President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

#21,653
#21,653
VOLLeeann said:
His Holiness Donald or Holy Father Donny... I wonder how is this information - Donald wants to be Pope - sits with the non-Catholic MAGAs? Aw, I'm sure they'll forgive Him, er, him.

Trump Says He’d ‘Like to Be the Next Pope’, Calls Himself the ‘Number One Choice’
thesarkariform.com

Trump Says He’d ‘Like to Be the Next Pope’, Calls Himself the ‘Number One Choice’

It was one of those moments where satire meets surrealism, where the political theater turns Vatican-level…
thesarkariform.com
Click to expand...
Self reflection to you on the articles you pull. Your trolling is below standards but your computer has probably been hacked.
 
#21,654
#21,654
BowlBrother85 said:
I hate to keep harping on Donald Trump's executive order addiction, but it's just not the way governance and lawmaking are supposed to function in the United States. Trump's unilateral expansion of presidential power in conjunction with this endless stream of executive action is completely bypassing the legislative branch. It is dictatorial in nature. I do not believe that Republicans would remain quiet if a Democrat was doing the same thing.

Republicans threatened Barack Obama with impeachment after one of his executive orders infringed on 2nd Amendment rights after the Sandy Hook mass shooting. They know this is wrong.
Click to expand...
You enjoy it as much as Trump loves signing over EO for energy/coal, DEI, female sports, influences in universities and other common sense items.
 
#21,655
#21,655
BowlBrother85 said:
I hate to keep harping on Donald Trump's executive order addiction, but it's just not the way governance and lawmaking are supposed to function in the United States. Trump's unilateral expansion of presidential power in conjunction with this endless stream of executive action is completely bypassing the legislative branch. It is dictatorial in nature. I do not believe that Republicans would remain quiet if a Democrat was doing the same thing.

Republicans threatened Barack Obama with impeachment after one of his executive orders infringed on 2nd Amendment rights after the Sandy Hook mass shooting. They know this is wrong.
Click to expand...
Does blame extend back to George Washington? He was the first president to issue an EO. Everyone who has followed, except Harrison, has issued EOs. Or is it the scope of EOs which is problematic? Perhaps its the sheer number?

It's yet another reason why cheering when one side does it (anything) is nonsensical because the other side will do it too. One side you support. The other side you do not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and Orange_Crush
#21,656
#21,656
McDad said:
Does blame extend back to George Washington? He was the first president to issue an EO. Everyone who has followed, except Harrison, has issued EOs. Or is it the scope of EOs which is problematic? Perhaps its the sheer number?

It's yet another reason why cheering when one side does it (anything) is nonsensical because the other side will do it too. One side you support. The other side you do not.
Click to expand...
George Washington only had 8 "executive orders" during his two terms, and they weren't anything at all that is in the realm of what Trump is currently doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen, EasternVol, McDad and 1 other person
#21,658
#21,658
McDad said:
Does blame extend back to George Washington? He was the first president to issue an EO. Everyone who has followed, except Harrison, has issued EOs. Or is it the scope of EOs which is problematic? Perhaps its the sheer number?

It's yet another reason why cheering when one side does it (anything) is nonsensical because the other side will do it too. One side you support. The other side you do not.
Click to expand...
That's not true.

I was very critical of Barack Obama's executive overreach following Sandy Hook, and critical of his abuses again in this very thread. Obama used an executive order to infringe on 2nd Amendment rights and effectively amend the United States Constitution. That is a blatant circumvention of the Amendment process and an undercutting of the legislative branch.

^^^ That ^^^ is exactly what Donald Trump has now done with his executive order which basically seeks to alter the 14th Amendment as it relates to birthright citizenship. It is both executive overreach and a usurp of Congress. I will say it again ..... if such unilateral overreach from the executive branch is allowed to stand, then the United States Constitution is not worth the paper that it is printed on. There are processes for amending the Constitution and for lawmaking in this country and they should be followed. Both Obama and Trump's usage of executive orders was dictatorial in nature. What is the point of even having a legislative branch if the President gets to unilaterally amend the Constitution and make laws with nothing more than a stroke of his pen?

The problem with Trump goes even beyond that. He is governing exclusively by executive orders. He has only signed 5 bills into law .... but he has signed 142 executive orders. By Trump's own criticism of Obama from 2012, that is wrong. That is a step towards having a dictator and a sign of a weak President who can't get legislation passed, even when his own party controls both chambers of Congress.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#21,659
#21,659
TN Ribs said:
WTF! No doubt that Trump is clinically delusional.
"Clinically Delusional" - having persistent, false beliefs (delusions) that are not based in reality and are not altered by evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...
You realize you just described transgenderism right..
 
