What gives the President power to create new government organizations?

#51
DocRDS said:
Exactly. I have no love for Musk who was a grifter on green energy credits before he became a media darling of the right. However, all presidents have advisors who are "unelected" Chief of Staff usually is one of the most powerful people in the world (especially domestically). That person never gets senate approval.


Its not that Trump is uniquely a dictator. The imperial presidency has been on the rise for some time and each cycle it gets worse. I don't think Trump is "different" than any previous occupant in that regard, I think some of us are coming to the realization that the Government is beyond broken and it starts with the executive branch and federal bureaucracy, regardless of who occupies the seat. As I said in the other thread, Trump is a symptom, not the disease. Its not that there is "some alternative" --our leaders over the last 80-100 years have failed us. Its bigger than any one individual.
Click to expand...
From all I have studied about US History, the Imperial Presidency has been in decline, as have the powers of the Legislative Branch, with the rise of the Administrative State. The best example of an Imperial President domestically was FDR (4 terms, rubber-stamp SCOTUS, slavish Congress for the 1930s and early 1940s).

The Progressive Era Administrative State has ballooned into a behemoth that simply ignores Congressional oversight and literally tells members of Congress to pound sand, ignores WH orders, and doesn’t care if SCOTUS rules against its actions decisively.

It still continues marching along, re-naming and adapting around oversight attempts.

A simple example for us gun folks is the ATF.

For States, fisherman, and outdoorsmen, it’s the EPA.

For parents and schools, it’s the DOEd and their State clones in each of the States.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10ring'r, mosin46, MarshallDodge and 2 others
#52
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking for any advise. I'm simply asking what gives him the right to create a "new" organization within our government when existing laws and the Constitution say it needs Congressional approval.

No one to this point has been able to provide me the documentation granting him the authority to do so. Instead you have voiced your personal opinions and questioned my reasons for asking such a question instead of pointing me to the documentation that would answer my question.

Apparently more people are interested in simply attacking my question and point of view then providing a link to the documentation showing he has the authority to do so.
Click to expand...
You've been given the answer at least three times in this thread, but you choose to ignore it. So you’re either too ignorant, likely willfully so, or don’t care for the answer because you don’t want to hear it. Either way, welcome to the ignore list….a shame really, because based your other posts seemed like you were at least ostensibly a participating member of the shooting community.

Trolls gonna troll though… bye bye from my feed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lightning8 and NoDopes
#53
LRRPF52 said:
From all I have studied about US History, the Imperial Presidency has been in decline, as have the powers of the Legislative Branch, with the rise of the Administrative State. The best example of an Imperial President domestically was FDR (4 terms, rubber-stamp SCOTUS, slavish Congress for the 1930s and early 1940s).

The Progressive Era Administrative State has ballooned into a behemoth that simply ignores Congressional oversight and literally tells members of Congress to pound sand, ignores WH orders, and doesn’t care if SCOTUS rules against its actions decisively.

It still continues marching along, re-naming and adapting around oversight attempts.

A simple example for us gun folks is the ATF.

For States, fisherman, and outdoorsmen, it’s the EPA.

For parents and schools, it’s the DOEd and their State clones in each of the States.
Click to expand...
Who's in charge of the administrative state?

The President. (He can fire all of em if he wants, choosing not to act is just as important as a bad decision).

We're on the same page--its the executive BRANCH, which is the administrative state. And I disagree with the decline of the imperial presidency, its been ramping up for a century because the first thing we (the people) do when something goes wrong is "DO SOMETHING"

So maybe splitting hairs but we can at least drink beer while someone takes a wrecking ball to our current situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mosin46
#54
B y r o n said:
Holding the title of "President" doesn't give ANYONE the RIGHT to violate the Constitution or laws of this country!
Click to expand...
Show me in the Constitution where it says he can't. Show me in the constitution where it says Shall not be infringed except for this that and the other thing.

