Chappy v Chip

    0
    190

    From Chip Darby

    Ok Chappy Gypsy how about you stop challenging my intellect and simply quote the constitution. He is commander in chief over the military when the military is in service of the several states as outlined by Congress the Congress is still responsible for the military budget. He has the authority to use the military to defend the several states when Congress hasn’t had time to convene. None of this gives him the authority to draw money from the treasury to build a wall. Show me in the constitution where he has the authority. Otherwise your verbose responses are only to play to your cheerleaders.

    From the Mind of a Dumb ole Biker from Alvin, Texas:
    So Chip Darby has made it his mission to tell me I pander to an audience and I’m Wrong about the President and his National Emergency.

    He says, Ok Chappy Gypsy how about you stop challenging my intellect, Otherwise your verbose responses are only to play to your cheerleaders.

    My response to him:

    Well Chip Darby, I wasn’t trying to challenge your intellect, I was however trying to get you to see the bigger picture. Let’s look at the facts.

    The President has inherent executive powers from Article II, as well as delegated authority from Congress under existing law, to stop taking in immigrants at the border or through visas for as much time as he deems necessary. While Congress controls immigration once immigrants are legally admitted to our country and can also exclude anyone from admission, the president shares concurrent jurisdiction on exclusions. He can’t deport anyone he wants to without an authorizing statue, but he can exclude anyone up front. As the Supreme Court said in a landmark 1950 case, “The exclusion of aliens is a fundamental act of sovereignty. The right to do so stems not alone from legislative power but is inherent in the executive power to control the foreign affairs of the nation.” This is why for the first 100 years of our country, immigration was entirely controlled by diplomatic correspondence through the State Department. Delegated authority from Congress
    INA 212(f) allows the president, whenever he finds that “the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States,” to “suspend” all forms of immigration “for such period as he shall deem necessary.”

    INA 215(a)(1) grants the president an almost equal level of authority to subject entry of all aliens entering or departing to “such reasonable rules, regulations, and orders, and subject to such limitations and exceptions as the President may prescribe.” If demanding that all immigrants enter legally or apply for asylum in a safe and controlled environment at a consulate rather than at a border controlled by some of the most dangerous people in the world is not a “reasonable rule,” I’m not sure what is.

    In addition, given that this is not an ordinary case of immigration or a trickle of asylum seekers, but rather a mass influx, the attorney general can use 8 U.S.C. § 1103(a)(10) to deputize local law enforcement bodies at the border that wish to participate to engage in the police powers of federal immigration officers. This section of the law states that when there’s an “imminent mass influx of aliens arriving off the coast of the United States, or near a land border,” the attorney general may “authorize any State or local law enforcement officer” to perform such duties. This will help with the manpower and the national security component of the issue. As I said Chip Darby, your’re smarter than that. Everything the President is doing, he is doing under current law, the same law that Congress voted on and gave their permissions to allow Presidents past authority. Just because it’s Trump doesn’t negate the fact that he has Presidential Authority under current law. If Congress doesn’t like the very laws most of them created in the past, then they need to work on changing the laws of this nation.

    I back my writings up with facts, using the Laws that Congress enacted, you say I’m pandering to my cheerleaders. Not true sir, however I can say you in-fact do pander to your audience. Never ever tell me I’m pandering to my cheerleaders. Everything I write is for informational purposes and I don’t pander to any audience. I write the truth and don’t really give a rats ass about who does or doesn’t agree with me, when I write. I write in hopes people will wake up and understand what’s happening to our Nation. Something you use to do as well. Understand something, I don’t write to influence and win friends. Never have. But I do back my writings up with facts. Chip Darby, you have yet to show me where I’m wrong, but to tell me I pandering to my cheerleaders? Wow, you don’t know me at all. We all have our part to play, and I will do what I can. Whether it’s in Austin, or I’m at the Border, running for Precinct Chair, or District Chair, or I’m sitting in my living room writing about the things I’ve learned from talking to the people over the short 58 years I’ve been on this planet. You see, I;m out there when most of the other people are not! I stand behind my convictions.

    But what do I know? I’m just a Dumb ole Biker from Alvin Texas.

    From Chip:

    This is the COMMENT that INITIATED his response:

    “Chappy Gypsy first let me say, I am grateful to be in a conversation about this with someone who is not calling me a libtard or a leftist moron.

    As far as your comment goes I agree Trump has the authority to intervene on this issue but the problem I have is how he is attempting to intervene.

    I have no issue with Trump enforcing current immigration laws or using military force to repel the invasion both of those are within the scope of his assigned powers.

    I have no problem with him prosecuting state, federal and city officials who aid in the criminal action by offering financial benefits or “sanctuary” provisions.

    All that is within the scope of his constitutional authority.
    This is where I would agree with rand Paul and some of the others who opposed his resolution (based on constitutionality).

    He doesn’t have the authority to remove money from the treasury without the consent of Congress

    He doesn’t have the authority to steal land from the residents of a state.

