• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

zeke said:
I know you don't actually listen to anything he says, but every speech he is threatening to both revoke broadcasting licenses, and sic the DOJ on news organizations.

Here is his video describing how he will take control of the always independent FCC:

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/110198717211607461


here's him promising to sic the DOJ on any news organization that criticizes him:

truthsocial.com

Truth Social

Truth Social is America's "Big Tent" social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating on the basis of political ideology.
truthsocial.com truthsocial.com
Click to expand...
It's lawful and in his power to manage regulatory agencies if he deems them not executing laws in a good manner. He's the way a direct, democratically-elected representative manages agencies that impact citizens lives greatly but who are not run by people elected by the citizens.

"Many presidents have been interested in asserting authority over independent regulatory agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Reserve Board. The underlying debates raise large constitutional questions, above all about the meaning and justification of the idea of a “unitary executive.” In the first instance, however, the President’s authority over independent agencies depends not on the Constitution but on a common statutory phrase, which allows the President to discharge the heads of such agencies for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” This phrase—the INM standard—is best understood to create a relationship of presidential review—and a particular remedy for legal delinquency flowing from that review. It allows the President to discharge members of independent agencies not only for laziness and torpor (inefficiency) or for corruption (malfeasance) but also for neglect of their legal duties, which includes egregiously erroneous decisions of policy, law, or fact, either repeatedly or on unusually important matters."
 
FlyGuy said:
It's lawful and in his power to manage regulatory agencies if he deems them not executing laws in a good manner. He's the way a direct, democratically-elected representative manages agencies that impact citizens lives greatly but who are not run by people elected by the citizens.

"Many presidents have been interested in asserting authority over independent regulatory agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Reserve Board. The underlying debates raise large constitutional questions, above all about the meaning and justification of the idea of a “unitary executive.” In the first instance, however, the President’s authority over independent agencies depends not on the Constitution but on a common statutory phrase, which allows the President to discharge the heads of such agencies for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” This phrase—the INM standard—is best understood to create a relationship of presidential review—and a particular remedy for legal delinquency flowing from that review. It allows the President to discharge members of independent agencies not only for laziness and torpor (inefficiency) or for corruption (malfeasance) but also for neglect of their legal duties, which includes egregiously erroneous decisions of policy, law, or fact, either repeatedly or on unusually important matters."
Click to expand...
So the arbitrator is strictly his opinion as opposed to regulations?


How fascist
 
Wayward DP said:
in fairness to FlyGuy, he did basically admit this yesterday. but the link between not paying attention, and self-awareness, is clearly missing.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think it's awesome that the corruption of the justice system was so blatantly flaunted in front of the country to see. No wonder african american men are identifying with Trump more.
 
FlyGuy said:
It's lawful and in his power to manage regulatory agencies if he deems them not executing laws in a good manner. He's the way a direct, democratically-elected representative manages agencies that impact citizens lives greatly but who are not run by people elected by the citizens.

"Many presidents have been interested in asserting authority over independent regulatory agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Reserve Board. The underlying debates raise large constitutional questions, above all about the meaning and justification of the idea of a “unitary executive.” In the first instance, however, the President’s authority over independent agencies depends not on the Constitution but on a common statutory phrase, which allows the President to discharge the heads of such agencies for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” This phrase—the INM standard—is best understood to create a relationship of presidential review—and a particular remedy for legal delinquency flowing from that review. It allows the President to discharge members of independent agencies not only for laziness and torpor (inefficiency) or for corruption (malfeasance) but also for neglect of their legal duties, which includes egregiously erroneous decisions of policy, law, or fact, either repeatedly or on unusually important matters."
Click to expand...

yes, so now you see how he is threatening them in ways previous presidents never did.

good.
 
thehabhater said:
So the arbitrator is strictly his opinion?


How fascist
Click to expand...
Yes. The people vote for their representative, and their representative makes judgements on lots of issues.

I know you guys would rather be governed by "experts" on their mountain top behind a green curtain who no one has power to anoint as the experts.
 
FlyGuy said:
Yes. The people vote for their representative, and their representative makes judgements on lots of issues.

I know you guys would rather be governed by "experts" on their mountain top behind a green curtain who no one has power to anoint as the experts.
Click to expand...
If the "judgement" is the removal of the first amendment rights of freedom of the press, it is cool, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top