Basically what I'm saying is why don't you and your buddy Kalisnakev or how ever he spells it go fuck right off. This shit is what I voted for and I AM fucking entertained!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 101st, Woodlanddude, MJF and 6 others
#55
As previously stated, not a new department.

You're just fine asking about the constitutionality of anything.......but then you out yourself by saying things like,

"It is like a big middle finger to democracy and shows he is just a big fat putin puppet!"

"....us citizens are way too stupid to understand why/how all the money is spent like it is....we have no lawful right to know where the money is going in the first place!"

So you're a constitutionalist, but also pro-democracy.....meaning you're likely half-retarded.
You're pro-democracy, but believe the tax-paying electorate both:
  1. Is too stupid to understand how/why government spends money
  2. Has no RIGHT to observe how their own money is being spent by the people representing them
This is a wonderful look into the mind of a Leftist, as they're getting politically steamrolled.

"When we win, we target you, we suppress you, we expropriate you, we ignore your laws, we destroy your civilization."
"When we lose, we weaponize your principals to thwart you from undoing the damage we've caused."
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 6/250/40, Woodlanddude, MJF and 5 others
#56
LRRPF52 said:
From all I have studied about US History, the Imperial Presidency has been in decline, as have the powers of the Legislative Branch, with the rise of the Administrative State. The best example of an Imperial President domestically was FDR (4 terms, rubber-stamp SCOTUS, slavish Congress for the 1930s and early 1940s).

The Progressive Era Administrative State has ballooned into a behemoth that simply ignores Congressional oversight and literally tells members of Congress to pound sand, ignores WH orders, and doesn’t care if SCOTUS rules against its actions decisively.

It still continues marching along, re-naming and adapting around oversight attempts.

A simple example for us gun folks is the ATF.

For States, fisherman, and outdoorsmen, it’s the EPA.

For parents and schools, it’s the DOEd and their State clones in each of the States.
Click to expand...

This, the Presidency is actually very weak right now compared to past years
 
  • Like
Reactions: UKDslayer
#57
LRRPF52 said:
Read post #3 in this thread, and click on the link that was provided to you.

DOGE is a re-named program that was signed into law by Obama, with majority Congressional approval.

Trump is simply fulfilling the requirements and mandates outlined in that law, which specifically was aimed at government efficiency.

Trump never created a new Federal Agency (like JFK did with USAID).
Click to expand...

If he simply renamed an existing program I would buy that however, it appears that he also changed the goal of that program. Show me where DOGE guidelines align with the original program.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Haney
#60
jmp1 said:
Show me in the Constitution where it says he can't. Show me in the constitution where it says Shall not be infringed except for this that and the other thing.

Basically what I'm saying is why don't you and your buddy Kalisnakev or how ever he spells it go fuck right off. This shit is what I voted for and I AM fucking entertained!!
Click to expand...
Show you: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." This is from his oath of office.
 
#62
akg102 said:
As previously stated, not a new department.

You're just fine asking about the constitutionality of anything.......but then you out yourself by saying things like,

"It is like a big middle finger to democracy and shows he is just a big fat putin puppet!"

"....us citizens are way too stupid to understand why/how all the money is spent like it is....we have no lawful right to know where the money is going in the first place!"

So you're a constitutionalist, but also pro-democracy.....meaning you're likely half-retarded.
You're pro-democracy, but believe the tax-paying electorate both:
  1. Is too stupid to understand how/why government spends money
  2. Has no RIGHT to observe how their own money is being spent by the people representing them
This is a wonderful look into the mind of a Leftist, as they're getting politically steamrolled.

"When we win, we target you, we suppress you, we expropriate you, we ignore your laws, we destroy your civilization."
"When we lose, we weaponize your principals to thwart you from undoing the damage we've caused."
Click to expand...
1740168214711.png


Here is a list.
They adopted this long ago.

This thread is 4 & 5.



