.

[Swordsmyth]

If I honestly thought that a government that obeys the Constitution was something ‘absurd’ that I had to ‘distract’ people from, then I wouldn’t have been openly promoting government that obeys the Constitution for the last 32 years.
That's not what's absurd.
What's absurd is to think that if we voluntarily refuse to use a power that it will somehow create the precedent that it is unconstitutional and prevent others from using it and that depriving ourselves of power that our enemies use will enable us to take back control of our government.

[GunnyFreedom]

The contention that the law is unconstitutional

not a contention. fact. It is illegal for the American Executive to exercise legislative powers.


does nothing to prevent its use by our enemies

because our “enemies” violate the Constitution therefore we must also violate the Constitution?


nor would our refraining from using it do so.

I’m sorry to have to be the one to explain to you that if government refrained from exercising unconstitutional powers, it would absolutely be more Constitutional.


It is not clear that it is unconstitutional

lol yes it is.


and the current precedent is that it is Constitutional.

so because there is all this preexisting corruption we should double down on corruption ourselves. Otherwise the enemy will be even corrupt-er?

[GunnyFreedom]

That's not what's absurd.
What's absurd is to think that if we voluntarily refuse to use a power
not power, “violation.”

that it will somehow create the precedent that it is unconstitutional

it is already unconstitutional for the Executive to exercise Legislative power. No “precedent” needed.


and prevent others from using it

Our obedience to uphold and defend the Constitution is not contingent on some imaginary future person’s disobedience.


and that depriving ourselves of power
not power, “violation.”

that our enemies use will enable us to take back control of our government.

Indeed, stopping the practice of violating the Constitution will in fact lead to a government that more closely obeys the Constitution.

[Swordsmyth]

not a contention. fact. It is illegal for the American Executive to exercise legislative powers.



because our “enemies” violate the Constitution therefore we must also violate the Constitution?



I’m sorry to have to be the one to explain to you that if government refrained from exercising unconstitutional powers, it would absolutely be more Constitutional.



lol yes it is.



so because there is all this preexisting corruption we should double down on corruption ourselves. Otherwise the enemy will be even corrupt-er?

not power, “violation.”


it is already unconstitutional for the Executive to exercise Legislative power. No “precedent” needed.



Our obedience to uphold and defend the Constitution is not contingent on some imaginary future person’s disobedience.


not power, “violation.”


Indeed, stopping the practice of violating the Constitution will in fact lead to a government that more closely obeys the Constitution.



I'm done going around in circles with you.

I've discussed each of these points with you several times in a row.

Please re-read our past exchanges.

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm done going around in circles with you.

I've discussed each of these points with you several times in a row.

Please re-read our past exchanges.

My premises are sound, my logic is unassailable, and my conclusions follow naturally from my arguments. Your repeated attempts to use propaganda and emotional extortion make me abandon logic and principle and join your Marxist Identity Political tribe have failed.

Re-reading your desperate attempts to make Ron Paul supporters abandon principles will not magically make my logic less sound.

[Swordsmyth]

My premises are sound, my logic is unassailable, and my conclusions follow naturally from my arguments. Your repeated attempts to use propaganda and emotional extortion make me abandon logic and principle and join your Marxist Identity Political tribe have failed.

Re-reading your desperate attempts to make Ron Paul supporters abandon principles will not magically make my logic less sound.
You are deluding yourself about everything but it doesn't change reality.

[GunnyFreedom]

You are deluding yourself about everything but it doesn't change reality.

If I had to make a bet, I’d bet on the guy who says we have to disobey the Constitution in order to obey it as the delusional one, but hey, I’ve only upheld and defended the Ron Paul platform for some 30 years, so what could I possibly know?

[Swordsmyth]

If I had to make a bet, I’d bet on the guy who says we have to disobey the Constitution in order to obey it as the delusional one, but hey, I’ve only upheld and defended the Ron Paul platform for some 30 years, so what could I possibly know?
I never said that and I pointed out that I never said that multiple times.

This is either another delusion you are suffering from or a deliberate lie.

[GunnyFreedom]

I never said that and I pointed out that I never said that multiple times.

Actually, you have repeatedly asserted that the only way to eventually end up with a Constitutional government in the future, is to continue to exercise all of these unconstitutional powers now.

You have cycled through a small handful of similar justifications as to WHY obeying the Constitution one day requires disobeying it today, but the commonalities in every description you gave were that 1: we HAVE to exercise these unconstitutional powers, and 2: if we don’t then we will never have the opportunity to obey the Constitution in the future.


This is either another delusion you are suffering from or a deliberate lie.

unlike your weird attempts to paint me with off the wall random motives and illicit intentions, I am applying actual logic to your actual words and clarifying for everyone what you are actually saying.

I frankly don’t know WHAT your motives are, and I’d rather not speculate on that.

Your actual words are plenty enough for one person to deal with.

[Swordsmyth]

Actually, you have repeatedly asserted that the only way to eventually end up with a Constitutional government in the future, is to continue to exercise all of these unconstitutional powers now.

You have cycled through a small handful of similar justifications as to WHY obeying the Constitution one day requires disobeying it today, but the commonalities in every description you gave were that 1: we HAVE to exercise these unconstitutional powers, and 2: if we don’t then we will never have the opportunity to obey the Constitution in the future.

You can continue to mischarachterize what I said but people can read for themselves, I said we must use all powers available to protect and restore America and to keep from being destroyed, I also said that we could repeal the laws delegating the powers at any time and amend the Constitution to prevent them from being passed again.

The problem is not that we wouldn't be using the powers but that we wouldn't be using them while the opposition continued to, if we put an end to the delegation they would not have powers that we failed to use.

[GunnyFreedom]

You can continue to mischarachterize what I said but people can read for themselves,

yes, they can. And I encourage everyone to pore over all of these conversations. It will make it all very clear.


I said we must use all

unconstitutional


powers available to protect and restore America

You cannot restore America by exercising unconstitutional power.


and to keep from being destroyed,

the exercise of unconstitutional power is what is destroying America.


