The Trump Presidency

sturg33 said:
"So man who supports [Trump] wants sympathy for his murdered daughter. He can go **** himself."
Click to expand...

cajun can speak for himself....but Trump and many of his supporters have actively worked to dehumanize and devalue the lives of entire groups of people...and this has contributed to a loss of empathy for people who are somehow different...I think the man whose daughter was killed is fully deserving of empathy...i just hope he will also do some reflecting about why he might not be getting it from some quarters
 
sturg33 said:
Good thread from the best member of our congress

[TW]1096537351654989825[/tw]
Click to expand...

I don't agree with Amash on many of his stances, but he is 100% correct in this assessment. The problem is Congress has ceded its authority to the Executive Branch, especially since 9/11, and for some reason has become afraid of actually passing laws. The dysfunctional, or better stated as non-functional, Congress basically invites the President to rule by Executive Order. Members of Congress across-the-board should fight this faux national emergency down to their marrow. Absent of that, they may as well all go home.
 
50PoundHead said:
I don't agree with Amash on many of his stances, but he is 100% correct in this assessment. The problem is Congress has ceded its authority to the Executive Branch, especially since 9/11, and for some reason has become afraid of actually passing laws. The dysfunctional, or better stated as non-functional, Congress basically invites the President to rule by Executive Order. Members of Congress across-the-board should fight this faux national emergency down to their marrow. Absent of that, they may as well all go home.
Click to expand...

under the non-delegation doctrine even if a branch of government tried to delegate its constitutional powers it would be invalid...the division of powers set out in the constitution can only be altered by constitutional amendment

the courts will probably rule against this pseudo emergency on narrower technical grounds, but there is a core constitutional principle at stake
 
I agree on Amash and with Amash on a number of topics. View him as one who would work across the aisle to make for the better good.
As we do disagree on most issues he seems a good faith player
..........................


the list of Speakers of the House since 9/11


Hastert 6 yrs
Pelosi 4 yrs
Boehner 4 yrs
Ryan 4 yrs

To be more specific on Congress ceding power to the executive since 9/11
Lets also be clear who headed hface of the executive for 14 of the 18 years since 9/11
Cheney and Trump
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
under the non-delegation doctrine even if a branch of government tried to delegate its constitutional powers it would be invalid...the division of powers set out in the constitution can only be altered by constitutional amendment

the courts will probably rule against this pseudo emergency on narrower technical grounds, but there is a core constitutional principle at stake
Click to expand...

I agree that the courts will likely side with Congress. My gripe is a longstanding one in that so many member of Congress want it both ways. The don't pass a law that some of their constituents (especially those in the purist ends of their base) may not like (sheer cowardice in most instances) and in the process leaves a problem unsolved. This inaction invites the President to solve the issue by Executive Order with the Andrew Jackson line-of-thinking "I'm the tribune of the people and the only one elected by the entire country" which members of Congress can then complain about. I'm in the camp--probably a dwindling one--that expects Congress to pass sensible legislation developed through compromise and limit the President's playground.

I'm not an Originalist in a lot of ways, but I am an Originalist in promoting adherence to the framework of our government and respect for the balance-of-power with a clear delineation of the powers of each branch. I didn't like it when W. did Executive Orders and Signing Statements. I didn't like it when Obama did the same thing. The difference between Trump and those two is that Trump actually seems to relish this while the other two didn't.
 
50PoundHead said:
I agree that the courts will likely side with Congress. My gripe is a longstanding one in that so many member of Congress want it both ways. The don't pass a law that some of their constituents (especially those in the purist ends of their base) may not like (sheer cowardice in most instances) and in the process leaves a problem unsolved. This inaction invites the President to solve the issue by Executive Order with the Andrew Jackson line-of-thinking "I'm the tribune of the people and the only one elected by the entire country" which members of Congress can then complain about. I'm in the camp--probably a dwindling one--that expects Congress to pass sensible legislation developed through compromise and limit the President's playground.

I'm not an Originalist in a lot of ways, but I am an Originalist in promoting adherence to the framework of our government and respect for the balance-of-power with a clear delineation of the powers of each branch. I didn't like it when W. did Executive Orders and Signing Statements. I didn't like it when Obama did the same thing. The difference between Trump and those two is that Trump actually seems to relish this while the other two didn't.
Click to expand...

yeah...DACA seemed a stretch to me even though I agree with the policy goal
 
thethe said:
What defines an emergency?
Click to expand...

obviously it's something that is the slowest way to "fix" a problem he himself says isn't necessary to be done and takes months "debating" about

that's an emergency

****ing clown question for a follower of a clown president
 
[tw]1096920155232264192[/tw]


You could pull countless amounts of tape and articles where its very clear the border crisis is a national emergency. But now those same individuals claims its imaginary. Incredible.
 
thethe said:
Anyone have a comment on the Smollett fake claim?
Click to expand...

Now this is a twitter thread worth reading. Bets on how many of these folks will come out, profusely apologize, and demand Smollet be punished for paying and orchestrating a fake hate crime?

[TW]1096184354253033472[/TW]
 
thethe said:
[tw]1096920155232264192[/tw]


You could pull countless amounts of tape and articles where its very clear the border crisis is a national emergency. But now those same individuals claims its imaginary. Incredible.
Click to expand...

I just don't see how you can call it a national emergency unless you and I have vastly different opinions of what constitutes an emergency

As Justin Amash has said, the only reason that provision is allowable because it requires action so immediate that the Congress literally cannot act in enough time to solve it.

That is not the case on our boarder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top