Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 1001 posts

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#31

Post by zeven7 »

Ancapistani wrote: post #25
zeven7 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your comment. Overall, this lifted me up and helped me learn some more about what was in the Declaration. (I went and read it for the first time after seeing your comment.) > deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed Unfortunately, unlike 1776, today's king was given power by the governed, and the majority (of those who care enough to vote) still support him. So I don't know where thos…

With absolutely no malice intended: you step back a bit, lick your wounds, and try to figure out why your message and candidate failed - just like the GOP did for the past four years. Four years feels like a long time when it has just started; it isn’t so long at all in hindsight. Moreover, you have two years before the next opportunity you have to disempower Trump (midterm elections). The campaigns for those start i…

Thank you for a non-malicious response, but (also respectfully) I am not a Democrat, and your response seemed to me more geared toward answering "How can I deal with policy changes that I disagree with?" I am more concerned about the potential for the complete capitulation of American democracy to totalitarianism than any particular platform issues. What's happening right now is only a small part standard disagreements between parties (the GOP banning trans athletes, rebalancing the budget, approaching foreign relations differently) and much more about half the country being entranced by a cult of personality while the leaders in a position to stop a president from becoming a king instead are bowing down to him.

> try to figure out why your message and candidate failed

I don't like Harris' message. I probably disagree with her on a majority of political debate topics. I am a centrist and would agree with her on some things, but I would have considered myself a right leaning centrist more than a left leaning centrist. Her message failed for me too. I am just dismayed that the country elected _this_ man. A convicted felon who has provably lied more than any other person on record in the history of humanity, who already tried to overthrow an election, is only self interested, a bully, a sexual assaulter, a conman, a swindler: _this_ man? And now he's doing what you knew he would do, and there doesn't seem to be any way to stop it.

I don't want to know how to get Kamala 2.0 to win an election. I want to know how to get back to Bush v. Gore.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#32

Post by amyames »

unethical_ban wrote: post #24
jaybrendansmith wrote: post #11

As Americans that believe in the Republic, what exactly are we supposed to do about this? Should we continue to implore congress to take action against this lawless behavior?

In my personal life, I have resolved not to be silent if confronted with a pro-Trump opinion being voiced. To state unequivocally and without needing to elaborate that what is occurring is something un-American and goes beyond partisan differences, that Trump and his lieutenants are destroying our Federal government for a generation or more while permanently damaging our place among democracies in the world. That the…

[dead]

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#33

Post by Terr_ »

unethical_ban wrote: post #22
readthenotes1 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump is bringing up the point that this Republic's constitution only provides for three branches of a government, not 4. This reminds me of a supreme Court ruling a few years ago where the rights of native Indians had been trampled on in Oklahoma for 100 years. The court said something like "well, now that you bring it up--stop it!"

Trump is bringing up the point that all employees of the executive branch owe fealty to him, and must act directly in accordance with is directives above Congress.

And also above rulings from the Judicial Branch.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#35

Post by Terr_ »

Ancapistani wrote: post #27
zzleeper wrote: post #12

This will probably get flagged, but if you read this, spent a few minutes trying to understand the gravity of this specific EO. Every federal employee even in independent agents must and will jump when Trump says so. Even if he asks them to do something illegal (close the congress! Jail a democrat!), they must follow his orders. Because HIS interpretation of the law cannot be superseded.

If he wanted to fire anyone who disagreed with him, this EO wouldn’t have been necessary. With very few exceptions, executive branch employees serve at the pleasure of the President. This is how it is, how it has been, and is entirely consistent with the Constitution. So, if not that, then why issue this EO? First of all, it’s a statement: “Resistance to this agenda from within the executive branch will not be effect…

> If he wanted to fire anyone who disagreed with him, this EO wouldn’t have been necessary.

Nonsense! This is the exact opposite! This is EO shows Trump trying even harder to fire all the people who refuse to go along with his crimes.

He is asserting that when the Judicial branch concludes his firings are illegal, he's going to ignore it, and then fire anyone else who refuses to help him illegally fire people.

