Special counsel Robert Mueller's team has interviewed White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, @pamelabrowncnn reports. "The President urged me, like he has everyone in the administration, to fully cooperate with the special counsel," @presssec said in a statement.
Post by UMaineTeach on Feb 15, 2019 15:18:48 GMT -5
"If we had a wall, we wouldn't need a military.“
CBS Evening News tweet quoting 45
It’s ok to spend the DoD funds, because if we build a wall we can disband the armed forces. There are no other threats to national security besides Mexicans who cross illegally, cause car accidents, and take our jobs.
I wonder if ol' SHS was as snarky and shitty to the SCO as she is to reporters. I imagine the smokey eye lies were running off her face while she was discussing those alt-facts she spews.
There's no way they'll even begin construction by the time he's voted out of office. The survey that's needed prior to groundbreaking will be of massive scale, and incredibly costly. They'll have to pull deeds and records for EVERY SINGLE tract of land along the wall route. Let alone working with current property owners that have land bordering the proposed wall.
This is actually what I do, in Texas no less, and on a 7 mile tract it takes nearly 6 months to complete the research and survey.
Yep. I work in industrial construction and told DH last night that there is no way they’ll even be able to get a contractor under contract by that point. There are so many things that have to happen before any firm can provide even a ballpark figure, let alone something refined enough to be worth the risk they will take on. Not to mention, if done correctly (and I realize that’s a big if), federal contracts take for-e-ver. This is so fucking absurd.
Does the Emergency status ease all the property rights problems? Will they still need to eminent domain/fight in court a million different people who own the land that the wall would be built on, thus delaying the actual building indefinitely?
I can speak to NEPA and Army Corps environmental requirements/permitting, but not eminent domain. There is precedence and a Exec. order that allows National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and Army Corps of Engineering permitting (for infrastructure near navigable rivers) to be circumvented during a national emergency with immediate threat to human health; however, NEPA and permiting have to be accommodated for longer term responses to national emergencies unless a council allows them to be met with certain planning conditions
"...long-term disaster response and the recovery actions remain subject to the regular NEPA process.
Alternative arrangements do not waive the requirement to comply with NEPA, but establish an alternative means for NEPA compliance. Alternative arrangements do not complete or alter other environmental requirements; however, engaging other resource and regulatory agencies about other environmental requirements during development and implementation of alternative arrangements can facilitate meeting other compliance requirements. Alternative arrangements for compliance with NEPA under 40 CFR § 1506.11 may be subject to judicial review of a final agency action."
We have helped with disaster responses with DoD and DOE that still have to comply with NEPA, so I know that it will cost A LOT of consultant $$$ to try to get the environmental assessments or conditions assessed fast and sufficiently - more than if it were a longer-term planned project not under emergency order.
Post by litebright on Feb 15, 2019 17:36:11 GMT -5
I dunno, haven't they already started construction at the National Butterfly Center? And I think I saw that the lawsuit some people filed trying to stop it got thrown out.
Ok, I guess that worked started in 2017 and was ... paused for some reason? But I am afraid that they're allowed to sidestep so many regulations that this will go up faster than people might think.
Does the Emergency status ease all the property rights problems? Will they still need to eminent domain/fight in court a million different people who own the land that the wall would be built on, thus delaying the actual building indefinitely?
I can speak to NEPA and Army Corps environmental requirements/permitting, but not eminent domain. There is precedence and a Exec. order that allows National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and Army Corps of Engineering ...
I think a lot of comparisons can be made between what Walker did with Foxconn and what they will try to do here. WEPA compliance was waived for Foxconn through the creation of 2017 Wisconsin Act 58 and they determined NEPA didn’t apply because it didn’t impact Waters of the US, even though it directly impacted the Great Lakes. Basically they made no one responsible for regulations and permits so what is typically done wasn’t done.
Is anyone hearing anything about what Rachel mentioned last night? Nancy Pelosi can call a vote to stop the national emergency, which would also force a vote in the Senate.
I can speak to NEPA and Army Corps environmental requirements/permitting, but not eminent domain. There is precedence and a Exec. order that allows National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and Army Corps of Engineering ...
I think a lot of comparisons can be made between what Walker did with Foxconn and what they will try to do here. WEPA compliance was waived for Foxconn through the creation of 2017 Wisconsin Act 58 and they determined NEPA didn’t apply because it didn’t impact Waters of the US, even though it directly impacted the Great Lakes. Basically they made no one responsible for regulations and permits so what is typically done wasn’t done.
I don't know much about this Foxconn deal - I think someone (you?) first talked about it here. This is slightly different. NEPA is a national environmental policy act that has jurisdiction on national borders - not state jurisdictions and compacts/treaties with other countries also have to be accommodated. But they could still circumvent some timing and public comment... just not all of it.
From what I can see here (dnr.wi.gov/Business/Foxconn.html), Foxconn is actually getting the permits and complying with the environmental permit requirements that Wisconsin has for environmental development. It might be shady, but it also looks like they haven't gotten any commission accommodations, just that they are mitigating their environmental issues and getting permits to develop. You may already know this, but it's a common misconception that a state agency can stop a proposed development - they can't - usually their state constitutions and laws don't allow that. They can impose tough environmental permit conditions that force a company to want to stop development b/c they are too costly to implement, but no State's (that I know of) Department of Environmental Quality (or similar) has the authority to just not give a permit - they have to issue a permit even if it has crazy conditions. They also get to fine after the fact if those conditions aren't met or environmental contaminants are found. But there isn't really anything they can do to stop a development.
Now the water allocation is through a different act - compact and that is still in court, I believe. Water rights compacts can stop development, but I don't know much about those laws and regulations.
I think a lot of comparisons can be made between what Walker did with Foxconn and what they will try to do here. WEPA compliance was waived for Foxconn through the creation of 2017 Wisconsin Act 58 and they determined NEPA didn’t apply because it didn’t impact Waters of the US, even though it directly impacted the Great Lakes. Basically they made no one responsible for regulations and permits so what is typically done wasn’t done.
I don't know much about this Foxconn deal - I think someone (you?) first talked about it here. This is slightly different. NEPA is a national environmental policy act that has jurisdiction on national borders - not state jurisdictions and compacts/treaties with other countries also have to be accommodated. But they could still circumvent some timing and public comment... just not all of it.
From what I can see here (dnr.wi.gov/Business/Foxconn.html), Foxconn is actually getting the permits and complying with the environmental permit requirements that Wisconsin has for environmental development. It might be shady, but it also looks like they haven't gotten any commission accommodations, just that they are mitigating their environmental issues and getting permits to develop. You may already know this, but it's a common misconception that a state agency can stop a proposed development - they can't - usually their state constitutions and laws don't allow that. They can impose tough environmental permit conditions that force a company to want to stop development b/c they are too costly to implement, but no State's (that I know of) Department of Environmental Quality (or similar) has the authority to just not give a permit - they have to issue a permit even if it has crazy conditions. They also get to fine after the fact if those conditions aren't met or environmental contaminants are found. But there isn't really anything they can do to stop a development.
Now the water allocation is through a different act - compact and that is still in court, I believe. Water rights compacts can stop development, but I don't know much about those laws and regulations.
Ugh, so the dnr site is misleading because they would have to comply with the standard state regs and permits, but Act 58 (created solely for Foxconn) exempts them from needing to do so.
Is anyone hearing anything about what Rachel mentioned last night? Nancy Pelosi can call a vote to stop the national emergency, which would also force a vote in the Senate.
We heard something barely mentioned by a Chuck Todd guest, no follow-up (grrr). So H just asked if “anyone on your Board” had brought this up. 😌 Sorry for no further info, but just to inform- there are definitely others who want to know!
The racist asshole who insulted Michelle Obama with the “ ... in heels” comment faces an $18k fine (and possible half a million more) and 30 years in prison for defrauding FEMA.
I think a lot of comparisons can be made between what Walker did with Foxconn and what they will try to do here. WEPA compliance was waived for Foxconn through the creation of 2017 Wisconsin Act 58 and they determined NEPA didn’t apply because it didn’t impact Waters of the US, even though it directly impacted the Great Lakes. Basically they made no one responsible for regulations and permits so what is typically done wasn’t done.
I don't know much about this Foxconn deal - I think someone (you?) first talked about it here. This is slightly different. NEPA is a national environmental policy act that has jurisdiction on national borders - not state jurisdictions and compacts/treaties with other countries also have to be accommodated. But they could still circumvent some timing and public comment... just not all of it.
From what I can see here (dnr.wi.gov/Business/Foxconn.html), Foxconn is actually getting the permits and complying with the environmental permit requirements that Wisconsin has for environmental development. It might be shady, but it also looks like they haven't gotten any commission accommodations, just that they are mitigating their environmental issues and getting permits to develop. You may already know this, but it's a common misconception that a state agency can stop a proposed development - they can't - usually their state constitutions and laws don't allow that. They can impose tough environmental permit conditions that force a company to want to stop development b/c they are too costly to implement, but no State's (that I know of) Department of Environmental Quality (or similar) has the authority to just not give a permit - they have to issue a permit even if it has crazy conditions. They also get to fine after the fact if those conditions aren't met or environmental contaminants are found. But there isn't really anything they can do to stop a development.
Now the water allocation is through a different act - compact and that is still in court, I believe. Water rights compacts can stop development, but I don't know much about those laws and regulations.
In addition to this, there are certain permits (at least in my state) that have no deadline to approve or deny. Others have a 90 day clock, 180 day clock, etc. The company I work for (and my team in particular) has been waiting for a relatively simple permit on a site for well over a year and a half, because the agency doesn’t have to issue it and we have no recourse. We’ve done everything right, all of the other relevant agencies have signed off, etc.
The racist asshole who insulted Michelle Obama with the “ ... in heels” comment faces an $18k fine (and possible half a million more) and 30 years in prison for defrauding FEMA.
It took 3 days to survey our land for us to figure out property lines to put up a fence. We live on 0.36 acres.
I imagine this imbecile's wall will take years to even plan. Except I think #45 will do whatever he wants and break any laws he wants to get this done ASAP.
Will he? Not that he is against subverting the law, but it sounded very much like more lies to appease his base and setting up political cover. Well, it's going to court, so what is a great orange liar to do? :::shrugs:::
Right, the money may be there though that will be challenged but all of the other stuff in terms of surveys, getting the bids and crews together will all be done by the local and state government which he has no power over. Very little will be accomplished but he will just blame those governments for the delays. He got what he needed for his base. He won't give shit about it after today.
Will he? Not that he is against subverting the law, but it sounded very much like more lies to appease his base and setting up political cover. Well, it's going to court, so what is a great orange liar to do? :::shrugs:::
Right, the money may be there though that will be challenged but all of the other stuff in terms of surveys, getting the bids and crews together will all be done by the local and state government which he has no power over. Very little will be accomplished but he will just blame those governments for the delays. He got what he needed for his base. He won't give shit about it after today.
I’m also thinking this is the last we will hear about the wall. Unless he desperately needs a deflection again in the near future.
Is anyone hearing anything about what Rachel mentioned last night? Nancy Pelosi can call a vote to stop the national emergency, which would also force a vote in the Senate.
But even if it were to pass the Senate, Trump can veto the legislation they vote on, because it still has to be signed by him to take effect -- unless there is a supermajority to override him. Which there is unlikely to be. I know that it's constitutional and everything, to require a president to sign legislation or be overridden by a supermajority, but it's still kind of crazy to me that he gets to veto a check on his own power. Our government really is based on a whole lot of assumptions about character and respect for norms that Trump and the majority of the GOP no longer meet.
The GOP is just going to live with him doing this, and maybe some of them will hope that the courts rein him in so they don't have to.
litebright I think the point would be to make Senators go on the record voting for or against and give McConnell a headache trying to keep the R caucus from splintering. Make him use up some political capital fighting this
litebright I think the point would be to make Senators go on the record voting for or against and give McConnell a headache trying to keep the R caucus from splintering. Make him use up some political capital fighting this
Oh, I absolutely get that. I just wish there was a likelihood that something would actually happen to stop him, and short of the courts, there really isn't.
And I wonder if the courts are going to be reluctant to challenge a president's opinion of what's an emergency. It's not illegal for a president to be wrong and I don't think it's even illegal for him to lie about whether there's an actual emergency or why he declared it. SCOTUS ended up letting the Muslim travel ban stand, because the president had the power to make that decision and they ended up saying that since it was "neutral on its face" that his public comments that indicated it was a tool of discrimination didn't matter.
“The issue before us is not whether to denounce the statements,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote. “It is instead the significance of those statements in reviewing a presidential directive, neutral on its face, addressing a matter within the core of executive responsibility.”
Basically I guess the real hope is that things can be dragged out long enough to get him out of office. I just ... this is where we are. Sometimes it hits me just how far we've slid.
I still think Will Hurd has a great idea. Fiber optics is a fraction of the cost of a wall and video surveillance gives a much better opportunity for necessary patrols to scramble to affected areas than a static wall that can be climbed over or dug under when nobody's looking. (The Hurd proposal is fiber optic cables to run along the border with video feed. The cable can also be used to support infrastructure/communities along the border that don't have access to high speed cable. I think it's smart, clever and has few negatives compared to the number of positives. I think I saw it posted here originally but ICYMI www.businessinsider.com/will-hurd-border-security-idea-fiber-optic-cable-instead-of-wall-2019-1)
Is anyone hearing anything about what Rachel mentioned last night? Nancy Pelosi can call a vote to stop the national emergency, which would also force a vote in the Senate.
But even if it were to pass the Senate, Trump can veto the legislation they vote on, because it still has to be signed by him to take effect -- unless there is a supermajority to override him. Which there is unlikely to be. I know that it's constitutional and everything, to require a president to sign legislation or be overridden by a supermajority, but it's still kind of crazy to me that he gets to veto a check on his own power. Our government really is based on a whole lot of assumptions about character and respect for norms that Trump and the majority of the GOP no longer meet.
The GOP is just going to live with him doing this, and maybe some of them will hope that the courts rein him in so they don't have to.
I don't know if it helps at all, but I called Sen Lankford's office (R-OK), and they assured me that he will be voting to stop the national emergency, should a joint resolution about it be called to a vote. His reasoning was that this is not how the national emergency declaration is supposed to be used, that there are other things we can do about the border without declaring an emergency, and that this sets up a bad precedent for future presidents (his staff meant democratic presidents, of course).
I have no reason to believe that the staffer on the phone was being dishonest or playing word games with me, so there's at least 1 R Senator who will vote against the President in this instance.