R
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: doubloon, Woodlanddude, Redlion and 5 others
#63
BCP said:
That was true in the past but not anymore, he's going through hell just to fire temp employees (which is why they offered a buyout to try and get rid of them).
Click to expand...
Again I think we are splitting hairs, its all about the political fallout. (see Air Traffic Controllers vs Reagan)

My line of work is under huge pressure from the Trump admin and everyone is bitching and moaning because our jobs and funding are on the line. Everyone forgets principles when its their ass in the fire. But deep down I am a grinnin fool. I got the skills to adapt, so hammer those fuckers and their graft. But 99% of people won't want to admit they are part of the system that is broken. Ask any republican about SS.

I PAYED INTO THE SYSTEM!!! Suddenly being on the Govt Dole is ok. You are 'owed' it.

Now all these unlected commisions that Congress has set up? Yeah technically that falls under the president. Again I cite Article 2 1st sentance:

"The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alan Warner
#64
DocRDS said:
Ask any republican about SS.

I PAYED INTO THE SYSTEM!!! Suddenly being on the Govt Dole is ok. You are 'owed' it.
Click to expand...

This is a more complex matter and more devious.
The government has and will have taken over $500,000 from me in forced taxes for "Social Security" and "Medicare" that I have no choice to opt out of and do on my own.
It's "for my own good and for my own retirement" according to their justification for taking so much.

So Yes, I expect to demand them to actually give me back what they took under the pretext of "it's for my own good".
I'm not interested in giving the government huge amounts of hard earned money just to pretend I'm virtuous.

I'd be perfectly happy to not need Social Security at all if they would let me completely stop paying into it and give me my money back to invest as I want.

Now if you want to stop the whole SS thing, well you are going to have to first of all agree to stop it with everyone.
Then you are going to have to come up with a way to fairly compensate all those who have paid into it as well as those who now depend on it, having also paid into it.

Sure you could say well we are going to say tough luck suckers, none for you anymore.
Sorry you were a sucker and followed the law and paid in all those decades...

But then how would you feel if the government also did the same thing to your IRAs and your 401ks and for that matter your investment accounts.
(I bet you didn't know the government could do that also did you? Read the fine print of some of the more obscure laws passed during "Crisis periods")

Beware the misery you want for others, you might just find you are swept up in it as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Eunozs, mosin46 and WasNH4X
#66
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking about what has been done before because that is now history. I'm asking my question now because I would like to see this Country run following the Constitution and existing laws. If his actions are unconstitutional then I believe he needs to be called on that. I still have not seen any documentation showing he has the legitimate right to do so.
Click to expand...

So, by your measurement of what is done in the past is history, then what he's done is in the past and is now also history.
Just sayin.
 
#67
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking for any advise. I'm simply asking what gives him the right to create a "new" organization within our government when existing laws and the Constitution say it needs Congressional approval.

No one to this point has been able to provide me the documentation granting him the authority to do so. Instead you have voiced your personal opinions and questioned my reasons for asking such a question instead of pointing me to the documentation that would answer my question.

Apparently more people are interested in simply attacking my question and point of view then providing a link to the documentation showing he has the authority to do so.
Click to expand...

Try to look at it from a different point of view for a moment.

YOU are making the accusation (aka questioning his authority) the POTUS is doing unconstitutional actions.

If you believe it to be so, THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU, not the rest of us .

What we aren't going to do around here, is this:
Screenshot_20240305_075843_Google.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 6/250/40, doubloon, 101st and 6 others
#68
B y r o n said:
Explained how? I have read responses based on feelings but I have not read ANY responses as to the AUTHORITY for him to do what he has done. Please point me to written legal documentation that allows him to do this. Until I see any documented proof granting him this power I will question it.
Click to expand...
For Gods sake leave you emotional feelings in the closet! You are being irrational and ludicrous. Honestly you are not capable to comprehend election consequences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 101st, 10ring'r and BCP
#69
W54/XM-388 said:
This is a more complex matter and more devious.
The government has and will have taken over $500,000 from me in forced taxes for "Social Security" and "Medicare" that I have no choice to opt out of and do on my own.
It's "for my own good and for my own retirement" according to their justification for taking so much.