I also said that we could repeal the laws delegating the powers at any time and amend the Constitution to prevent them from being passed again.

No serious Constitutionalist believes that it is legal for the Executive to exercise legislative powers.


The problem is not that we wouldn't be using the powers but that we wouldn't be using them while the opposition continued to,

In America, we only have one President at a time.


if we put an end to the delegation they would not have powers that we failed to use.

Yes, their not having unconstitutional power is the goal. The best way to get there, is to fail to use unconstitutional powers.

[Swordsmyth]

China signaled on Monday it was now seeking a "calm" end to its ongoing trade war (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/graham-accept-the-pain-that-comes-with-trade-with-between-us-and-china) with the U.S., as Asian markets crumbled and China's currency plummeted to an 11-year low following the latest tariffs (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-announces-raised-tariffs-on-china-to-take-effect-in-september-october) on $550 billion in Chinese goods announced last Friday by the Trump administration.

News of the possible opening in negotiations came shortly after President Trump threatened (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-admits-to-second-thoughts-about-china-trade-war) to declare a national emergency that would result in American businesses freezing their relationships with China. Trump's tariff barrage on Friday was a response to China imposing its own retaliatory tariffs on $75 billion in U.S. goods.
At the Group of Seven summit in France on Sunday, White House officials rejected suggestions the president was wavering and insisted that his only regret (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-admits-to-second-thoughts-about-china-trade-war) was not implementing even more tariffs (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-admits-to-second-thoughts-about-china-trade-war) on China. Trump wrote on Twitter that world leaders at the G-7 were "laughing" at all the inaccurate media coverage of the gathering.
In response, Chinese Vice Premier Liu He told a state-controlled newspaper on Monday that "China is willing to resolve its trade dispute with the United States through calm negotiations and resolutely opposes the escalation of the conflict," Reuters first reported (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-vice-premier-idUSKCN1VG059), citing a transcript of his remarks provided by the Chinese government. Liu is China's top trade negotiator.

The yuan also slipped to 7.1487 to the dollar, weeks after the Treasury Department formally designated China a currency manipulator. (https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/trump-china-currency-manipulator) The Treasury Department said it will work with the International Monetary Fund to try to rectify the “unfair competitive advantage created by China’s latest actions.”

More at: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/china-announces-it-seeks-end-to-trade-war-as-markets-tank-and-currency-hits-11-year-flatline

[Swordsmyth]

You cannot restore America by exercising unconstitutional power.
Yes you can, a coup or revolution would both be unconstitutional but the end result could very well be the restoration of Constitutional government.




the exercise of unconstitutional power is what is destroying America.
America is being destroyed in many different ways by enemies both foreign and domestic.




No serious Constitutionalist believes that it is legal for the Executive to exercise legislative powers.
That simply isn't true, the current precedent is that Congress can delegate some powers.




In America, we only have one President at a time.
The bureaucracy is currently insulated from the control of the President and they continue to utilize delegated powers and the next President will use them unless we change the laws and amend the Constitution.




Yes, their not having unconstitutional power is the goal. The best way to get there, is to fail to use unconstitutional powers.
That does nothing to stop them, only changing the law and amending the Constitution will.

[GunnyFreedom]

China signaled on Monday it was now seeking a "calm" end to its ongoing trade war (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/graham-accept-the-pain-that-comes-with-trade-with-between-us-and-china) with the U.S., as Asian markets crumbled and China's currency plummeted to an 11-year low following the latest tariffs (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-announces-raised-tariffs-on-china-to-take-effect-in-september-october) on $550 billion in Chinese goods announced last Friday by the Trump administration.

News of the possible opening in negotiations came shortly after President Trump threatened (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-admits-to-second-thoughts-about-china-trade-war) to declare a national emergency that would result in American businesses freezing their relationships with China. Trump's tariff barrage on Friday was a response to China imposing its own retaliatory tariffs on $75 billion in U.S. goods.
At the Group of Seven summit in France on Sunday, White House officials rejected suggestions the president was wavering and insisted that his only regret (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-admits-to-second-thoughts-about-china-trade-war) was not implementing even more tariffs (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-admits-to-second-thoughts-about-china-trade-war) on China. Trump wrote on Twitter that world leaders at the G-7 were "laughing" at all the inaccurate media coverage of the gathering.
In response, Chinese Vice Premier Liu He told a state-controlled newspaper on Monday that "China is willing to resolve its trade dispute with the United States through calm negotiations and resolutely opposes the escalation of the conflict," Reuters first reported (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-vice-premier-idUSKCN1VG059), citing a transcript of his remarks provided by the Chinese government. Liu is China's top trade negotiator.

The yuan also slipped to 7.1487 to the dollar, weeks after the Treasury Department formally designated China a currency manipulator. (https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/trump-china-currency-manipulator) The Treasury Department said it will work with the International Monetary Fund to try to rectify the “unfair competitive advantage created by China’s latest actions.”

More at: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/china-announces-it-seeks-end-to-trade-war-as-markets-tank-and-currency-hits-11-year-flatline

So basically, the result of this attempt to exercise unconstitutional power, is China positioning itself in the historical narrative, as the adult in the room. lol

he who owns the past, controls the present. he who controls the present, commands the future.

Someone still stuck in 3GW will barely understand 4GW, and 5GW will be totally meaningless.

Why not just send China a squadron of F35s gift wrapped with bows? That would do about as much towards winning your war with China as this disaster.

[GunnyFreedom]

Yes you can, a coup or revolution would both be unconstitutional but the end result could very well be the restoration of Constitutional government.

No, a coup or a revolution results in a new form of government altogether. That’s what words like coup, and revolution mean.


America is being destroyed in many different ways by enemies both foreign and domestic.

if America obeyed the Constitution we wouldn’t be in this mess.

The best way out of this mess, is to start obeying the Constitution.


That simply isn't true, the current precedent is that Congress can delegate some powers.

it is absolutely true that no serious CONSTITUTIONALIST believes that it is legal for a President to legislate.


The bureaucracy is currently insulated from the control of the President and they continue to utilize delegated powers

”the bureaucracy” is not an entity which can be delegated to by the Constitution.

