Posted on 01/01/2016 6:38:14 PM PST by Libloather
Police can only arrest violators of THE LAW.
Police have no authority (or funding attached to enforce) executive orders.
The court system can only try someone arrested under LAW. There is no provision for a prosecutor to move a case before a judge based on violation of an executive order.
He was very open a while ago about the frustration of dealing with our checks & balances; very creepy, and a Republican president would have been shredded for it.
That will never happen (and doesn’t need to for the Bolshevik agenda to proceed); the Dems will just run another soulless candidate (like Hillary), and this would basically be Obama’s third term - or BJ Clinton’s fifth, depending on how you view it.
Heroin is a big problem in NJ now; the fact is that a whole generation of Americans is facing true despair, coming to terms with the fact that few of them have any economic future at all.
Grim...
Is there a single Republican who will stand up to this thug?
The one who did, by calling him a “ liar” during the state of the union was quickly castrated by fellow party members and the lapdog MSM....
He was very open a while ago about the frustration of dealing with our checks & balances; very creepy, and a Republican president would have been shredded for it.
The MSM will never admit to their role in enabling this usurper of freedom to occupy a world leadership position.
They never bothered to ask “ what do you mean by fundamentally change America”
Of course let Trump or any other opposition to the Dem way of life utter a word and they do in depth destruction...
The GOP (Gutless Old Party) controls both Houses. I’m sure they’ll stop this tyrannical Executive over reach. *smirk*
The cost of dealing with this has got to be in the billions.
Compared to ISIL, this is a far more clear and present danger. Sure, folks will look at this and say, “who cares, they are just addicts.” But what the general public doesn’t realize is that these are not your “father’s” heroin addicts.
When I hear the fire department getting called to the same house three times in 24 hours, there is a huge cost. When we hear about shootings in every major city every weekend, it’s not “gun violence” it’s drug violence.
If you think we should be at war with Islam over 14 deaths, think about all of the crime, death, and wasted tax money we spend because the cartels are sucking billions of dollars out of our streets every month.
It’s time to turn our sites south, tell Mexico they are either with us, or against us, and start droning the cartels, their labs, their banks, and everyone on the take from them.
Don’t make it harder for me to pass a shotgun on to my children.
They have the same employer as the Kenyan Pirate; they are all playing for the other team.
Unfortunately heroin is only becoming a news story here because children of wealthier families are dying; they even proposed laws to charge dealers with murder (that may have prevented or reduced the problems with urban drugs decades ago by sentencing those dealers much more harshly).
I look at the “war on drugs” as a segment of the “poverty industry”; it employs a lot of people, so nobody really wants to see it get better. Like teachers that make extra income teaching summer school - why would they want to see all students perform better during the regular school year?
Latin America pointed out years ago that we, not they, have the drug problem; our addicts have ravaged their countries.
He most certainly IS entitled. According to the 28th Amendment that Obama enacted last year, whenever the President is frustrated by Congress' failure to pass a law the President wants passed, he is entitled to enact it himself through Executive Action.
It's right there in Amendment XXVIII. You could look it up.
I respectfully disagree with your premise. If one little city of 30,000 is sending out a fully staffed paramedic ambulance seven times a night on a weekend, and twice a night every weekday night at $500 (average) a whack, extrapolate that across a region, a state, or the entire country.
Add into that the cost of larceny, burglary, and theft. Add in the Emergency room costs.
I am not making an emotional argument at all. I am making an economic argument. The cost of the crap is going to add to the bankruptcy of our medical services.
Now, add in the gun violence. After suicide, I have to believe that most gun deaths are related to rugs.
ISIL is scary. But it is taking your attention away from a much larger problem.
We should be using those military assets to destroy the drug trade. We should make some ultimatatums to Mexico. We should kill the cartel leaders. We should stop doing business with Mexican banks.
The border crap is not about illegal aliens. Those people are a drop in the bucket when compared to the cost of dealing with the heroin trade in the US. Stopping it at the source will kill the root cause—cheap and readily available drugs.
I’m all for fortifying the border; as long as we refuse to do so we should accept that we have surrendered in the “war on drugs”. We do pay a high price by allowing the uninterrupted flow of drugs in this country; we simply don’t have the money to fight this war south of the border, and our government is increasingly the same leftists as those ruling the drug states to our south.
You are missing my key point: Pull the troops out of the middle east. Pull the assets back home. Put them to use in Mexico.
If the Mexicans cannot take care of the problem, we should do the job ourselves. At the same time, use the “police state” BS that the government seems to want to use on the trafficking.
Honestly, going after the end user is a stupid ploy. That is akin to going after every German Soldier without the strategic bombing to cut the logistics.
Cut the supply. Drive the prices up. Wreck the quality.
Save us BILLIONS in days. The end user problem will take care of itself.
I think the troops would be better deployed along our Mexican border than in the Middle East/Afghanistan; the problem is that we really can’t afford either (and there are Constitutional issues with deploying them here). As far as deploying them in Latin America itself, that is an unwinnable war; if we had partners (as we had in Colombia more recently with the Uribe government, or with the military rulers during the Cold War) then it might work. Unfortunately, many of the Latin American governments today are leftists like our own.
Let me be very clear: I think that the Mexican government plays ball with us, or we simply declare Mexico vs US II. This is NOT about immigration. It is about cutting a cancer out of the world and doing it in a manner that is strong and clear.
Yes, I know no one has suggested this. But the economics have simply become too significant to ignore.
We keep our border with Mexico open because they have made it clear the government would fall if so many unemployed young men couldn’t leave for work (or for any purpose - including running drugs); they are already a US satellite, with no means to stop their crime & corruption. The wall should be the answer (accompanied by enforcing immigration laws).
No problem with the Constitution, as long as we post troops on the Mexico-side of the border ;-)
True, but once they start coming home in bags people will lose the stomach for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.