So Yes, I expect to demand them to actually give me back what they took under the pretext of "it's for my own good".
I'm not interested in giving the government huge amounts of hard earned money just to pretend I'm virtuous.

I'd be perfectly happy to not need Social Security at all if they would let me completely stop paying into it and give me my money back to invest as I want.

Now if you want to stop the whole SS thing, well you are going to have to first of all agree to stop it with everyone.
Then you are going to have to come up with a way to fairly compensate all those who have paid into it as well as those who now depend on it, having also paid into it.

Sure you could say well we are going to say tough luck suckers, none for you anymore.
Sorry you were a sucker and followed the law and paid in all those decades...

But then how would you feel if the government also did the same thing to your IRAs and your 401ks and for that matter your investment accounts.
(I bet you didn't know the government could do that also did you? Read the fine print of some of the more obscure laws passed during "Crisis periods")

Beware the misery you want for others, you might just find you are swept up in it as well.
Click to expand...
Nope its not. I am not hoping for the misery. I'm forcasting it. Its coming. For all of us regardless.

While you are correct on the IRAs and such. You don't pay into the system you pay taxes (as you say, look at the fine print). Its so ingrained into our culture we "expect" the govt handout. After all--who would want to throw sweet old gradma out on the street. That's how they sucked us in.

And now they can even take what they can't tax. I'm not arguing the merits of SS, I'm pointing out everyone because a New Deal leftist when its "their money" (See Covid unemployment response)

We'd all be better off if govt got our of our pocketbooks and yet here we are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarshallDodge
#70
Major Wader said:
He did not create a new department.

DOGE was a renaming of an existing department. President Trump has the authority vested in him by the Constitution to redirect the activities of individual departments.

From the article linked above -

"DOGE took over the U.S. Digital Service, a 300-person technology office President Barack Obama set up inside the Executive Office of the President in 2014 to fix his beleaguered HealthCare.gov. Bureaucrats had bungled the site, so USDS sought out Silicon Valley innovators, and was authorized to circumvent federal hiring procedures to get them. "

President Trump and his staff are operating under the rules of the department created by a former president. It is also a fact that numerous presidents have created departments by executive order (Kennedy created USAID by EO), and even if President Trump did create a new department, it would have been a valid action.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was Kennedy who signed an EO to change bud to bud/S and create the SEAL program. No one voted on that. Granted, I think it has helped having SEALs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BCP and MarshallDodge
#71
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking for any advise. I'm simply asking what gives him the right to create a "new" organization within our government when existing laws and the Constitution say it needs Congressional approval.

No one to this point has been able to provide me the documentation granting him the authority to do so. Instead you have voiced your personal opinions and questioned my reasons for asking such a question instead of pointing me to the documentation that would answer my question.

Apparently more people are interested in simply attacking my question and point of view then providing a link to the documentation showing he has the authority to do so.
Click to expand...
It basic mechanics of business and the way laws are structured.

DOGE is effective because its well informed, not because its operating under some kind of outside authority.

The executive branch doesn't need a per-se "new" organiztion inform itself over its existing operations. They just need an effective organiization (so maybe thats the "new" part LOL).

Basically what you are watching in real time is a game of information assymetry.

en.wikipedia.org

Information asymmetry - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

All DOGE-type unit has to do is "inform the exitsing organizations" (ie as a consultant) within the exective brance, so those authorities can make well informed decisionsunder existing authorities to make decisions under existing laws. The only difference is now the will do so with symmetric information.

The employment of "digital services" is simply a mechanism to eliminate pockets of private information inside the executive branch. Its part of the fundsamental authority of the Exective branch to have self-awareness of its own operations.

Arguing against this logic is 100% futile.

This is standard business practice in things like mergers and acquistions, when a new management team comes into ownership of an existing authority. They start with understanding what is in all the cuppboards and pantries, etc. Then they go about re-stocking the shelves.
 