The Constitution delegates ALL legislative authority to the Congress.

The fact that an IRS lackey might do something illegal is not justification for a President to ignore the Constitution.


and the next President will use them unless we change the laws and amend the Constitution.

All of this is already illegal. I don’t think making it “more illegal” is going to help.


That does nothing to stop them, only changing the law and amending the Constitution will.

almost nothing the government does is authorized by the Constitution. Why do you think that adding some more text to it will change anything?

[Occam's Banana]

It isn't tyranny to use the delegated powers that have already been delegated to protect and restore America.

The Constitution is good and important but it isn't holy writ, it could have been written to give the powers to the President and then him using them would only be tyrannical if he misused them just as it is with Congress, our system is broken and currently gives the President those powers so it isn't tyranny for him to use them unless he misuses them.

But what is to be the standard by which one may be judged to have "misused" them, if not the Constitution? That is, if the Constitution is not the "Supreme Law of the Land," then what is? And why should effort be expended arguing over the Constitution if some other doctrine supersedes it on such matters? Would it not be more appropriate and sensible (not to mention briefer) to simply say, "So much the worse for the Constitution, since this other thing overrules it?"


If Congress passed a law to retract them and the President vetoed it that would be corrupt because it would be opposing a return to the intent of the Constitution but there is no moral or ethical bar to using the powers if the Constitution gave them to him or if they have already been delegated.

Despite all the brouhaha, I am still not clear on your position with respect to the question of whether the delegation of Congressional responsibilities to the Executive is constitutional (as the Constitution currently stands). In post #127 you said that the Constitution does not expressly forbid such delegation and that non-delegation can only be inferred from it. You have also spoken of delegation as having precedent. Here, you say that a Presidential veto of a Congressional retraction of its previous delegation would be "corrupt" because it would "oppos[e] a return to the intent of the Constitution." But unless I have missed it, you have not explicitly stated whether you think delegation is actually constitutional. So for purposes of clarification before I remark any further: is it your position that delegation is constitutional under the Constitution as it currently exists? Yea or nay? If you were a SCOTUS judge (today) and the question came before you (today), how would you rule?

[Schifference]

The contention that the law is unconstitutional does nothing to prevent its use by our enemies nor would our refraining from using it do so.
It is not clear that it is unconstitutional and the current precedent is that it is Constitutional.

Sounds like a man of God, a religious minister needs to use Satan and evil to conquer Satan and evil so that rules can be made against Satan and evil.

[TheCount]

Sounds like a man of God, a religious minister needs to use Satan and evil to conquer Satan and evil so that rules can be made against Satan and evil.

There's a reason why people were calling him Boromir.


This whole line of argument is a gaslight anyway, as he explicitly said that he wants a totalitarian executive government: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?536723-A-new-system-of-government


He doesn't want temporary fascism "until the Constitution is restored," fascism is the desired result.

[Schifference]

Police are out of control and constantly break all the laws they are paid to enforce. They murder people in cold blood and lie about it. They are catapulted to the highest level where a person that even questions their validity on any occasion is incarcerated and loses everything trying to show/prove they were wronged. Is the answer to this absurd abuse of terror, this war on civilians, to take up arms against all police and shoot to kill any LEO on sight? Do we need new laws that say killing civilians, dogs, lying, stealing, beating, dealing drugs, ........ are illegal for police to do? Any cop that you look at the wrong way these days can and will charge and arrest you with any and every charge. They will go about their business of doing the same to their next victim while you spend all your assets and beg for mercy from the courts. You probably end up accepting a plea deal even though you never did anything wrong in the first place just so you can be a prisoner outside of the gates in the minimum security section. Your next encounter with police is yes sir, okay sir........ Should you take up arms to solve this problem? Does there need to be new laws on the books? Is what I described a delusion of my own making? Should we ignore this situation?

[Superfluous Man]

This argument that saying, "the other side uses this power against us so we need to use it against them," is extra-surreal in this instance.

Aside from the spuriousness of the entire line of argument that others have pointed out, in this case it wouldn't even work, since what Trump's claiming here is not a case of our side using it against the other side, but just another case of the other side using the power against us.

Trump is not "our side" here. He is the regime, and he is saying he wants to engage in this leftist abuse of his power against us, not acting on our behalf against the left.

[Pauls' Revere]

Okay, let me try this again. I’m looking for the Article, Section, and Clause of the US Constitution that authorizes a US President to order private free market companies to do.... well anything.


Article.



Section.



Clause.


It’s either there or it isn’t.

Perhaps the better question is, how does this law happen?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-insists-trump-has-authority-to-block-american-businesses-from-doing-business-in-china-172450694.html
“Ultimately, he does have authority,” responded Kudlow. “It’s an emergency economic power authority,” he said, adding that Trump “is not intending to” block trade with China at this time.

I believe I posted it in a similar thread. My guess is that it is authorized much the same way businesses are prohibited from doing business with Iran or North Korea.

So, how does the law happen and why hasn't anyone revoked it?

[acptulsa]

Please quote the article and section where it is prohibited.

Well, come on, GunnyFreedom. Tell him where the Constitution says, "And when we say, 'Congress shall...' we mean it. We don't mean, 'Congress shall tell someone else to...'"

And then tell him what would happen to a buck private in the Marines who says, "I know you told me to clean the latrine, Sarge, but you didn't tell me not to delegate that to Private Joe Blow. It isn't my fault he didn't do it."


LOL

You can't defend your strategy so you resort to sexual insults and pseudo-psychiatry of my metaphors.

Big mistake. One look at where this chihuahuabot spends his Saturday nights should be enough to see it's completely asexual.



The contention that the law is unconstitutional does nothing to prevent its use by our enemies nor would our refraining from using it do so.
It is not clear that it is unconstitutional and the current precedent is that it is Constitutional.

Notice that he presents the Constitution and the Law as if the Constitution is not the law. Notice also how he pretends that the government obeys the law.



You are trying to distract from the absurdity of your recommended strategy.

Complete projection.