It's the democracy-destroying version of a Monty Python sketch: The people who followed the law have been sacked. The people who didn't sack the people who followed the law have also been sacked.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#36

Post by Ancapistani »

zeven7 wrote: post #31
Ancapistani wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With absolutely no malice intended: you step back a bit, lick your wounds, and try to figure out why your message and candidate failed - just like the GOP did for the past four years. Four years feels like a long time when it has just started; it isn’t so long at all in hindsight. Moreover, you have two years before the next opportunity you have to disempower Trump (midterm elections). The campaigns for those start i…

Thank you for a non-malicious response, but (also respectfully) I am not a Democrat, and your response seemed to me more geared toward answering "How can I deal with policy changes that I disagree with?" I am more concerned about the potential for the complete capitulation of American democracy to totalitarianism than any particular platform issues. What's happening right now is only a small part standard disagreemen…

> I am not a Democrat, and your response seemed to me more geared toward answering "How can I deal with policy changes that I disagree with?"

Yep, 100%. My biases are showing :)

> I am more concerned about the potential for the complete capitulation of American democracy to totalitarianism than any particular platform issues. What's happening right now is only a small part standard disagreements between parties (the GOP banning trans athletes, rebalancing the budget, approaching foreign relations differently) and much more about half the country being entranced by a cult of personality while the leaders in a position to stop a president from becoming a king instead are bowing down to him.

Yes, I’m concerned about the risks I’m seeing too. Where I’m really struggling is in trying to connect that emotion to facts. So far, every headline, article, and statement I’ve seen has turned out to be somewhere between “misleading” and “outright malicious falsehood” upon closer inspection.

Still, I read and give each one a fair chance to change my mind. The accusations being made are so extreme it would be wrong for me not to.

What really concerns me is that this extreme partisan rhetoric would make it much easier for Trump or someone near him to actually take control. When people have seen months and months of these sorts of assertions being made, only to investigate them and discover that isn’t what was happening at all… at some point, people are going to stop listening. That’s when things get really dangerous IMO.

My biggest fear with this administration is that they’ll actually do the things they’re being accused of, I’ll see it for what it is, and I won’t be able to get anyone to listen to me because of “outrage fatigue”.

ETA: a second response is coming for the last section :)

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#37

Post by h335ian »

So disappointed by the irrational and hyperbolic comments from my fellow nerds. Why are folks reading into this so much!? Clearly folks aren’t actually reading the content and just reacting based on a headline. Read, contemplate, compose. This really shouldn’t be an inflammatory exec order - from what I can tell this is precisely within the purview of a POTUS and precisely in line with historical exec orders. Why the cray cray reactions? Just cause Trump I guess. For shame. Be nerds. Look stuff up. Stop with the hyperbolic “fascist” “coup” business. If you disagree with strategy, fine!! But at least recognize that these ideas aren’t new - nor fascistic - they’re inherently American and we’re in the midst of an adjustment cycle where these old ideals will be expressed in new modalities that we don’t all agree with. Doesn’t make it “fascist”. Ugh. So juvenile.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#38

Post by hayst4ck »

We have a government that has been completely capture by the elite. Democrats are the oligarchs good cops offering performative resistance while ultimately consenting to anything that boosts their brokerage accounts and re-election budgets, while republicans are the oligarchs bad cops, directly weakening regulation of those with power, protections for those without, and systematically destroying any force that can stand up to the insanely wealthy. Republicans are setting the wealthy up for the mass privatization of public property and services as well as the purchase of all the assets firesold to sustain life during a disaster, like your parent's house when social security/medicare doesn't cover the cost of living, or like farmland that isn't profitable to farm because it's too expensive to import fertilizer.

The elite capture is multiplicitively damaging because the elite own nearly all major media outlets. WaPo, NYT, Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Neutrality is implicit support for power over justice. Justice requires challenging those with power, because those with power are the default victors in conflict. Evil wins when good men do nothing.

The Hacker News algorithm is easily gamed. Downvoting and flagging will sink any post, but resigned consent to a fait accompli is the win condition for this coup. The less they are publicly challenged, the easier it is to seize power without resistance. The easier it is to keep exercises of power unchecked.

State AGs and members of the house of representatives are making public official statements with the power of their office that we are experiencing a coup. This is historic.

