I think this says something about the trump government.

[martybegan]

So when you complained about weaponization and politicization of government, that was all bullshit. Right?

Government is politics you idiot.

 

[Norm Paperman]

If they are overseen by congress, then they are obviously not independent.

If they are executive agencies, then they are obviously not independent.

Congress, the president, or both, may encourage agency heads to act as if they were independent. But if they do something egregious, or do not follow the will of the elected leaders, then those elected leaders will step in and put them back on the right track.

If they do not, the voters will throw out those elected leaders.

They are Independent from the Executive branch, not from all oversight at all.

 

[Marener]

Government is politics you idiot.

Again, you want every agency to be entirely political.

Right?

You complained about weaponized government. But here you are trying to make sure Trump can weaponized every agency.

You’re full of shit, right?

 

[martybegan]

Again, you want every agency to be entirely political.

Right?

You complained about weaponized government. But here you are trying to make sure Trump can weaponized every agency.

You’re full of shit, right?

Weaponization, not politicization. I was complaining about the politization of science in another thread, you ******* stalker.

You are a ******* idiot, not worthy of my time.

 

[Marener]

Weaponization, not politicization. I was complaining about the politization of science in another thread, you ******* stalker.

You are a ******* idiot, not worthy of my time.

I don’t know what thread you’re talking about.

You have to admit, everything you want makes it WAY easier to weaponize government. Don’t you agree?

 

[martybegan]

I don’t know what thread you’re talking about.

You have to admit, everything you want makes it WAY easier to weaponize government. Don’t you agree?

No, it makes it harder for the leftist bureaucrats to get their way.

The "neutral" civil service is a farce, but a progressive civil service is what you want.

 

[Seymour Flops]

They are Independent from the Executive branch, not from all oversight at all.

Where in the Constitution does it say that?

 

[Marener]

No, it makes it harder for the leftist bureaucrats to get their way.

That’s not what I asked, which means you’re afraid to answer the question.

The "neutral" civil service is a farce, but a progressive civil service is what you want.

When you’re a right wing hack, someone who is neutral will look like a progressive.

A president who can fire anyone in government for any reason can very easily weaponize it against his enemies. Don’t you agree?

 

[Norm Paperman]

Where in the Constitution does it say that?

Where in the Constitution does it say that the FTC or FCC should exist at all?

 

[Mick2]

A very famous republican said it very well:

"that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth"

Abe is spinning in his grave right now.

11/5/24

 

[Mick2]

A president who can fire anyone in government for any reason can very easily weaponize it against his enemies. Don’t you agree?

The President is the head of the executive branch and a lot of other government positions require Presidential appointment. Who else are you suggesting should terminate bad actors who are undermining the President the people chose? Leave it left-wing nutjobs who have zero authority on the matter?

 

[Marener]

The President is the head of the executive branch and a lot of other government positions require Presidential appointment. Who else are you suggesting should terminate bad actors? Leave it left-wing nutjobs who have zero authority on the matter?

What do you mean by “bar actors”?

 

[Mick2]

What do you mean by “bar actors”?

I don't know what a "bar actor" is. Explain.

 

[Marener]

I don't know what a "bar actor" is. Explain.

Bad actor. Don’t be annoying.

Trump says to prosecute Letitia James. The prosecutor says there’s no case.

Is that prosecutor a “bad actor”?

 

[martybegan]

That’s not what I asked, which means you’re afraid to answer the question.

When you’re a right wing hack, someone who is neutral will look like a progressive.

A president who can fire anyone in government for any reason can very easily weaponize it against his enemies. Don’t you agree?

I don't care what the "queef of gotcha attempts" asks.

You ain't neutral.

Don't care. A president who's own branch fights against his lawful orders is not government by the people.

The people only elect the President, not the 100,000 bureaucrats who are just supposed to enact the Presidents lawful orders.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And where did Congress grant them that authority?

Huh? Youre not making sense.

Furthermore, go look this stuff up for yourself. It's basic civics information.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Where in the Constitution does it say that the FTC or FCC should exist at all?

It is allowed by the Article 1, Section 8, the last sentence which is the "necessary and proper" clause.

The constitution says nothing about executive agencies being independent of the executive.

Nor does the 1934 law establishing the FCC.

Nor do the laws establishing any federal executive agency, with the CFPB arguably being the exception.

This idea that federal agencies should be independent is only brought up when democrats do not like the current president, and the agencies are staffed with people who also do not like the current president, and try to buck his leadership.

It is a purely political concept and absolutely not a legal concept.

 

[Marener]

I don't care what the "queef of gotcha attempts" asks.

You ain't neutral.

Don't care. A president who's own branch fights against his lawful orders is not government by the people.

The people only elect the President, not the 100,000 bureaucrats who are just supposed to enact the Presidents lawful orders.

Is it lawful for the president to weaponize government?

 

[martybegan]

Is it lawful for the president to weaponize government?

Trump hasn't weaponized government.

Biden and his puppet masters did it.

 

[Norm Paperman]

It is allowed by the Article 1, Section 8, the last sentence which is the "necessary and proper" clause.

The constitution says nothing about executive agencies being independent of the executive.

Nor does the 1934 law establishing the FCC.

Nor do the laws establishing any federal executive agency, with the CFPB arguably being the exception.

This idea that federal agencies should be independent is only brought up when democrats do not like the current president, and the agencies are staffed with people who also do not like the current president.

It is a purely political concept and absolutely not a legal concept.

Does the Constitution forbid federal agencies from being independent?