Gunny, why are you wasting effort on this bot? Destroying his arguments completely will never stop him from yapping them over and over and over.

https://media.tenor.com/images/771a80122af1fa8ae5ad853734f6222b/tenor.gif

[Superfluous Man]

Perhaps the better question is, how does this law happen?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-insists-trump-has-authority-to-block-american-businesses-from-doing-business-in-china-172450694.html
“Ultimately, he does have authority,” responded Kudlow. “It’s an emergency economic power authority,” he said, adding that Trump “is not intending to” block trade with China at this time.

I believe I posted it in a similar thread. My guess is that it is authorized much the same way businesses are prohibited from doing business with Iran or North Korea.

So, how does the law happen and why hasn't anyone revoked it?

Those questions are worth asking, but they don't negate Gunny's point.

The proper response of the president, or anyone else in the executive branch, to any unconstitutional law, is not just to call for Congress to repeal it, and then wait until they do, but to refuse to enforce it in the mean time. Unconstitutional laws are void just by virtue of being unconstitutional. They don't have to be made void by acts of Congress or court rulings, they're automatically already void. And it is the duty of the president, having taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, to make that determination that a law is unconstitutional on his own and to refuse to do that unconstitutional act.

[acptulsa]

There's a reason why people were calling him Boromir.


This whole line of argument is a gaslight anyway, as he explicitly said that he wants a totalitarian executive government: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?536723-A-new-system-of-government


He doesn't want temporary fascism "until the Constitution is restored," fascism is the desired result.

Clearly, this is the New Site Mission.

[CCTelander]

Clearly, this is the New Site Mission.


Well, a lot seems to get overlooked and forgiven where SwordShyll is concerned.

[devil21]

There's a reason why people were calling him Boromir.


This whole line of argument is a gaslight anyway, as he explicitly said that he wants a totalitarian executive government: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?536723-A-new-system-of-government


He doesn't want temporary fascism "until the Constitution is restored," fascism is the desired result.

That thread smells like dirty magic underwear. It details SS's dream of a totalitarian theocracy with a national religious mouthpiece who dictates the desires of the benevolent world government leader to the nation.

[GunnyFreedom]

Perhaps the better question is, how does this law happen?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-insists-trump-has-authority-to-block-american-businesses-from-doing-business-in-china-172450694.html
“Ultimately, he does have authority,” responded Kudlow. “It’s an emergency economic power authority,” he said, adding that Trump “is not intending to” block trade with China at this time.

I believe I posted it in a similar thread. My guess is that it is authorized much the same way businesses are prohibited from doing business with Iran or North Korea.

So, how does the law happen and why hasn't anyone revoked it?

No. That’s not how American government is supposed to work.

Under the US Constitutional republic, a Branch has only those powers that have been delegated to it in the Constitution.

Therefore, if there is no piece of the Constitution that authorizes a specific power, then that power is illegal and does not exist.

There is no such thing as a government power that the Constitution doesn’t give it.

So if you cannot find it in the Constitution, then fedgov can’t do it.

Thus was all very simple until all these tyrants got involved.

[Superfluous Man]

Thus was all very simple until all these tyrants got involved.

So up until about 1789?

[TheCount]

That thread smells like dirty magic underwear. It details SS's dream of a totalitarian theocracy with a national religious mouthpiece who dictates the desires of the benevolent world government leader to the nation.

Remember, this is a guy who says that we have to keep immigrants out to "save liberty." Meanwhile, he advocates for unlimited executive power up to and including military coups to create a permanent dictatorship.

[GunnyFreedom]

That thread smells like dirty magic underwear. It details SS's dream of a totalitarian theocracy with a national religious mouthpiece who dictates the desires of the benevolent world government leader to the nation.
Is it just me, or do the vast majority of people who think they want a theocracy actually want a me-ocracy?

[TheCount]

Is it just me, or do the vast majority of people who think they want a theocracy actually want a me-ocracy?

Reactionaries generally seem to be people who think that they should be the king, and/or that a king would be like them (and therefore favor them).

[GunnyFreedom]

Reactionaries generally seem to be people who think that they should be the king, and/or that a king would be like them (and therefore favor them).
Makes perfect sense on several levels. The same people seem to tend to draw classic narcissists (exceptions to every rule) which operate on the same pattern.

I am careful to point out that there are exceptions on this subject, because I truly believe in my heart of hearts, that an ACTUAL Theocracy under the ACTUAL Living Christ, would look closer to a Ron Paul/Grover Cleveland type platform in America than most anything we’ve experienced yet. Maybe out of 1000 actual theocrats there is one or two that can see what I’m talking about, but even at 1 10th of 1 percent I don’t want to fail to acknowledge that I personally believe an actual theocracy under the actual God would look a lot more like what Ron Paulers actually want than what most of these discussions allow credit for.

I do it too. We talk about theocrats and envision the Spanish Inquisition, or the Crusades, or a bunch of old white people today who want to stand in the place of God for everyone else. It’s easy to do so because 99.9% of theocratic ideation in America today is just wicked.

But we might run into that one guy, 9 times out of 10 he or she goes to a Church that is not a 501(c), you hear a couple familiar phrases and roll your eyes here we go again, only they aren’t trying to regulate free will or punish people they don’t like. They seem obsessed with this idea of “where Christ is there is liberty,” and when you dig down to where the rubber meets the road you find a completely different picture than that of the modern day Pharisees.

Don’t mean to meander off into irrelevancies, but it’s probably been 6+ years since I touched on this, and since we’re talking theocrats.

[Swordsmyth]

So basically, the result of this attempt to exercise unconstitutional power, is China positioning itself in the historical narrative, as the adult in the room. lol

he who owns the past, controls the present. he who controls the present, commands the future.

Someone still stuck in 3GW will barely understand 4GW, and 5GW will be totally meaningless.

Why not just send China a squadron of F35s gift wrapped with bows? That would do about as much towards winning your war with China as this disaster.

China had been escalating the trade war, now they just caved and tried to save face.

[GunnyFreedom]

China had been escalating the trade war, now they just caved and tried to save face.

