Department of Government Efficiency - DOGE

#3,004
#3,004
Sgt_Nick_Fury said:
Click to expand...

FLMAO

now the MAGA'rs are the one pushing the bs on "wah, we are a democracy".

yeah numbnuts, that how its works. its called checks and balances, and that is how it works in this nation.

the executive branch isn't king. there are processes they have to follow. rules of the land, namely the Constitution, that have to be followed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#3,005
#3,005
LouderVol said:
FLMAO

now the MAGA'rs are the one pushing the bs on "wah, we are a democracy".

yeah numbnuts, that how its works. its called checks and balances, and that is how it works in this nation.

the executive branch isn't king. there are processes they have to follow. rules of the land, namely the Constitution, that have to be followed.
Click to expand...

Except this isn't a case of checks and balances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, Enki_Amenra, walkenvol and 4 others
#3,007
#3,007
BeardedVol said:
You'd lose that bet handily. I paid off my student loans within 3 years of graduation, have never carried a credit card balance over at the end of the month, and the only debt that I carry is a mortgage on my primary residence.

It sounds like you're projecting, maybe you should look into getting some help managing your debt?

Tennessee

Contact us today for your free consultation and learn how our Tennessee debt relief programs can help you achieve financial peace of mind.
www.nationaldebtrelief.com www.nationaldebtrelief.com
Click to expand...
You don't want to flex in this game with me, especially when it sounds like you're a proponent of the world's shittiest investments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#3,009
#3,009
LouderVol said:
what? because DOGE isn't an official part of the government?

Judicial review has always existed and always been used. but now that its Trump its a problem?
Click to expand...

What makes you think it's not an official part of government?

It's not a case of checks and balances because no laws were being broken, no rights denied or anything else that would need judicial review. This is the executive branch auditing and inspecting the executive branch and the judicial branch has zero power to "review' that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, MemphisVol77, 825VOL and 5 others
#3,010
#3,010
hog88 said:
What makes you think it's not an official part of government?

It's not a case of checks and balances because no laws were being broken, no rights denied or anything else that would need judicial review. This is the executive branch auditing and inspecting the executive branch and the judicial branch has zero power to "review' that.
Click to expand...
Plus, the neat thing about DOGE is it is fully funded by the Legislative Branch. What gives the Judicial any standing to interfere in their actions?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, walkenvol and hog88
#3,011
#3,011
BeardedVol said:
Cool, then Tennessee can stop accepting federal funding for education and fund it locally, and nothing is going to stop them. Considering that Tennessee gets back more money from the feds than it pays, this shouldn't be an issue for Tennesseans to absorb the cost of fully funding Tennessee public education.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Why do you want our money to go to DC only for it to get wasted and sent back?

I know I’m asking you to think outside of your comfort zone because you love that Fed money for some reason.

Do this. Think of all of those federal dollars as yours and ours (because they actually are). Then ask yourself why you should be made to send your money to DC.

Have you not seen the waste being reported? Does that not anger you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, marcusluvsvols and dovervolz
#3,013
#3,013
LouderVol said:
FLMAO

now the MAGA'rs are the one pushing the bs on "wah, we are a democracy".

yeah numbnuts, that how its works. its called checks and balances, and that is how it works in this nation.

the executive branch isn't king. there are processes they have to follow. rules of the land, namely the Constitution, that have to be followed.
Click to expand...
You clearly failed at civics if you think every federal judge has the authority to just block any executive action they dislike.



So can any federal judge over rule a General's order to their troops? Use common sense. Furthmore even Federal courts have limited Jurisdictions. Otehrwise why even have elected offices if any local fed judge can simply over rule the President? The Executive Branch isn't king The Constitution is King, and when a judge steps out of the bounds of his constitutional authority and constitutional law the executive is free to ignore his ass. A Judge that continues to ignore constitutional law can be removed from the bench. Judges are certainly not Kings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#3,015
#3,015
SpaceCoastVol said:
Eggggggsactly. RFKjr's example of Froot Loops in the USA vs Europe should be a wake up. Sadly, it isn't.
Click to expand...
I challenge folks to look at the difference of ingredients in European ketchup vs Heinz or Hunt’s. In Europe it’s typically just tomato paste, sugar, vinegar, and spices. Check the label in your fridge
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and SpaceCoastVol
#3,016
#3,016

Removing Federal Judges Without Impeachment

www.yalelawjournal.org www.yalelawjournal.org

...There is nothing constitutionally suspect about government officials investigating allegations of judicial misconduct and then making reports to Congress and the executive branch. Under any reading of the Constitution, the political branches have the authority to investigate and sanction judges. The chambers of Congress can impeach, convict, and remove based on proper evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors. And whatever Congress decides, the executive may prosecute any judges whom it believes has violated the law. The proposed Inspector General would merely make it easier to prosecute and convict miscreant judges. Moreover, under our reading of good behavior, information gathered by the Inspector General also could be used to prove in court that a judge had misbehaved and had thereby violated the terms of her tenure.

But what about the cherished independence of federal judges? Too much emphasis has been laid on the independence of judges and not enough on the Constitution’s provisions that promote judicial accountability, which include the grant of life tenure subject to termination for misbehavior. Judges do enjoy a certain type of independence—they cannot be punished for the judgments they issue. But the Constitution makes clear that federal judges do not have an absolute or a boundless independence. If an Inspector General would further judicial accountability, that fact counts in favor of the Inspector General proposal.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, CagleMtnVol and Enki_Amenra
#3,020
#3,020
Jxn Vol said:
Ignore the judge. It’s unlawful. Keep going DOGE. The country supports it. Screw the enemy
Click to expand...
Ignore him until it goes to the SCOTUS. They can and will uphold the President doing his job.

It's flabbergasting, the dems watching Trump's approval steadily climb while their party's plummets. They're like, "We just drank a lot of drano. To fix it, I think we should slit our wrists."
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, marcusluvsvols, InVOLuntary and 5 others
#3,023
#3,023
Orange_Crush said:
Ignore him until it goes to the SCOTUS. They can and will uphold the President doing his job.

It's flabbergasting, the dems watching Trump's approval steadily climb while their party's plummets. They're like, "We just drank a lot of bottled of drano. To fix it, I think we should slit our wrists."
Click to expand...
Fine with me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and hjeagle1vol
#3,024
#3,024
hog88 said:
What makes you think it's not an official part of government?

It's not a case of checks and balances because no laws were being broken, no rights denied or anything else that would need judicial review. This is the executive branch auditing and inspecting the executive branch and the judicial branch has zero power to "review' that.
Click to expand...
in that tweet, according to musk all that matters is if they are elected. DOGE was just as elected as any judge was.

my understanding is that if there is a conflict between parts of the government that judges can be brought in. granted I can't think of too many cases of our government trying to decrease our government where it would have been challenged like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#3,025
#3,025
A judge does not have the direct authority to prevent the President from performing the duties outlined in Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Separation of Powers: The U.S. Constitution establishes a separation of powers among the three branches of government. The judiciary's role is to interpret laws, not to directly control or prevent the executive branch from performing its constitutional duties.

He can not prevent the Executive CiC from auditing the Executive branch of government. To think they could is idiocy. It won't hold up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, InVOLuntary, Enki_Amenra and 3 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top