#21,661
#21,661
BeardedVol said:
George Washington only had 8 "executive orders" during his two terms, and they weren't anything at all that is in the realm of what Trump is currently doing.
Click to expand...
FACT :

Donald Trump has signed fewer bills into law, while also signing more executive orders than any President in American history through the first 100 days in office of a term. That is running a country as though it is a dictatorship under absolute rule.

I have gone the extra mile in this thread to point out how Barack Obama did the same thing, and how it was just as wrong when he did it. I see the what-about-isms and I agree with them. They are equally as wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#21,664
#21,664
BowlBrother85 said:
That's not true.

I was very critical of Barack Obama's executive overreach following Sandy Hook, and critical of his abuses again in this very thread. Obama used an executive order to infringe on 2nd Amendment rights and effectively amend the United States Constitution. That is a blatant circumvention of the Amendment process and an undercutting of the legislative branch.

^^^ That ^^^ is exactly what Donald Trump has now done with his executive order which basically seeks to alter the 14th Amendment as it relates to birthright citizenship. It is both executive overreach and a usurp of Congress. I will say it again ..... if such unilateral overreach from the executive branch is allowed to stand, then the United States Constitution is not worth the paper that it is printed on. There are processes for amending the Constitution and for lawmaking in this country and they should be followed. Both Obama and Trump's usage of executive orders was dictatorial in nature. What is the point of even having a legislative branch if the President gets to unilaterally amend the Constitution and make laws with nothing more than a stroke of his pen?

The problem with Trump goes even beyond that. He is governing exclusively by executive orders. He has only signed 5 bills into law .... but he has signed 142 executive orders. By Trump's own criticism of Obama from 2012, that is wrong. That is a step towards having a dictator and a sign of a weak President who can't get legislation passed, even when his own party controls both chambers of Congress.
Click to expand...
What isn't true????

If the untruth is related to my last paragraph, I was expanding the cheer/jeer concept beyond EOs. And I shared that in a general sense...certainly not directed at you.

I am not in disagreement about the use of EOs. Naturally, that extends to EOs which would be unconstitutional.

It reads as if you are concerned not with EOs but the quantity and the scope. Is it worth the political effort to limit number and scope for all presidents?
 
#21,666
#21,666
BowlBrother85 said:
FACT :

Donald Trump has signed fewer bills into law, while also signing more executive orders than any President in American history through the first 100 days in office of a term. That is running a country as though it is a dictatorship under absolute rule.

I have gone the extra mile in this thread to point out how Barack Obama did the same thing, and how it was just as wrong when he did it. I see the what-about-isms and I agree with them. They are equally as wrong.
Click to expand...
Does POTUS introduce bills or member on the house and Senate have that power??? My understanding is the POTUS can recommend and encourage but can't force a bill to be introduced.
 
#21,669
#21,669
McDad said:
Ok.

So it is number and scope. Is it worth pursuing a constitutional amendment or legislation limiting the scope and number of EOs?
Click to expand...

How is the Chief Executive supposed to run the executive branch without issuing executive orders/memorandums?
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#21,670
#21,670
whodeycin85 said:
Does POTUS introduce bills or member on the house and Senate have that power??? My understanding is the POTUS can recommend and encourage but can't force a bill to be introduced.
Click to expand...
Of course.

Remember that Saturday morning cartoon on ABC in the 70's and 80's?

I'm just a bill ... and only a bill.

STEP 1: The bill is drafted.
STEP 2: The bill is introduced.
STEP 3: The bill goes to committee.
STEP 4: The bill goes to subcommittee for review.
STEP 5: Committee mark up of the bill.
STEP 6: Voting by the full chamber on the bill.
STEP 7: Referral of the bill to the other chamber.
STEP 8: The bill goes to the President.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#21,672
#21,672
BowlBrother85 said:
Of course.

Remember that Saturday morning cartoon on ABC in the 70's and 80's?

I'm just a bill ... and only a bill.

STEP 1: The bill is drafted.
STEP 2: The bill is introduced.
STEP 3: The bill goes to committee.
STEP 4: The bill goes to subcommittee for review.
STEP 5: Committee mark up of the bill.
STEP 6: Voting by the full chamber on the bill.
STEP 7: Referral of the bill to the other chamber.
STEP 8: The bill goes to the President.
Click to expand...
So knowing there are 7 steps before th le POTUS can do anything with a bill...why are we holding them responsible for lack of bills being introduced by the house and Senate?
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#21,674
#21,674
hog88 said:
How is the Chief Executive supposed to run the executive branch without issuing executive orders/memorandums?
Click to expand...
So far, only Harrison has not issued EOs. If he can do it, I don't see why others couldn't do it, too.

Are you in favor of keeping the precedent as it is now wrt EOs?
 
#21,675
#21,675
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top