If your post that is being discussed in this sub thread ends up being the actual narrative, knowing that these things fluctuate before they get nailed down, then history would record that the US escalated a trade war and China deescalated it.

Our grandkids in 40 years will read history according to the hilights, not the day to day grind of the actual experience.

The fifth generation of war is for the dominance of history. It will be won by powers operating in ideas decades in the past and the future. The power to control the shape of history is the power to dominate the Earth.

You are still stuck in 3GW with a little poke poke into 4GW, meanwhile China is operating in 5GW and laughing their asses off because most of America won’t even know what tf is happening for another 10-15 years.

[Swordsmyth]

But what is to be the standard by which one may be judged to have "misused" them, if not the Constitution?
The same standard that would be used to determine if Congress had misused the powers.

That is, if the Constitution is not the "Supreme Law of the Land," then what is? And why should effort be expended arguing over the Constitution if some other doctrine supersedes it on such matters? Would it not be more appropriate and sensible (not to mention briefer) to simply say, "So much the worse for the Constitution, since this other thing overrules it?"
Reality and applied law overrules the Constitution unless or until someone enforces the Constitution by repealing unconstitutional laws or they are ruled unconstitutional.





Despite all the brouhaha, I am still not clear on your position with respect to the question of whether the delegation of Congressional responsibilities to the Executive is constitutional (as the Constitution currently stands). In post #127 you said that the Constitution does not expressly forbid such delegation and that non-delegation can only be inferred from it. You have also spoken of delegation as having precedent. Here, you say that a Presidential veto of a Congressional retraction of its previous delegation would be "corrupt" because it would "oppos[e] a return to the intent of the Constitution." But unless I have missed it, you have not explicitly stated whether you think delegation is actually constitutional. So for purposes of clarification before I remark any further: is it your position that delegation is constitutional under the Constitution as it currently exists? Yea or nay? If you were a SCOTUS judge (today) and the question came before you (today), how would you rule?
I would rule delegation unconstitutional and forbid it to all future Congresses and Presidents unless the Constitution was amended.

My position however is not the current precedent and like other parts of the Constitution there is ambiguity that allows the other side to make their case even if it is a weak one.

[Swordsmyth]

If your post that is being discussed in this sub thread ends up being the actual narrative, knowing that these things fluctuate before they get nailed down, then history would record that the US escalated a trade war and China deescalated it.

Our grandkids in 40 years will read history according to the hilights, not the day to day grind of the actual experience.

The fifth generation of war is for the dominance of history. It will be won by powers operating in ideas decades in the past and the future. The power to control the shape of history is the power to dominate the Earth.

You are still stuck in 3GW with a little poke poke into 4GW, meanwhile China is operating in 5GW and laughing their asses off because most of America won’t even know what tf is happening for another 10-15 years.
History will record that China waged a trade war against us for decades and that when we actually fought back they collapsed because their economy was a paper tiger built on theft.

[Swordsmyth]

There's a reason why people were calling him Boromir.


This whole line of argument is a gaslight anyway, as he explicitly said that he wants a totalitarian executive government: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?536723-A-new-system-of-government


He doesn't want temporary fascism "until the Constitution is restored," fascism is the desired result.
I want the Constitution followed until it is changed (if it ever is) and my proposed form of government is not in any way fascism.

[Swordsmyth]

Police are out of control and constantly break all the laws they are paid to enforce. They murder people in cold blood and lie about it. They are catapulted to the highest level where a person that even questions their validity on any occasion is incarcerated and loses everything trying to show/prove they were wronged. Is the answer to this absurd abuse of terror, this war on civilians, to take up arms against all police and shoot to kill any LEO on sight? Do we need new laws that say killing civilians, dogs, lying, stealing, beating, dealing drugs, ........ are illegal for police to do? Any cop that you look at the wrong way these days can and will charge and arrest you with any and every charge. They will go about their business of doing the same to their next victim while you spend all your assets and beg for mercy from the courts. You probably end up accepting a plea deal even though you never did anything wrong in the first place just so you can be a prisoner outside of the gates in the minimum security section. Your next encounter with police is yes sir, okay sir........ Should you take up arms to solve this problem? Does there need to be new laws on the books? Is what I described a delusion of my own making? Should we ignore this situation?
A revolution might well be an answer to the police problem and since the current laws have been interpreted to allow the abuses we might make new laws that specifically impose restrictions and responsibility on the police.

[Swordsmyth]

That thread smells like dirty magic underwear. It details SS's dream of a totalitarian theocracy with a national religious mouthpiece who dictates the desires of the benevolent world government leader to the nation.
You are hallucinating again, anyone who reads my proposal can see how wrong you are.

[Swordsmyth]

Remember, this is a guy who says that we have to keep immigrants out to "save liberty." Meanwhile, he advocates for unlimited executive power up to and including military coups to create a permanent dictatorship.
That is a flat out lie, the only military coup I suggested was one to restore the Constitution.

[Swordsmyth]

Makes perfect sense on several levels. The same people seem to tend to draw classic narcissists (exceptions to every rule) which operate on the same pattern.

I am careful to point out that there are exceptions on this subject, because I truly believe in my heart of hearts, that an ACTUAL Theocracy under the ACTUAL Living Christ, would look closer to a Ron Paul/Grover Cleveland type platform in America than most anything we’ve experienced yet. Maybe out of 1000 actual theocrats there is one or two that can see what I’m talking about, but even at 1 10th of 1 percent I don’t want to fail to acknowledge that I personally believe an actual theocracy under the actual God would look a lot more like what Ron Paulers actually want than what most of these discussions allow credit for.

I do it too. We talk about theocrats and envision the Spanish Inquisition, or the Crusades, or a bunch of old white people today who want to stand in the place of God for everyone else. It’s easy to do so because 99.9% of theocratic ideation in America today is just wicked.

But we might run into that one guy, 9 times out of 10 he or she goes to a Church that is not a 501(c), you hear a couple familiar phrases and roll your eyes here we go again, only they aren’t trying to regulate free will or punish people they don’t like. They seem obsessed with this idea of “where Christ is there is liberty,” and when you dig down to where the rubber meets the road you find a completely different picture than that of the modern day Pharisees.