#73
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking about what has been done before because that is now history. I'm asking my question now because I would like to see this Country run following the Constitution and existing laws. If his actions are unconstitutional then I believe he needs to be called on that. I still have not seen any documentation showing he has the legitimate right to do so
Click to expand...
No, crappy history that you broke every frigging constitutional principle and amendment to achieve your indoctrinations through including assassination of a sitting president, legitizimizing propaganda (=blantant lies to the American people), fraud of elections, shadow governments run by Sorsos and globalists, and overall defecation of the willl of the American people matters. In some cases, we do need two wrongs to make a right, and get back to our constitutional republic principles!

We finally hope your house of cards is coming DOWN!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 101st, DIBBS and BCP
#75
ma smith said:
Its part of the fundamental authority of the Executive branch to have self-awareness of its own operations.
Click to expand...
This is a fiduciary responsibility. Not only does the President have a right to know, even more-so he has a responsibility.
This is what a chief executive is supposed to do. It's his job, whether anybody likes that or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WasNH4X, ma smith and UKDslayer
#76
B y r o n said:
Re-read my original post. What I found was the President does not have the power to create "new" departments without Congressional approval. It seems no one has been able to show me where he has the right to do so. Since Congresses approval is required then this would be a violation of the Constitution or existing laws.
Click to expand...

Well then, Karen, how bout you march your happy ass up to the White House and tell Big Daddy "You Can't Do Dat". I gotta funny feeling you're gonna triple down on stupid.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: doubloon, 6/250/40, 10ring'r and 1 other person
#80
Reality:

Any U.S. President can do whatever he wants until the Congress or the courts stop him, or the citizens vote him out.

The Executive Branch can always act faster than the Congress, courts, or citizens can react.

What President Trump is making people realize is that “Presidential Norms” are more like “Behavioral Choices” and in most cases they are not compelled by law.

-Stan
 
  • Like
Reactions: Major Wader
#82
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking for any advise. I'm simply asking what gives him the right to create a "new" organization within our government when existing laws and the Constitution say it needs Congressional approval.

No one to this point has been able to provide me the documentation granting him the authority to do so. Instead you have voiced your personal opinions and questioned my reasons for asking such a question instead of pointing me to the documentation that would answer my question.

Apparently more people are interested in simply attacking my question and point of view then providing a link to the documentation showing he has the authority to do so.
Click to expand...
circle back (and read) post #45
 
#84
B y r o n said:
Show you: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." This is from his oath of office.
Click to expand...
Yup.....that's the oath. Best I can see he is faithfully executing. Show me the part of the constitution you believe he's violating you commie cuck!!
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 6/250/40, 1J04, 10ring'r and 1 other person
#85
Read the entire thread. What a pile of bullshit. Byron really doesn’t want to hear your opinion, he wants to hear HIS opinion coming from your mouth. He willfully plays dumb, or dense. USAID is prefect as an example: Originated by Presidential Executive Order. And shut down by exactly the same mechanism.
The first thing any good CEO does when he takes on management of a company, is “go through the books” and take a look at every employee. I’d like to know where this turd’s outrage and concern was during Obama and Biden’s terms. Trust me he isn’t worth the time, will never come to acknowledge the truth, and is just here to stir shit. He glows. And isn’t very good at it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6/250/40, 1J04, 101st and 5 others
#86
OldSalty2 said:
I 100% agree. I wrote a strongly worded letter to my representatives and suggest you do the same. What gives drumpf the authority to rename and existing govt department/functional organization to some meme-lord "DOGE" bullshit? It is like a big middle finger to democracy and shows he is just a big fat putin puppet!!!! I mean obama said something like (not exact quote) "kicking and screaming clutching their bibles"...but what gives drumpf the authority to drag the left "crying while clutching our dildos"???

