Fire every federal bureaucrat/employee caught undermining the administration.

[martybegan]

Like Elon Musk and Ramaswamy?

They are advising the elected President, not some high level super grade civil servant.

 

[westwall]

I have, and they are more run of the mill authoritarians or oligarchs than Fascists.

I always liked the term Progressive Bureaucratic Statists.

All part and parcel. Their goals are the same. How they get there is only slightly different.

 

[westwall]

Like Elon Musk and Ramaswamy?

Or soros and his band of merry scumbags?

What's good for the goose, simp.

 

[Marener]

That doesn't make any fucking sense.

So a civil servant should refuse to execute a directive from someone appointed by an elected President because they don't like the directive?

Should a civil servant refuse a directive that is clearly political in nature?

 

[marvin martian]

Not really. They admit to it all of the time.

Make Bureaucrats Scared Again

 

[martybegan]

Should a civil servant refuse a directive that is clearly political in nature?

Define political.

What I am talking about is the deliberate criminal prosecution of political enemies, as well as the over prosecution of the same.

Is telling an EPA civil servant we are moving away from going after carbon and now your job is to regulate pesticides political?

 

[postman]

Should a civil servant refuse a directive that is clearly political in nature?

Like Trumps first two "muslim" bans?

 

[westwall]

Make Bureaucrats Scared Again

Yup. You remember that scumbag koskinen just glaring at the Oversight committee?

I sure do.

 

[westwall]

Like Trumps first two "muslim" bans?

No such thing. But you're a fascist, so you lie.

 

[martybegan]

Like Trumps first two "muslim" bans?

They banned people by country, not religion.

Not Trump's fault that the countries with terrorist issues are mostly Muslim countries.

Was India on the list? India has a large Muslim population.

 

[Marener]

Define political.

What I am talking about is the deliberate criminal prosecution of political enemies, as well as the over prosecution of the same.

Is telling an EPA civil servant we are moving away from going after carbon and now your job is to regulate pesticides political?

It’s quite hard to define political. I don’t doubt it.

If Trump said that the DoJ should prosecute Hillary Clinton, is that political? Should they obey?

 

[martybegan]

It’s quite hard to define political. I don’t doubt it.

If Trump said that the DoJ should prosecute Hillary Clinton, is that political? Should they obey?

Depends on what they prosecute her for, and if they stretched the law to do so like they did to Trump in NY.

Get back to me when she's indicted.

 

[marvin martian]

It’s quite hard to define political. I don’t doubt it.

If Trump said that the DoJ should prosecute Hillary Clinton, is that political? Should they obey?

One of the loser Dems asked Pam Bondi that question about Liz Cheney.

 

[Marener]

Depends on what they prosecute her for, and if they stretched the law to do so like they did to Trump in NY.

Get back to me when she's indicted.

So who decides?

This is the question you don’t want to answer.

 

[Foxfyre]

I remember the same of Truman.

On July 26, 1948, President Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981, creating the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services. The order mandated the desegregation of the U.S. military. The first point in the executive order states “It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion or national origin. This policy shall be put into effect as rapidly as possible, having due regard to the time required to effectuate any necessary changes without impairing efficiency or morale.”

Truman should have rid the federal government of segregationists from the very start.

Do you honestly think desegregation is the same thing as DEI? It isn't.

There is zero reason to think people who happen to be born with black skin are automatically incapable of doing anything a white person can do. President Truman was absolutely right in recognizing that.

But he did not even hint that standards should be lowered for anybody or that preference in recruiting should be targeted at anybody. He simply removed an artificial barrier that made absolutely no sense.

Now would you like to comment on the actual topic of federal employees etc. who deliberately undermine the Executive Branch?

 

[Foxfyre]

Trump doesn’t want them doing their jobs; neither does Putin.

Show your evidence for that or find some other thread to troll please.

 

[martybegan]

So who decides?

This is the question you don’t want to answer.

It's a question that's pointless. People decide on their own about it.

Who should really decide is the judicial system, but that's been co-opted by the left as shown by the sham Trump Prosecutions.

All that work to get no sentences, and get him re-elected.

But you get to call him President Convicted Felon, so enjoy that meaningless "victory"

 

[postman]

Define political.

Is telling an EPA civil servant we are moving away from going after carbon and now your job is to regulate pesticides political?

It depends why they're going after carbon, and why they're regulating pesticides.

If going after carbon is based on a ratified international treaty, and regulating pesticides has a lesser foundation, then the person at the EPA is bound by the constitution.

 

[Contumacious]

Here is what Trump is having to deal with even before taking office. We saw it played out by FBI personnel et al in his first administration and no doubt it will continue, i.e. federal bureaucrats/employees intentionally undermining and/or sabotaging the President and his agenda.



I want Congress to pass a law mandating that any bureaucrat/employee/appointee who is caught and confirmed in deliberately sabotaging or otherwise interfering with the elected leadership can be immediately fired and will be entitled to no benefits. If sufficiently severe, the person can be indicted and tried for criminal acts.

No President can do his job as effectively with this kind of deep state subversion going on.

Federal employees must be instructed and must agree to work faithfully for the people's choice as their leaders or they must be out.

That of course would not apply to honest whistle blowers who go through proper channels to report any obvious malfeasance going on within the government.

I have seen posted on social media that Mannina was fired over the incident in the link but I have not confirmed that.

As the Constitutional Head of the Executive Branch President Trump will be able direct K$H Patel and Ms Pam Bondi to prosecute to the max

 

[postman]

No such thing. But you're a fascist, so you lie.

Trump issued two EO's that he called "muslim bans", which the cogs didn't follow because they were unconstitutional.