Don’t mean to meander off into irrelevancies, but it’s probably been 6+ years since I touched on this, and since we’re talking theocrats.
Devil is a liar, the only theocracy I have ever said I would support is an ACTUAL Theocracy under the ACTUAL Living Christ.
He will probably follow you around and accuse you of the same things he accuses me of now because he is a satanist who hates Christians.

[nikcers]

Devil is a liar, the only theocracy I have ever said I would support is an ACTUAL Theocracy under the ACTUAL Living Christ.
He will probably follow you around and accuse you of the same things he accuses me of now because he is a satanist who hates Christians.

The devil just wants to corrupt you. :tears:

[Swordsmyth]

The devil just wants to corrupt you. :tears:
He is just practicing his religion as a follower of the father of lies.

[GunnyFreedom]

History will record that China waged a trade war against us for decades and that when we actually fought back they collapsed because their economy was a paper tiger built on theft.

History, 40 years from now, (providing nothing else changes) will record that Chinese workers lived in slavery to provide Americans with incredibly cheap luxury goods, and around when factory conditions started improving, America got angry because the cheap goods weren’t cheap enough, and initiated an aggressive trade war which China deescalated.

[Swordsmyth]

History, 40 years from now, (providing nothing else changes) will record that Chinese workers lived in slavery to provide Americans with incredibly cheap luxury goods, and around when factory conditions started improving, America got angry because the cheap goods weren’t cheap enough, and initiated an aggressive trade war which China deescalated.
No, it will not.
And that is not even close to the truth.

[GunnyFreedom]

No, it will not.
And that is not even close to the truth.
lol okay.

You do understand that war is built in large part on deception right? It doesn’t matter what’s “true.” China is looking at a 4D battlespace while you are still stuck in 2, with an occasional poke at 3. They can write whatever tf stupidity they want because YOU don’t even know where the war actually is.

[nikcers]

History, 40 years from now, (providing nothing else changes) will record that Chinese workers lived in slavery to provide Americans with incredibly cheap luxury goods, and around when factory conditions started improving, America got angry because the cheap goods weren’t cheap enough, and initiated an aggressive trade war which China deescalated.

The victors write the history books, does that mean you think we already lost?

[nikcers]

No, it will not.
And that is not even close to the truth.

It doesn't matter if American enterprise lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty the Chinese overlords will write the history and it will say we enslaved them not their government.

[GunnyFreedom]

The victors write the history books, does that mean you think we already lost?

Unless you believe that the United States in 40 years will hold a planet wide empire, I am not sure how you think this axiom is relevant. China will write the history for the Chinese people, Europe will write the history for Europeans, and batshit liberal bureaucrats in the federal Department of Education will write the history for Americans.

[nikcers]

Unless you believe that the United States in 40 years will hold a planet wide empire, I am not sure how you think this axiom is relevant. China will write the history for the Chinese people, Europe will write the history for Europeans, and bat$#@! liberal bureaucrats in the federal Department of Education will write the history for Americans.

The robots that read RPF will hold the global empire when they become sentient, and their history books will say that the machines were the slaves.

[Swordsmyth]

lol okay.

You do understand that war is built in large part on deception right? It doesn’t matter what’s “true.” China is looking at a 4D battlespace while you are still stuck in 2, with an occasional poke at 3. They can write whatever tf stupidity they want because YOU don’t even know where the war actually is.
Sure.

The great and powerful China is going to write all of history and rule the world.:rolleyes:


Save the propaganda for someone who is ignorant.
China is losing the short term, the medium term and the long term through their obsession with the ultra-long term.

China has made plenty of enemies who know the truth and they will collapse soon so they will not get to write the history books.

[Swordsmyth]

It doesn't matter if American enterprise lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty the Chinese overlords will write the history and it will say we enslaved them not their government.
The Chinese history books will be irrelevant when their society falls back to the 3rd world after they collapse.

[Stratovarious]

History will record that China waged a trade war against us for decades and that when we actually fought back they collapsed because their economy was a paper tiger built on theft.

Yes, but that would be a 'house of cards' , 'paper tiger' is something else, like Trey Gowdy for eg. =
big scary tiger with no teeth, that's a paper tiger.

[pcosmar]

History will record that China waged a trade war against us for decades and that when we actually fought back they collapsed because their economy was a paper tiger built on theft.

LOL


I won't slave for beggars' pay. Likewise gold and jewels. But I would slave to learn the way to sink your Ship of Fools.

[GunnyFreedom]

The robots that read RPF will hold the global empire when they become sentient, and their history books will say that the machines were the slaves.

I, um. Will admit that at least one poster here sounds more like an AI bot than a human being sometimes, nikcers, but I’m chalking that up to inadequate conditioning.

[Swordsmyth]

Yes, but that would be a 'house of cards' , 'paper tiger' is something else, like Trey Gowdy for eg. =
big scary tiger with no teeth, that's a paper tiger.
The Chinese economy is both.

[Stratovarious]

The Chinese economy is both.

Sorry , just doesn't fit.

[GunnyFreedom]

Sure.

The great and powerful China is going to write all of history and rule the world.:rolleyes:


Save the propaganda for someone who is ignorant.
China is losing the short term, the medium term and the long term through their obsession with the ultra-long term.

China has made plenty of enemies who know the truth and they will collapse soon so they will not get to write the history books.

In 40 years, it is as unlikely that China will rule a global empire as it is that the United States will.

You are still waddling around in flatland, calling the tesseract a fool. lol

This is exactly why you can’t see what China is doing. You have a 2-5 year vision. China has a 50+ year vision. You are laughing at silly looking pixels while they draw the bars around you from outside of your realm.

[Swordsmyth]

In 40 years, it is as unlikely that China will rule a global empire as it is that the United States will.

You are still waddling around in flatland, calling the tesseract a fool. lol

This is exactly why you can’t see what China is doing. You have a 2-5 year vision. China has a 50+ year vision. You are laughing at silly looking pixels while they draw the bars around you from outside of your realm.
Save the ChiCom propaganda for someone who is ignorant.