Even if drumpf and his team legally out maneuvered his opposition in renaming the existing department which basically had the same charter, because obama wisely knew "congress was not acting quickly enough", which has only resulted in the current consitutional crisis!!! Lastly, us citizens are way too stupid to understand why/how all the money is spent like it is, and to be quite honest, we have no lawful right to know where the money is going in the first place!!!!
Click to expand...
📢 old cunty.....please report for your booster......I repeat.....old cunty please report to the booster station.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Major Wader and OldSalty2
#87
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking about what has been done before because that is now history. I'm asking my question now because I would like to see this Country run following the Constitution and existing laws. If his actions are unconstitutional then I believe he needs to be called on that. I still have not seen any documentation showing he has the legitimate right to do so.
Click to expand...
Nooooo.....you'd like your interpretation of the constitution followed......there's a difference. Souldnt be....because it's pretty fucking clear......
 
#88
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking for any advise. I'm simply asking what gives him the right to create a "new" organization within our government when existing laws and the Constitution say it needs Congressional approval.

No one to this point has been able to provide me the documentation granting him the authority to do so. Instead you have voiced your personal opinions and questioned my reasons for asking such a question instead of pointing me to the documentation that would answer my question.

Apparently more people are interested in simply attacking my question and point of view then providing a link to the documentation showing he has the authority to do so.
Click to expand...
I think you will need to speak to his (Trump) lawyers. It's "CLASSIFIED". Mac
 
#89
B y r o n said:
As the title says, "What gives the President power to create new government organizations?"

Not knowing a did a Google search and this is what it showed:

"
AI Overview
Learn more

While the President does have some authority to reorganize the executive branch, the primary power to create new government organizations lies with Congress, meaning they must pass legislation to establish new agencies; the President cannot unilaterally create a new government organization without Congressional approval, which is typically done through acts of Congress, not solely through executive power vested in the President by Article II of the Constitution.

Key points to remember:
  • Limited Reorganization Power:
    The President does have some limited authority to reorganize existing executive branch agencies through "reorganization plans," but these plans usually require Congressional approval or oversight.

  • Executive Vesting Clause:
    Article II of the Constitution grants the President broad executive power, but this power is generally interpreted as the ability to manage and direct existing agencies, not to create new ones without Congressional involvement.

  • Congressional Authority:
    The power to create new government agencies and departments primarily rests with Congress, as they enact laws establishing these entities. "

    If this is true how does he get away with creating the "Department of Government Efficiency"?
I also found this. I haven't heard or read anything about Congress granting him the approval to do so.
Click to expand...
Do you think that the lawyers for the Democrats are dumber than you? If it wasn't legal/constitutional the liberal judges would have put a stop to it in the first week.
Now go back to playing with the rest of the autistic kids in the game room. When you come up with another stoooopid idea driven by Trump Derangement Syndrome keep it to yourself. It's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think that you're a dumbass than open your mouth and prove it.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 6/250/40, 1J04, NoDopes and 3 others
#92
DarnYankeeUSMC said:
Do you think that the lawyers for the Democrats are dumber than you? If it wasn't legal/constitutional the liberal judges would have put a stop to it in the first week.
Now go back to playing with the rest of the autistic kids in the game room. When you come up with another stoooopid idea driven by Trump Derangement Syndrome keep it to yourself. It's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think that you're a dumbass than open your mouth and prove it.
Click to expand...

So, what do you have that is legitimate to this thread?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Haney
#93

Keeping the Balance: What a President Can Do and Cannot Do | Harry S. Truman

A PRESIDENT CAN . . .
www.trumanlibrary.gov www.trumanlibrary.gov


https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-1/ALDE_00000243/




The 2nd Article of the U.S. Constitution

SECTION. 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the...
constitutioncenter.org


Powers of the president of the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: doubloon
#96
B y r o n said:
I'm not asking for any advise. I'm simply asking what gives him the right to create a "new" organization within our government when existing laws and the Constitution say it needs Congressional approval.

No one to this point has been able to provide me the documentation granting him the authority to do so. Instead you have voiced your personal opinions and questioned my reasons for asking such a question instead of pointing me to the documentation that would answer my question.

Apparently more people are interested in simply attacking my question and point of view then providing a link to the documentation showing he has the authority to do so.
Click to expand...

B y r o n said:
Did you bother to read what I posted in post #57?
Click to expand...
Yes, I did.

