Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well he is talking about disarming US nukes
Well he already started firing the employees in charge of the nuclear arsenal.. https://archive.is/qOYI2
And attempting to re-hire them immediately afterwards.
"Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
521–530 of 1001 posts
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#522This is obviously alarming, and if used to disregard the Judiciary's interpretation of law, unconstitutional. But I'm puzzled by the exemption of the Federal Reserve and FOMC. He's previously beefed with them, and would presumably find the additional leverage useful. Why explicitly exclude them?
[dead]
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#523In general, people are going to interpret this EO with their own lens. Unsurprisingly, reasonable people may disagree on the merits of the EO as a whole. However this part of the EO is pretty concerning > 'The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch' and later > 'No employee of the executive bra…
I took it to mean that agencies no longer have the final say in interpretations of law when it comes to exercising executive power. So for instance if ATF says a banana is a machine gun and the president says "yes", then barring an act of Congress clarifying, it is. I don't see how you go from there to the end of judicial review?
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#524Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Since 2016, leftist democrats have promised that if only the democratic party moves far left enough, they will unlock some kind of secret progressive majority. This has been repudiated at every turn, most resoundingly in the last presidential election. The demographics that the leftist democrats had appointed themselves the saviors of went over to Trump, along with the tech industry which had formerly been a huge…
Eh agree in part, disagree in part. In 2016 a bunch of people who would otherwise not be interested in politics were interested in two politicians - Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. The Democratic party leadership made a concerted effort to drown Sanders' economic populism before it could succeed. That sent a message that it had no place in the party, killing their ability to grow the base, and giving MAGA (via the B…
> And most of what you described only exists in a Fox News fever dream
It also exists in the 2024 election results
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#525My high level take on this saga is: welcome to the Chinese century. It's very common for companies that are failing to adopt uncreative reactive strategies that hasten their collapse. Look at the history of Kodak for some good examples. MAGA is that for the United States -- respond to the challenges of the new century by going back to the 1950s. MAGA (and Project 2025) is going to turbocharge American decline. The pa…
Here is the crux. If during this time they also dismantle the checks and balances that allow a stable democracy to exist then they transition into chaos. Chaos creates a very convenient excuse to establish martial law. This is accelerated if the people rise up to protest the dismantling of democracy. Martial law leads to suspension of elections, ipso facto, the loss of democracy.
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#526Earlier quoted context omitted.
This EO says nothing about the Judicial branch and presents a perfectly reasonable policy statement about how legal decisions and interpretation should be made within the executive branch. What specific language in this EO do you have a problem with? I’m no fan of Trump, but this pattern of people hallucinating that Trump said something he didn’t and then freaking out about their nonexistent hallucination, is getting…
https://archive.is/g6ElI “So, through constitutional means?” the presiding judge asked. “Jawohl!” Hitler replied.
Good share, thanks.
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#527Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congress makes lots of rules about how the executive can wield power: * FOIA tells the executive branch when/how to share documents. * APA tells executive agencies what they have to do to make a rule. * Congress gives line item budgets, and the executive doesn't get to reassign funds. * Executive agencies must submit to audits from GAO (within congress) It's perfectly reasonable for congress to limit how executive ag…
There's no more FOIA - Musk had their entire office fired and disbanded.
There is no central FOIA office. Each agency has is responsible for their own FOIA requests. IF you are referring to this news story [1] That was just the FOIA office at OPM.
[1] https://www.commondreams.org/news/cnn-foia-office-of-personn...
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#528In general, people are going to interpret this EO with their own lens. Unsurprisingly, reasonable people may disagree on the merits of the EO as a whole. However this part of the EO is pretty concerning > 'The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch' and later > 'No employee of the executive bra…
who could have seen this coming
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#529In general, people are going to interpret this EO with their own lens. Unsurprisingly, reasonable people may disagree on the merits of the EO as a whole. However this part of the EO is pretty concerning > 'The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch' and later > 'No employee of the executive bra…
I took it to mean that agencies no longer have the final say in interpretations of law when it comes to exercising executive power. So for instance if ATF says a banana is a machine gun and the president says "yes", then barring an act of Congress clarifying, it is. I don't see how you go from there to the end of judicial review?
“No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law“ would seem to rule out, say, accepting a SCOTUS ruling against the President, should he insist it was wrongly decided.
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#530In general, people are going to interpret this EO with their own lens. Unsurprisingly, reasonable people may disagree on the merits of the EO as a whole. However this part of the EO is pretty concerning > 'The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch' and later > 'No employee of the executive bra…
> Nothing prevents the next president from having a radically different opinion. Of course, this is only relevant if they are interested in having a 'next' president, something which it seems a segment of society is less than open to.
I would like to believe(perhaps naively) that the segment of population which genuinely believes in doing away with democracy is pretty small.
However, in case such an event comes to pass, what is far more important is the segment which actively opposes such a power grab. Authoritarians reply on the passiveness of the majority coupled with a small but very vocal and rabid fan base.
It's quite possible that a slow and gradual slide in that direction is underway, but the minute even a small faction of people actively oppose that, strongmen tend to find the limits of their power pretty quickly and mostly in ways that are pretty detrimental to their health.
The civil rights movement is a pretty good example of the power of a small set of people being enough to have critical mass.