I really wish dang would privilege more of these discussions about the end of constitutional rule from the automatic downward moderation of controversy and flagging.

The number of largely independent media platforms which allow for open and public discussion without major algorithmic influence is few. Failing to challenge power, submitting to it, or protecting yourself from attention is the easy thing to do, and right now we all have the privilege of doing so, but this slow moving disaster will seep into every area of our lives as the scaffolding of trust is eroded and the lack of consequences for those who exercise arbitrary power will make it a winning strategy to take advantage of people.

I understand hacker news is a place for curiosity, but curiosity is not allowed when obedience is demanded, and that is what authoritarians do, demand obedience. Maintaining one day's curiosity at the cost of tomorrow's defeats the goal of being a place for curiosity. The right to question authority... the right to be curious must be defended.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#39

Post by Ancapistani »

zeven7 wrote: post #31
Ancapistani wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With absolutely no malice intended: you step back a bit, lick your wounds, and try to figure out why your message and candidate failed - just like the GOP did for the past four years. Four years feels like a long time when it has just started; it isn’t so long at all in hindsight. Moreover, you have two years before the next opportunity you have to disempower Trump (midterm elections). The campaigns for those start i…

Thank you for a non-malicious response, but (also respectfully) I am not a Democrat, and your response seemed to me more geared toward answering "How can I deal with policy changes that I disagree with?" I am more concerned about the potential for the complete capitulation of American democracy to totalitarianism than any particular platform issues. What's happening right now is only a small part standard disagreemen…

> I don't like Harris' message. I probably disagree with her on a majority of political debate topics. I am a centrist and would agree with her on some things, but I would have considered myself a right leaning centrist more than a left leaning centrist. Her message failed for me too.

I’m an extremist without question, just not the popular type. Think less “Donald Trump” and more “Ron Paul” :)

> I am just dismayed that the country elected _this_ man. A convicted felon who has provably lied more than any other person on record in the history of humanity, who already tried to overthrow an election, is only self interested, a bully, a sexual assaulter, a conman, a swindler: _this_ man?

The alternative was someone with no obvious positions other than her predecessor’s, who was not elected by her party, and who was honestly just unlikeable as an individual for most people.

Of all the things you listed about Trump, I’d only really take issue with two: I’m not convinced he sexually assaulted anyone (though I also don’t have sufficient evidence to believe he definitely didn’t), and I don’t think “only self interested” is quite right. I think his motivations are a bit more complex than that, and are more rooted in personal pride and revenge than anything else. I don’t think he intended to win the first time, and I don’t think personal financial enrichment was really a goal of his either time.

I think his initial run was mostly on a whim, but (Hillary) Clinton offended him and he doubled down in response. His second run was personal - he felt personally attacked on both socially and legally, and has basically made it his mission in life at this point to destroy everything those who did that to him care about.

I don’t believe for a moment that he’s being selfless or altruistic. He’s acting out of self-interest, but not in the way most people would mean that statement.

> And now he's doing what you knew he would do, and there doesn't seem to be any way to stop it.

As best I can tell, he’s mostly doing what the people who elected him expected him to do.

> I don't want to know how to get Kamala 2.0 to win an election. I want to know how to get back to Bush v. Gore.

I’d be happy with Obama v. McCain at this point.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#40

Post by Ancapistani »

Terr_ wrote: post #35
Ancapistani wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he wanted to fire anyone who disagreed with him, this EO wouldn’t have been necessary. With very few exceptions, executive branch employees serve at the pleasure of the President. This is how it is, how it has been, and is entirely consistent with the Constitution. So, if not that, then why issue this EO? First of all, it’s a statement: “Resistance to this agenda from within the executive branch will not be effect…

> If he wanted to fire anyone who disagreed with him, this EO wouldn’t have been necessary. Nonsense! This is the exact opposite ! This is EO shows Trump trying even harder to fire all the people who refuse to go along with his crimes. He is asserting that when the Judicial branch concludes his firings are illegal, he's going to ignore it , and then fire anyone else who refuses to help him illegally fire people. It's…

> He is asserting that when the Judicial concludes his firings are illegal, he's going to ignore it, and fire anyone else who refuses to help him illegally fire people.

Where?

Post reply on HN