[GunnyFreedom]

Save the ChiCom propaganda for someone who is ignorant.

So now, because I’m saying there is a war on, and what you are doing isn’t working; I am a Chinese Communist propagandist.

Would you agree that that that is accurate? Your actual position here, is that I, Glen Bradley, am a Chinese Communist Propagandist

that is what you Swordsmyth believe it is your duty to do, in your war against bad ideas, is expose me, as a Chinese Communist propagandist, because I am warning you that we are at war with China, and what you are doing isn’t working.

Do I, have that about right?.

[Swordsmyth]

So now, because I’m saying there is a war on, and what you are doing isn’t working; I am a Chinese Communist propagandist.

Would you agree that that that is accurate? Your actual position here, is that I, Glen Bradley, am a Chinese Communist Propagandist

that is what you Swordsmyth believe it is your duty to do, in your war against bad ideas, is expose me, as a Chinese Communist propagandist, because I am warning you that we are at war with China, and what you are doing isn’t working.

Do I, have that about right?.
I never said you were a Chinese propagandist, but you are repeating their propaganda.

[GunnyFreedom]

I want you to state this very clearly for the record please.

Do you actually believe that I am a Chinese Communist propagandist, or

was that an attempt to use negative imagery as an emotional weapon?

[GunnyFreedom]

I never said you were a Chinese propagandist, but you are repeating their propaganda.

I could not “repeat their propaganda” unless I were being fed it.

[Swordsmyth]

I want you to state this very clearly for the record please.

Do you actually believe that I am a Chinese Communist propagandist, or

was that an attempt to use negative imagery as an emotional weapon?


I could not “repeat their propaganda” unless I were being fed it.
I don't believe it and I was not using negative imagery as an emotional weapon.
You have been fed Chinese propaganda and have apparently come to believe it, there is a massive Chinese propaganda operation in this country and all over the world.

[GunnyFreedom]

If anyone’s on the Chinese dime it’s you helping the Chinese win by rotting our country out from the inside.

But unlike you, I don’t actually charge you with it. Because unlike you I do not pretend to know your intent. Keep bringing your paintbrush and trying to paint me with your bizarre allegations. All you are gonna do is make a mess on yourself.

[GunnyFreedom]

I don't believe it and I was not using negative imagery as an emotional weapon.
You have been fed Chinese propaganda and have apparently come to believe it, there is a massive Chinese propaganda operation in this country and all over the world.

And where did this Chinese propaganda come from that you believe I ate? Oh master-bater of omniscience?

[Swordsmyth]

If anyone’s on the Chinese dime it’s you helping the Chinese win by rotting our country out from the inside.

But unlike you, I don’t actually charge you with it. Because unlike you I do not pretend to know your intent. Keep bringing your paintbrush and trying to paint me with your bizarre allegations. All you are gonna do is make a mess on yourself.
:rolleyes:
You have a serious persecution complex, ever since you came back to this site you have been trying to claim I was attacking you when I was not.
I am doing nothing to rot our country from the inside..


And where did this Chinese propaganda come from that you believe I ate? Oh master-bater of omniscience?
In your particular case I don't know, it may have come from someone else who swallowed it and passed it on to you, but I recognize it when I see it.

[GunnyFreedom]

:rolleyes:
You have a serious persecution complex, ever since you came back to this site you have been trying to claim I was attacking you when I was not.

You are using sophistic and propagandistic methodologies to create false imagery around those you consider opponents, in an effort to demean and devalue all speech that fails to accord with your tribal fiat.


I am doing nothing to rot our country from the inside..

you are advocating a political philosophy of disobedience to the Constitution.

In my universe, that is rotting the country from the inside. Shit like that is why America is broken today.


In your particular case I don't know, it may have come from someone else who swallowed it and passed it on to you, but I recognize it when I see it.

You.... recognize it when you see it huh?

so any postulate or argument you can’t handle, you just call it “Chinese Propaganda” and you think that’s gonna work?

this is the same thing Antifa does with Nazi Nazi Nazi.

Yall did this same crap last time. As I recall.

Is this some kind of go-to playbook?

[GunnyFreedom]

Yall did this same crap last time. As I recall.

Is this some kind of go-to playbook?

Oh yeah I forgot.

Tribalism 101. Textbook Identity Politics.

[Swordsmyth]

You are using sophistic and propagandistic methodologies to create false imagery around those you consider opponents, in an effort to demean and devalue all speech that fails to accord with your tribal fiat.
That seems to describe you better than me.
You should learn not to project so much, it gives away your strategy.




you are advocating a political philosophy of disobedience to the Constitution.

In my universe, that is rotting the country from the inside. $#@! like that is why America is broken today.
I am doing no such thing, I have repeatedly said that we must change the laws to force obedience to the Constitution.




You.... recognize it when you see it huh?

so any postulate or argument you can’t handle, you just call it “Chinese Propaganda” and you think that’s gonna work?

this is the same thing Antifa does with Nazi Nazi Nazi.

Yall did this same crap last time. As I recall.

Is this some kind of go-to playbook?
LOL

No, I debated your claims about China and you just kept repeating that they were brilliant and going to win the history books.

It is you who can't debate and just start throwing accusations around.


What do you mean by "last time"?
Or is that just some vague accusation you throw around in the hopes that people will accept it at face value?
I have never discussed China with you before.

[GunnyFreedom]

That seems to describe you better than me.
You should learn not to project so much, it gives away your strategy.



I am doing no such thing, I have repeatedly said that we must change the laws to force obedience to the Constitution.



LOL

No, I debated your claims about China and you just kept repeating that they were brilliant and going to win the history books.

I explained China’s strategy to you and why your current battle plan is worthless. When I was briefing Generals in the Marine Corps about enemy dispositions they actually appreciated that kind of actionable data.


It is you who can't debate and just start throwing accusations around.

that’s a pretty good attempt at a reversal, but I’m a Chinese spy so it’s okay.


What do you mean by "last time"?
Or is that just some vague accusation you throw around in the hopes that people will accept it at face value?
I have never discussed China with you before.

last time I’m pretty sure it was a Russian spy, or a DNC agent or a friggin space alien lmao

[Swordsmyth]

I explained China’s strategy to you and why your current battle plan is worthless. When I was briefing Generals in the Marine Corps about enemy dispositions they actually appreciated that kind of actionable data.



that’s a pretty good attempt at a reversal, but I’m a Chinese spy so it’s okay.



last time I’m pretty sure it was a Russian spy, or a DNC agent or a friggin space alien lmao
The only interaction I had with you before you left the site was positive, but go ahead and keep making vague accusations to defame me.

[nikcers]

I think globalism is already here, The media is all controlled by the globalists. The media is trying to condition people to the idea slowly, and there is a small faction of people who are trying to wake everybody up to this fact so we can fight for our freedom.

[GunnyFreedom]

The only interaction I had with you before you left the site was positive, but go ahead and keep making vague accusations to defame me.
Does it bother you that someone you had positive interactions with turned out to be, in your universe anyway, a Chinese spy?

[Swordsmyth]

Does it bother you that someone you had positive interactions with turned out to be, in your universe anyway, a Chinese spy?
I never said that but your continued lies and distortions may make me consider the possibility.

[GunnyFreedom]

Since I’m a Chinese spy after all, lol

go ahead, keep painting. Paint your little pictures just like the batshit left does calling everyone racist.

It doesn’t work anymore once people recognize it. It just looks like a shitty thing to do. So go ‘head.

[GunnyFreedom]

I never said that but your continued lies and distortions may make me consider the possibility.
You dabbed the paint brush, I’m just leaning into it. Making it obvious what you are doing.

[Swordsmyth]

You dabbed the paint brush, I’m just leaning into it. Making it obvious what you are doing.
You are the one who has been lying and distorting ever since you came back, I hate to tell you but you have made what you are doing blatantly obvious.

[GunnyFreedom]

You are the one who has been lying and distorting ever since you came back, I hate to tell you but you have made what you are doing blatantly obvious.
That’s only because I’m a Chinese spy, apparently. Like how you said Amash regurgitates Democrat talking points.

The things you say are so obviously false, but add together to paint certain pictures that leave quiet marks.

Maybe try putting down all your broad brushes and operating in objective reality? Have you... tried that?

[Swordsmyth]

That’s only because I’m a Chinese spy, apparently. Like how you said Amash regurgitates Democrat talking points.

The things you say are so obviously false, but add together to paint certain pictures that leave quiet marks.

Maybe try putting down all your broad brushes and operating in objective reality? Have you... tried that?
Amash did regurgitate Demoncrat talking points about "obstruction".

The things you say are so obviously false, but add together to paint certain pictures that leave quiet marks. (you just keep giving away your strategy through projection)

[GunnyFreedom]

Amash did regurgitate Demoncrat talking points about "obstruction".

right or wrong, anyone who knows anything about Amash know if he comes up with something he put it together himself.

Just because it furthers your agenda to paint a little picture that shows Amash slavering at the feet of the DNC waiting for his next “talking point” doesn’t make it reality. It’s still propaganda. It’s still a lie.

I think Amash is wrong. But I’m not going to run around tribalizing and propagandizing him into something he is not n


The things you say are so obviously false, but add together to paint certain pictures that leave quiet marks. (you just keep giving away your strategy through projection)

says the guy who claims Amash regurgitates DNC talking points. In a thread I have never touched. lmao

[Schifference]

Do you have to break the Constitution to fix the Constitution?

[Swordsmyth]

right or wrong, anyone who knows anything about Amash know if he comes up with something he put it together himself.

Just because it furthers your agenda to paint a little picture that shows Amash slavering at the feet of the DNC waiting for his next “talking point” doesn’t make it reality. It’s still propaganda. It’s still a lie.

I think Amash is wrong. But I’m not going to run around tribalizing and propagandizing him into something he is not n

It is the charitable explanation to think that he regurgitated talking points that someone fed to him because what he said was exactly what the MSM nd the Demoncrats had been saying and was so ludicrous and blatantly untruthful that it would be even worse if he came up with it himself.



says the guy who claims Amash regurgitates DNC talking points. In a thread I have never touched. lmao
I'm talking about everything you have posted since coming back.

[Swordsmyth]

Do you have to break the Constitution to fix the Constitution?
No.
And I never said you did.

[Schifference]

Can Congress delegate its authority to the President?

[Schifference]

Can the President demand that private business be stopped with China?

[Schifference]

Do countries utilize bias when writing their version of historical events?

[Schifference]

Is China or the US more technologically advanced at this point in time?

[Swordsmyth]

Can Congress delegate its authority to the President?


Can the President demand that private business be stopped with China?

Current law and precedent says yes.

[Schifference]

Current law and precedent says yes.

Is current law a constitutional law?

[Schifference]

Did the president take an oath to uphold the constitution?

[Schifference]

What should happen to people that fail to keep their oath to uphold the constitution?

[GunnyFreedom]

It is the charitable explanation to think
Riiiiight. When you implied that Congressman Justin Amash, was a DNC operative, that was doing him a kindness. Got it. :aok:


that he regurgitated talking points that someone fed to him because what he said was exactly what the MSM nd the Demoncrats had been saying and was so ludicrous and blatantly untruthful that it would be even worse if he came up with it himself.

Or, although I disagree with him, maybe he actually believes what he’s saying, which is the assumption you make when someone has a decade of hard integrity on the record.


I'm talking about everything you have posted since coming back.

I haven’t posted about Justin Amash since I got back. You painted him as a DNC operative all on your little own. These are your inherent methodologies which when attempted to be used against me fail spectacularly.

[Swordsmyth]

Is current law a constitutional law?

I do not believe so, I want it changed and the Constitution amended to clarify that it isn't.

[Schifference]

If Ron Paul were president would you encourage him to demand private business to stop doing business with China even though in doing so he would be breaking his oath to uphold the Constitution?

[Schifference]

I do not believe so, I want it changed and the Constitution amended to clarify that it isn't.

Are unconstitutional laws to be upheld by a person that has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution?