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

[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.

Originally Posted by Swordsmyth


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.

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]

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]

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.

[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.

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.