Original department mission statement - Our mission
To deliver better government services to the American people through technology and design.

For some of us, better government services means LESS fraud, LESS money to NGO's, and LESS money going overseas to stupid liberal DEI/queer/tranny causes. There is zero question that Elon is using technology and design to achieve what my President, Donald J Trump, has asked him to do.

By the way - Every Trump voter knew what he wanted Elon to do, we voted for him knowing that, and he won.

Go suck something round and listen to the information you were given. Of 95 replies to your original post, including this one, I think I saw ONE individual who appeared to agree with you. Seems that you are in the minority.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 6/250/40, BCP, Haney and 1 other person
#97
B y r o n said:
So you feel he has the right to do whatever he wants simply because he holds the title of "President" regardless if it violates the Constitution or existing laws?
Click to expand...

This is the way the entire system works, checks and balances.

Congress has passed things before that were overturned or found unconstitutional later.

Just like speed limits the Constitution does not "prevent" anything. It provides a framework for making changes, even to the Constitution itself, with checks and balances from different cogs in the machine.

Nothing *prevents* Congress from passing legislation that violates the Constitution and nothing *prevents* POTUS from writing an EO that violates the Constitution.
 
#98
B y r o n said:
I care because I want the Government to operate within the Constitution and established laws. Don't you want the same thing?
Click to expand...
Steve Deace said it best…”We are not a nation of laws and never have been, we are a nation of Political Will and always will be.”

What you are seeing right now is “Political Will” from Trump just like you saw “Political Will “ from Biden the last four years.
 
#99
B y r o n said:
So, what do you have that is legitimate to this thread?
Click to expand...

Nothing anyone says will scratch your itch because you are suffering from TDS and you think that you have found a scab to be picked. NEWS FLASH!!!! YOU HAVE NOT. As stated, the best constitutional lawyers that the Democrats have don't agree with you. Yet you came here and created a thread to show your ass and display your Karenhood for all to see. Congratulations, you have successfully accomplished that.
You are a product of poor parenting. This "I'm outraged and give me attention" bullshit should have been squashed years ago. You are nothing more than a toddler screaming for candy in the checkout line. Throwing yourself on the floor until you get your way. Your parents were pieces of shit for not whipping your ass and teaching you better.
Grow the fuck up. I understand that your parents were not good role models to use as an example but look around at the most of society and use them as a reference not the Karens you have been modeling life after.

How's that for a fact based legitimate contribution?
 
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 101st, jmp1, doubloon and 4 others
#100
B y r o n said:
If he simply renamed an existing program I would buy that however, it appears that he also changed the goal of that program. Show me where DOGE guidelines align with the original program.
Click to expand...

The problem here is you've been provided with the answer within the framework of the EO which was signed by JFK.

The goal of the program is no different. The way to reach that goal has changed.

Instead of skimming the document and looking for the key words, try reading it so you actually have an understanding of it.

Once that is done, read the EO by DJT. Again don't skim it looking for your ideas. Actually read it, with the goal of understanding the purpose.

You've been given the tools. You've been given the books.
All you want to do is bang the tools on the floor and eat the covers off of the books.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doubloon and 6/250/40
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PatMiles
The Philippine vice president publicly threatens to have the president assassinated!
Replies
25
Views
971
Edsel
Edsel
B
One mistake made by the Founding Fathers
Replies
61
Views
2K
LuckyDuck
LuckyDuck
N
Maggie’s Hypocrisy At It's Best
Replies
33
Views
1K
muzzleloader
M
PatMiles
Massachusetts Democrat Governor Vows to Defy Trump’s Deportation Plans: Promises to Use ‘Executive Power’ to Shield Criminal Aliens.
Replies
65
Views
2K
DarnYankeeUSMC
DarnYankeeUSMC
PatMiles
Justice Alito Issues Brutal Reminder to Woke Lawmakers as Congress Tries to Mandate SCOTUS Ethics Code
Replies
3
Views
638
bobkhan
bobkhan
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts