The Official "Making America Great Again" Thread

[Ibanez]

The average American was better off at the end of the Obama Administration then the average American was at the beginning of it. However, on a macro level, the Executive Branch (President) is not the policy setting Branch. Congress is the policy setting branch. The Congress makes the laws. The President has some power in that regard in that they can veto. But Congress has the ultimate authority in that it can override. Congress can make law without the President. The President cannot make law at all.

The Executive Branch (President) is the IMPLEMENTING Branch. The Executive Branch is responsible for IMPLEMENTING the laws Congress passes.

At least that's the design. And that's why this attitude of seeing the President as a ruler pisses me off so much. That's not the way it's supposed to be. The President is just supposed to implement the Constitution and the laws. Oh...they ARE the Commander in Chief of the military. But only Congress is SUPPOSED to have the authority to declare war.

The design is that Congress, not the Executive, is the pre-eminent branch of government. We've strayed way too far from the design.

This sounds like a D-minus report in ninth grade civics. What is true is that Congress has ceded too much authority to the Executive, because Congress is a bunch of spineless pricks and twats. The system wasn’t designed that way.

Interesting how he forgot about the third and equal branch of our government.

[css75]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/06/politics ... index.html

Sounds like most don't and are not required too.

Right.....like I said.....Trump doesn't pay for anything.

Just like Obama, Clinton, Bush 41 and 43. Probably most of them


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

Trump doesn't pay for anything.

According to the Center for Public Integrity, presidential campaign committees "are not generally obligated by federal law to pay public safety-related bills sent to them by municipalities that host presidential candidates' campaign rallies," and President Barack Obama "often did not pay such bills during his 2012 reelection campaign."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/06/politics ... index.html

Sounds like most don't and are not required too.

Yeah. Not seeing the “scandal” here. At least how it’s purely a Trump thing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

You had to let go of Trump's dick for 30 seconds to say that. Are you OK?

Still mad that he is still your President?

Are you kidding? Show me when watching your gubmint at work has ever been this entertaining? And it just keeps getting better and better- obviously you agree with that.

[SDHornet]

Still mad that he is still your President?

Are you kidding? Show me when watching your gubmint at work has ever been this entertaining? And it just keeps getting better and better- obviously you agree with that.

I do. Also entertained by all the sky screaming because of this.

[houndawg]

Are you kidding? Show me when watching your gubmint at work has ever been this entertaining? And it just keeps getting better and better- obviously you agree with that.

I do. Also entertained by all the sky screaming because of this.

If he could take the Republican Party and the FBI down with him when he goes that would justify his existence right there

[SDHornet]

I do. Also entertained by all the sky screaming because of this.

If he could take the Republican Party and the FBI down with him when he goes that would justify his existence right there

Republican party was dead before he got the nomination. The FBI took themselves down, he was just the catalyst.

[JohnStOnge]

The average American was better off at the end of the Obama Administration then the average American was at the beginning of it. However, on a macro level, the Executive Branch (President) is not the policy setting Branch. Congress is the policy setting branch. The Congress makes the laws. The President has some power in that regard in that they can veto. But Congress has the ultimate authority in that it can override. Congress can make law without the President. The President cannot make law at all.

The Executive Branch (President) is the IMPLEMENTING Branch. The Executive Branch is responsible for IMPLEMENTING the laws Congress passes.

At least that's the design. And that's why this attitude of seeing the President as a ruler pisses me off so much. That's not the way it's supposed to be. The President is just supposed to implement the Constitution and the laws. Oh...they ARE the Commander in Chief of the military. But only Congress is SUPPOSED to have the authority to declare war.

The design is that Congress, not the Executive, is the pre-eminent branch of government. We've strayed way too far from the design.

Somebody didn't watch their Schoolhouse Rock cartoons on Saturday mornings

The three branches are co-equal

That's why they are called the "three co-equal branches of the Federal government"

I disagree. The Constitution provides for a SEPARATION of powers. It does not provide for the branches to be equal in power. Congress is clearly the most powerful branch Constitutionally. Again: Congress makes laws. As a branch, it can make laws whether the President likes them or not. It can remove a President from office if it determines that that the President is not following the laws.

Yes, I know that the phrase "three co-equal branches" is commonly used. But it is not accurate. If the Legislative Branch decides to put the President in their place the President is put in their place.

The Judiciary is very powerful now. But that was not the intent. That was explicitly indicated in Federalist 78. Here is a quote:

Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power.

I included preceding language for context but the underlined portion is important. It shows that this idea of "co-equal branches" is nonsense. That's not what it was about.

Again: It was about SEPARATION of powers. It was not about making each of the three branches equal in terms of the power it wields.

Now, the protection associated with Congress being the most powerful branch is that it is composed of a large number of people. They need, for instance, to have an overwhelming majority in order to put the President in their place. But, as a branch, if they have that overwhelming majority the President is helpless. Congress can overrule him (or her). And Congress can kick him (or her) out.

[CID1990]

Somebody didn't watch their Schoolhouse Rock cartoons on Saturday mornings

The three branches are co-equal

That's why they are called the "three co-equal branches of the Federal government"

I disagree. The Constitution provides for a SEPARATION of powers. It does not provide for the branches to be equal in power. Congress is clearly the most powerful branch Constitutionally. Again: Congress makes laws. As a branch, it can make laws whether the President likes them or not. It can remove a President from office if it determines that that the President is not following the laws.

Yes, I know that the phrase "three co-equal branches" is commonly used. But it is not accurate. If the Legislative Branch decides to put the President in their place the President is put in their place.

The Judiciary is very powerful now. But that was not the intent. That was explicitly indicated in Federalist 78. Here is a quote:

Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power.

I included preceding language for context but the underlined portion is important. It shows that this idea of "co-equal branches" is nonsense. That's not what it was about.

Again: It was about SEPARATION of powers. It was not about making each of the three branches equal in terms of the power it wields.

Now, the protection associated with Congress being the most powerful branch is that it is composed of a large number of people. They need, for instance, to have an overwhelming majority in order to put the President in their place. But, as a branch, if they have that overwhelming majority the President is helpless. Congress can overrule him (or her). And Congress can kick him (or her) out.

TL/DR

If it takes you more than 1000 words to say that the government does not consist of 3 co-equal branches, then your opinion is shaky at best

(I assume thats what you are arguing)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

Somebody didn't watch their Schoolhouse Rock cartoons on Saturday mornings

The three branches are co-equal

That's why they are called the "three co-equal branches of the Federal government"

I disagree. The Constitution provides for a SEPARATION of powers. It does not provide for the branches to be equal in power. Congress is clearly the most powerful branch Constitutionally. Again: Congress makes laws. As a branch, it can make laws whether the President likes them or not. It can remove a President from office if it determines that that the President is not following the laws.

Yes, I know that the phrase "three co-equal branches" is commonly used. But it is not accurate. If the Legislative Branch decides to put the President in their place the President is put in their place.

The Judiciary is very powerful now. But that was not the intent. That was explicitly indicated in Federalist 78. Here is a quote:

Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power.

I included preceding language for context but the underlined portion is important. It shows that this idea of "co-equal branches" is nonsense. That's not what it was about.

Again: It was about SEPARATION of powers. It was not about making each of the three branches equal in terms of the power it wields.

Now, the protection associated with Congress being the most powerful branch is that it is composed of a large number of people. They need, for instance, to have an overwhelming majority in order to put the President in their place. But, as a branch, if they have that overwhelming majority the President is helpless. Congress can overrule him (or her). And Congress can kick him (or her) out.

It’s about CHECKS AND BALANCES. And you might want to read up on Marbury v. Madison when you have a few minutes.

[kalm]

This is how the game is played. Limited government at its finest.

https://apnews.com/d7440cffba4940f5b85c ... oVEYVlsV_4

[Ivytalk]

This is how the game is played. Limited government at its finest.

https://apnews.com/d7440cffba4940f5b85c ... oVEYVlsV_4

I think Analjelly scooped you!

See his latest post on Trump Whistleblower thread.

[kalm]

Oh Dear Leader! I can't believe this is real...

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
As I have stated strongly before, and just to reiterate, if Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey (I’ve done before!). They must, with Europe and others, watch over...
8:38 AM · Oct 7, 2019·Twitter for iPhone

[kalm]

President Trump late Sunday suggested that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was guilty of treason and should be “immediately” impeached.

“Nancy Pelosi knew of all of the many Shifty Adam Schiff lies and massive frauds perpetrated upon Congress and the American people, in the form of a fraudulent speech knowingly delivered as a ruthless con, and the illegal meetings with a highly partisan ‘Whistleblower’ & lawyer,” he tweeted.

“This makes Nervous Nancy every bit as guilty as Liddle’ Adam Schiff for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, and even Treason. I guess that means that they, along with all of those that evilly 'Colluded' with them, must all be immediately Impeached!”

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... mmediately

[UNI88]

President Trump late Sunday suggested that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was guilty of treason and should be “immediately” impeached.

“Nancy Pelosi knew of all of the many Shifty Adam Schiff lies and massive frauds perpetrated upon Congress and the American people, in the form of a fraudulent speech knowingly delivered as a ruthless con, and the illegal meetings with a highly partisan ‘Whistleblower’ & lawyer,” he tweeted.

“This makes Nervous Nancy every bit as guilty as Liddle’ Adam Schiff for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, and even Treason. I guess that means that they, along with all of those that evilly 'Colluded' with them, must all be immediately Impeached!”

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... mmediately

He is such an insecure little 8 year old sometimes.

[CAA Flagship]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... mmediately

He is such an insecure little 8 year old sometimes.

Sometimes?

[UNI88]

He is such an insecure little 8 year old sometimes.

Sometimes?

Shhhh, I was hoping a Trumpster would come out and argue that he isn't an insecure 8 year old and we just can't see his stable genius at work.

[houndawg]

Sometimes?

Shhhh, I was hoping a Trumpster would come out and argue that he isn't an insecure 8 year old and we just can't see his stable genius at work.

You don't mess with great and unmatched wisdom

[CAA Flagship]

Shhhh, I was hoping a Trumpster would come out and argue that he isn't an insecure 8 year old and we just can't see his stable genius at work.

You don't mess with great and unmatched wisdom

And you don't mess around with Jim

[SeattleGriz]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... mmediately

He is such an insecure little 8 year old sometimes.

But he gets his point across to those who don't bother with politics. Pretty obvious what his play for the election is going to be - I do it, I'm guilty. The deep state does it, it's okay.

[JohnStOnge]

He is such an insecure little 8 year old sometimes.

But he gets his point across to those who don't bother with politics. Pretty obvious what his play for the election is going to be - I do it, I'm guilty. The deep state does it, it's okay.

think it was a tactical error but Schiff simply paraphrased what Trump was reported as saying in that memo of telephone conversation. When a Republican complained about it he had no problem indicating that it was not a quote. He called it a "parody."

That's way different from what Trump does. Trump just flat out lies. Makes things up out of nothing. And he won't admit that he lied when he's called on it. He just doubles down and comes up with some kind of complete crap.

Schiff isn't part of what the Trump zombies are calling the "deep state" anyway. But to the extent that Trump may try to claim Schiff did something like Trump does: No. He didn't. NOBODY on the Democrat side is as bad as Trump about just total lying and bullshit. NOBODY on the Democrat OR the Republican side during my lifetime has been as bad as Trump is with respect to that. He is just completely the worst. And it's a disgrace to our country that ANYBODY supports that guy.

[Ivytalk]

But he gets his point across to those who don't bother with politics. Pretty obvious what his play for the election is going to be - I do it, I'm guilty. The deep state does it, it's okay.

think it was a tactical error but Schiff simply paraphrased what Trump was reported as saying in that memo of telephone conversation. When a Republican complained about it he had no problem indicating that it was not a quote. He called it a "parody."

That's way different from what Trump does. Trump just flat out lies. Makes things up out of nothing. And he won't admit that he lied when he's called on it. He just doubles down and comes up with some kind of complete crap.

Schiff isn't part of what the Trump zombies are calling the "deep state" anyway. But to the extent that Trump may try to claim Schiff did something like Trump does: No. He didn't. NOBODY on the Democrat side is as bad as Trump about just total lying and bullshit. NOBODY on the Democrat OR the Republican side during my lifetime has been as bad as Trump is with respect to that. He is just completely the worst. And it's a disgrace to our country that ANYBODY supports that guy.

You are a better apologist for the Donks than Chuck Todd, Jim Acosta, and Rachel Madcow rolled into one.

[kalm]

think it was a tactical error but Schiff simply paraphrased what Trump was reported as saying in that memo of telephone conversation. When a Republican complained about it he had no problem indicating that it was not a quote. He called it a "parody."

That's way different from what Trump does. Trump just flat out lies. Makes things up out of nothing. And he won't admit that he lied when he's called on it. He just doubles down and comes up with some kind of complete crap.

Schiff isn't part of what the Trump zombies are calling the "deep state" anyway. But to the extent that Trump may try to claim Schiff did something like Trump does: No. He didn't. NOBODY on the Democrat side is as bad as Trump about just total lying and bullshit. NOBODY on the Democrat OR the Republican side during my lifetime has been as bad as Trump is with respect to that. He is just completely the worst. And it's a disgrace to our country that ANYBODY supports that guy.

You are a better apologist for the Donks than Chuck Todd, Jim Acosta, and Rachel Madcow rolled into one.

So you really disagree with what JSO posted?

[JohnStOnge]

think it was a tactical error but Schiff simply paraphrased what Trump was reported as saying in that memo of telephone conversation. When a Republican complained about it he had no problem indicating that it was not a quote. He called it a "parody."

That's way different from what Trump does. Trump just flat out lies. Makes things up out of nothing. And he won't admit that he lied when he's called on it. He just doubles down and comes up with some kind of complete crap.

Schiff isn't part of what the Trump zombies are calling the "deep state" anyway. But to the extent that Trump may try to claim Schiff did something like Trump does: No. He didn't. NOBODY on the Democrat side is as bad as Trump about just total lying and bullshit. NOBODY on the Democrat OR the Republican side during my lifetime has been as bad as Trump is with respect to that. He is just completely the worst. And it's a disgrace to our country that ANYBODY supports that guy.

You are a better apologist for the Donks than Chuck Todd, Jim Acosta, and Rachel Madcow rolled into one.

It's not about being an apologist for Democrats. It's about being honest about what's going on with the side of historically been on. And it's not good. The side I have been historically been on has done something much worse than the other side has ever done by virtue of rallying behind an atrocity like Trump. He's worse than anything the Democrats have ever come up with. Just absolutely awful.

The Conservative side has historically stressed values, honesty, etc. Now most of its members have rallied behind a completely zero values, thoroughly dishonest person. They have just totally sacrificed any credibility they may have hoped to have on such subjects. Meanwhile they have also thrown out a number of practical principles. Like now increasing deficits indefinitely into the future is fine. Trade wars are fine. Breaking our word is fine. North Korea violating UN resolutions is fine. Whatever Trump does is fine regardless of how bad it is.

The Republican Party is now a Cult of Personality Party. Nothing other than worshipping at the altar of Trump matters.

[SeattleGriz]

But he gets his point across to those who don't bother with politics. Pretty obvious what his play for the election is going to be - I do it, I'm guilty. The deep state does it, it's okay.

think it was a tactical error but Schiff simply paraphrased what Trump was reported as saying in that memo of telephone conversation. When a Republican complained about it he had no problem indicating that it was not a quote. He called it a "parody."

That's way different from what Trump does. Trump just flat out lies. Makes things up out of nothing. And he won't admit that he lied when he's called on it. He just doubles down and comes up with some kind of complete crap.

Schiff isn't part of what the Trump zombies are calling the "deep state" anyway. But to the extent that Trump may try to claim Schiff did something like Trump does: No. He didn't. NOBODY on the Democrat side is as bad as Trump about just total lying and bullshit. NOBODY on the Democrat OR the Republican side during my lifetime has been as bad as Trump is with respect to that. He is just completely the worst. And it's a disgrace to our country that ANYBODY supports that guy.

Why did he need to paraphrase if he had the transcript in front of him?