New And More Dangerous Stage In U.S. Constitutional Crisis

The 35-day (partial) government shutdown, longest in American history, ended Friday, Jan. 25, 2019, with a temporary and grudging truce between President Donald Trump and the U.S. Congress. The truce expires on Feb. 15. Some Federal agencies began reopening on Saturday, and about 800,000 government workers will receive paychecks. Date of paychecks to be announced.

The shutdown, the fight over a border wall at the Mexican border, and most importantly, the Constitutional crisis involving the power of the U.S. Congress to appropriate government funds and the power of the president to do . . . whatever . . .  is off the front pages of American newspapers.

We might be forgiven for thinking the storm is over.

But the Constitutional crisis has entered new and more dangerous territory. Trump has threatened to declare a state of emergency and/or shut down the government again if Congress fails to meet his demands by Feb. 15.

President Trump made a concession, gave in to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s demand to reopen the government before negotiations could begin. Trump’s seeming capitulation means nerve-rending pressures on both sides.

Trump is being portrayed as the loser. He is vilified by his Republican base. His most hard-core supporters adopted his promise of a wall as a divine right, a modern Manifest Destiny.  I can only imagine that he believes he must deliver on his promise to build a border wall, or all is lost for him.

Pelosi and Democrats are portrayed as the winners. Many on the far left are celebrating. The reality is that Pelosi is now under excruciating pressure to negotiate in good faith. Does she have any good faith?

Pelosi will feel pressure even from her own Democrats in the House of Representatives. But Pelosi says she will never agree to build any border structure, anywhere. Many Democrats agree. And of course many Democrats are willing to make at least some concessions, to build a little bit of wall, or a fence. Here, or there.

Let’s talk about it?

How negotiations will play out is totally unpredictable.

In order to resolve the deadlock and end the Constitutional crisis, there must be good-faith negotiations. Compromises must be made. Both sides must give up something in order to achieve compromise, unless one side is willing to accept defeat and declare unconditional surrender. Compromise is essential. See the problem?

What happens if compromise is not reached by Feb. 15?

It’s totally unpredictable. It appears that Trump would have little choice but to declare his emergency, spend money on a wall without Congressional appropriations. Or shut down the government again, and who knows when it would reopen?

Or maybe the deadline could be extended?

Unpredictable negotiations, unpredictable presidential actions. Weeks of uncertainty.

And it probably wasn’t on the front page of your Sunday newspaper. Nothing about the shutdown on Page 1 of the Tampa Bay Times, which claims to be the largest newspaper in the third-largest state. Nothing on page 2A or 3A. Nothing about the shutdown, the temporary truce, the Constitutional crisis. Not until Page 10A, at which point the Tampa Bay Times reports:

“Some national parks open to visitors post-shutdown”

Well, national parks ARE important. The story also reports that airports are returning to normal operation. But the Smithsonian Institution won’t reopen until Tuesday.

So now we know what’s important to Americans, or at least to newspaper editors. National parks, airports, and the Smithsonian.

The callow irresponsibility of the media is as much to blame for this crisis as the actions of politicians. And the American public, with its short attention span, is not interested. The American public has gone shopping, or something.

In the end, we Americans will get what we deserve, whatever that may be.

— John Hayden

6 thoughts on “New And More Dangerous Stage In U.S. Constitutional Crisis

  1. There is fault on all sides, unfortunately the tremendous tsunami of terrorist, traffickers, and illegal aliens could have been stemmed years ago had a wall been built. It was promised by dems and reps alike, yet no one acted on their promise.

    We have a constitution in place. We have the means to continue functioning as a nation. And yet there are those who want to tear down the USA and make us part of a global “nation.”

    We have lost our ability to debate one another, and we have become the victims of our own indecisions. We want to be kind to the oppressed, yet our inaction has allowed the oppressed to be used so that those who want to destroy our country (terrorists, MS-13, etc.) can come in by using our altruism against us. With so many pouring through our borders over decades, we are at a crisis point.

    There are two distinct ideologies in a cold war (“democratic” socialism and constitutional conserative thought) that have divided a nation to the point where NO ONE wants to budge and compromise is nearly impossible. These are the things that civil wars are made of, and if there is one truth about a civil war it’s that the only ones who win in the end are the vultures that swoop in after the dust has settled.

    There is one question I’ve asked that no one seems to have an answer for: If there is a global nation created, who will be running it? The answers I receive are nebulous at best, and go something like this, “Everyone will get along so well and there will be only peace.”

    If there is one truth about humanity, its this: Without checks and balances, what rises to the top will decide who lives or dies, and do so at the edge of a sword.


    • You have set out the essential issues more clearly and concisely than I could. Thank you! I agree with your concern about civil war.

      Regarding the question of who might run a globalized world: I will make a guess. Powerful corporations, possibly with interlocking investors and directors, will consolidate economic power. Corporations do not have consciences. Exactly how policy will be made and implemented is beyond me. But it will be structured to benefit the few dominant corporations, and a small cabal of the most wealthy individuals or families in the world.

      Liked by 1 person

      • That is the best answer I’ve received as of yet! Whether it’s corporations or a cabal, those in charge won’t care about color or creed. The bait used to reel in a nation is like a worm to a fish. Once hooked, the fisherman is in control.


What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s