    Chip
    Where were you guys when we were trying to get Rick Perry to stop offering incentives to illegal immigrants? When we were challenging our state representative to empower the Texas State Guard to use military force on the borders? Where were you when we were calling attention to the plight of Paul Copeland who lost his rights and was imprisoned as a result of sanctuary city policies in Texas? Where were you when we had civilian militia patrolling private property on the borders turning away illegal immigrants? Where were you when we fought to use constitutionally sound solutions to control the borders? Some of you may have been with us but I bet many of you were supporting that traitorous Rick Perry in one of his show boat prayer meetings. A patriot would honor the founding documents of his state and the union his state empowers. To imply I am not a patriot because I oppose the violation of our constitution is to make an implication in utter ignorance. We have constitutional resources for controlling illegal immigration. Many of us know that a little military force and enforcement of our current laws would have a dramatic impact on illegal immigration. Bush took latitude with the patriot act and Obama with Obama care and now Trump. Each time one team places its policy over the constitution or liberty it is a step towards a total loss of liberty.

    He has a lot of options at his disposal that don’t involve constitution violations. I am not open borders advocate I just think bypassing the constitution even for a good cause is a bad idea.”


    Chappy
    Chip Darby As I said, you don’t know me very well, but I’ve been in this fight since 1989. I’ve been writing and talking about this in Austin at the State Capitol, and all around the Great State of Texas trying to raise awareness since 1995. So don’t ask me where I’ve been. I was called a conspiracy theorist long before you came on the scene. I was told none of this would ever happen in the United States and certainly not the Great State of Texas. Where was I? No sir, Where were you? I’ve been fighting these idiots since Waco and Ruby Ridge, trying to get the truth out there. You come into the game late and want to ask where was I? You see, you didn’t hit the stage until the Ron Paul Revolution, which I was also a Ron Paul State Delegate, I was in Fort Worth at the State Convention,during that time. I also have challenged our District Precinct Chair Twice since then, so don’t ask me where was I. I have been fighting these establishment bastards a long time. I have also been in and remain in the Republic of Texas and am an advocate to leave the union if we don’t get this mess fixed and fixed soon. One of my best friends was Johnny Johnson, he’s dead now, but he started the militia movement here in Texas long before your time, Maybe you’re familiar with Johnny Johnson, because I guarantee you, most of the Militias are very familiar with that name. Oh and where was I when it came to the border, I was at the VIcker’s Ranch, and down in the Rio Grande Valley. We even podcast our show several times while down in the RIO GRANDE VALLEY and from Vicker/s Ranch.

    Chip

    Congress INA 212(f) allows the president, whenever he finds that “the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States,” to “suspend” all forms of immigration “for such period as he shall deem necessary.”

    INA 215(a)(1) grants the president an almost equal level of authority to subject entry of all aliens entering or departing to “such reasonable rules, regulations, and orders, and subject to such limitations and exceptions as the President may prescribe.” If demanding that all immigrants enter legally or apply for asylum in a safe and controlled environment at a consulate rather than at a border controlled by some of the most dangerous people in the world is not a “reasonable rule,” I’m not sure what is.

    In addition, given that this is not an ordinary case of immigration or a trickle of asylum seekers, but rather a mass influx, the attorney general can use 8 U.S.C. § 1103(a)(10) to deputize local law enforcement bodies at the border that wish to participate to engage in the police powers of federal immigration officers. This section of the law states that when there’s an “imminent mass influx of aliens arriving off the coast of the United States, or near a land border,” the attorney general may “authorize any State or local law enforcement officer” to perform such duties. This will help with the manpower and the national security component of the issue. As I said Chip Darby, your’re smarter than that. Everything the President is doing, he is doing under current law, the same law that Congress voted on and gave their permissions to allow Presidents past authority. Just because it’s Trump doesn’t negate the fact that he has Presidential Authority under current law. If Congress doesn’t like the very laws most of them created in the past, then they need to work on changing the laws of this nation.

    Chip
    Chappy Gypsy why would you support bump stock bans and red flag laws? This post is addressing multiple issues. Trump has done well with the economy and I will support some of his economic policies but every time he desires to violate the Constitution I will refuse to support that. The other post where I defended Rand Paul’s support of the national emergency declaration was the one you originally objected to.

    His so called Bump Stock ban is actually on hold and now it’s in the hands of the courts, now if I wanted to have something pulled off the table, I would do something completely ridiculous knowing it was unconstitutional and force it into the courts to get that ruling, therefore taking any future bans off the table. The Red Flag laws are being used by the states, even here in Texas, Red Flag laws have to be fought and fought at the higher courts, Remember, even if the Federal Red Flag laws get beat in Congress, Many States are enacting their own Red Flag laws, Something by the way that is in-fact the right of the State. While Unconstitutional, States rights supersede Federal law, or in theory that was the way it was supposed to work. This was supposed to apply to anything that was not directly covered in the Constitution, On that point Mr. Chip Darby, you’re are correct! That too is the point of the conversations I have with you, so that people see that there are indeed two sides of every story. I am not attacking you at all, But between the two of us, our conversations invoke the thought patterns of others. My main goal is to make others think, and you my friend do that quite well.

    https://prospect.org/article/trumps-emergency-action-unlawful-and-unconstitutional

    Chappy

    Chip Darby, For everyone of those video and articles with the globalist spouting how illegal Donald J. Trump’s National Emergency is, I can post just as many by some of the best legal minds in the country explaining why it’s not. Don’t play games. I gave you the laws Trump is operating under, now you sir, please show me the exact laws he’s violating. I’m not going to match you video for video of why and why not’s. Show me the laws you’re set on defending. You already said in another post, your problem was with the eminent domain laws, unfortunately, even those laws fall into Donald J. Trump’s authority and have since the early 1800’s beginning with the railroad.

    Actually, folks, I will tell you why I do like this conversation with Mr. Chip Darby, It’s discussions like this, that really get people to start thinking. There is so much power at your finger tips today, that there is absolutely no reason for anyone to remain ignorant. Chip and I have these type of conversations so people can see two different sides of a growing problem. Now if you noticed, there was no name calling by either party. This is how conversations are supposed to go, Show both sides of the equation, from two different perspectives. It’s actually an honor to debate with Mr. Chip Darby, he knows and understands where to draw the line. But I kept the conversation going, because, this is an issue that needs to be addressed and it should have been addressed 2 decades ago. We the People need to be having these conversations with our Representatives and let them know, we are all tired of the games coming out of Washington, D.C. They can either fix it, or we’ll find those who can and elect them to do it.. Chip Darby as I said before is a stand up gentlemen and he wants what’s best for our country too.

    Chip
    This is still going? Chappy Gypsy a lot of people here are assuming I am a liberal. When you started sharing and tagging folks you didn’t share the initial part of the conversation.

    In essence I thought it Ironic that Republicans were condemning Rand Paul and others for supporting the Constitution. You questioned my position and I shared it.

    Had you included my response the folks following this would realize I am more of a constitutional conservative than most.

    I CHALLENGE ALL OF YOU WHO THINK I AM AN OPEN BORDER LIBERAL TO READ THE COMMENT THAT INITIATED CHAPPY’S POST:

    Chappy Gypsy first let me say, I am grateful to be in a conversation about this with someone who is not calling me a libtard or a leftist moron.
    As far as your comment goes I agree Trump has the authority to intervene on this issue but the problem I have is how he is attempting to intervene.

    I have no issue with Trump enforcing current immigration laws or using military force to repel the invasion both of those are within the scope of his assigned powers.

    I have no problem with him prosecuting state, federal and city officials who aid in the criminal action by offering financial benefits or “sanctuary” provisions.

    All that is within the scope of his constitutional authority.
    This is where I would agree with rand Paul and some of the others who opposed his resolution (based on constitutionality).
    He doesn’t have the authority to remove money from the treasury without the consent of Congress

    He doesn’t have the authority to steal land from the residents of a state.

    He has a lot of options at his disposal that don’t involve constitution violations. I am not open borders advocate I just think bypassing the constitution even for a good cause is a bad idea.

    Peggy Harris Denson no peeing contest here just want to be accurately represented. Chappy Gypsy reposted part of what I said in a thread on my page and tagged a lot of folks. Typically Chappy and I are in agreement have no clue why he chose to misconstrue my position here. Nevertheless I do agree with you except for the peeing contest. I have been advocating for military action at the border for over a decade and both Trump and Abbott have the Constitutional authority to do that.


    Billy White, this was the comment that started the last conversation between Chip and me…and he’s still wrong on this subject, I have to admit, Chip is normally not wrong, but on this subject he is. Here’s why, The President has inherent executive powers from Article II, as well as delegated authority from Congress under existing law, to stop taking in immigrants at the border or through visas for as much time as he deems necessary. As the Supreme Court said in a landmark 1950 case, “The exclusion of aliens is a fundamental act of sovereignty. The right to do so stems not alone from legislative power but is inherent in the executive power to control the foreign affairs of the nation. In 1976 Congress gave the President full authority to declare National Emergencies when there was a threat to this nation. Now if Congress wants to rescind all National Emergencies which are still in affect and rule them illegal, I might concede that we need to limit what is and what isn’t a National Emergency, however, when we have had 76,000 illegals enter our country in the last month alone, anyone with any sense at all, understands we have an invasion problem.



    The Butcher Shop
    SHARE
    Previous articleAnd They Had Machine Guns
    Next articleSection 22.041
    The Butcher Shop is an alternative news source based in the Tea Party Tribune with an eye on God, family, and preservation of America. It is a collection of minds started by Bill the Butcher, a conservative op/ed journalist who began publishing forty years ago. We strive to make the articles informative, entertaining, and diverse. All you see will cause you to stop and consider. We try not to drone on with the same old day after day clap trap that may have driven you away from mainstream media. You will read things here that you will see nowhere else. We are from London to Austin to the Escalanté. So, what’s your cut of meat? Shop around. The Butcher Shop is happy to fill your order.

    LEAVE A REPLY