NYT: Donald Trump is Unfit to Lead

Here, that would require a constitutional amendment, and the approval of 38 states.
That won't happen here.

They didn't require one in Nazi Germany. They simply passed a law establishing a new head of state office, not defined or prohibited, in their Constitution.
 
"Mr. Trump has shown a character unworthy of the responsibilities of the presidency. He has demonstrated an utter lack of respect for the Constitution, the rule of law and the American people. Instead of a cogent vision for the country’s future, Mr. Trump is animated by a thirst for political power: to use the levers of government to advance his interests, satisfy his impulses and exact retribution against those who he thinks have wronged him.

He is, quite simply, unfit to lead."


Trump committed treasonous, historic crimes: attempting to overturn a presidential election, disenfranchise millions of Americans, and disrupt the peaceful transfer of power – corrupt and dishonest, a pathological liar, an enemy of democracy, and a convicted felon, Trump is unfit to hold any public office.
Oooh, Mrs. Jones, try a Midol and change out your maxi pad, those cramps will subside. Plus TDS during your time of month....ouch!
 
Of course it was. Their constitution declared their head of state was a president, elected by the people every 4 years. Hitler wanted to be a dictator. He couldn't be president since that required an election. So instead, the Nazi's in their parliament, passed legislation creating a new office. They made him fuhrer by combining the powers of the president and the chancellor. And enough people went along with it, inside the government as well as outside and the military, that it led to what it became. Don't be so naive to think that can't happen again. Anywhere.
The US Constitution cannot be overruled by an unconstitutional Law.
Even if they could get 60 votes in the senate, the USSC would kill it.
An Amendment takes an inordinate amount of time and must be approved by 38 states.
NFW Trump can stay in office more than 4-years.
At 78, I'll be happy if he walks out of the WH in 4-years, instead of on a gurney.
Not even considering what would happen in the 2026 mid-terms if Trump went off the rails.
 
And what was the rate for almost the ENTIRE Obama Presidency, Faun? The truth is that the Fed kept interest rates near 0 for 7 years of the Obama Presidency. They didn't increase it at all until Dec. of 2016 because the economy was so weak. Under Trump the rate was increased seven times before another small rate increase was imposed. They were raising the rate because the economy was doing so well under Trump. Now under Biden the Fed desperately WANTS to increase the rate to combat the rampant inflation that Biden's spending caused but they can't because the economy isn't strong enough to support it and they fear a recession!

So now that you admit I didn't dodge your question, you come up with a new one?

Regardless, 3 things. One is that the increases, indicating the economy was good, began under Obama and was handed to Trump. Two is that Trump's "greatest economy in history" wasn't that great since they had to start lowering the rate in 2019. And three, even with a rate more than double Trump's highest, Biden has created more jobs on a monthly average (262K in 24 months since surpassing Trump's pre-covid high) in less time than Trump did (180K in 37 months).
 
The US Constitution cannot be overruled by an unconstitutional Law.
Even if they could get 60 votes in the senate, the USSC would kill it.
An Amendment takes an inordinate amount of time and must be approved by 38 states.
NFW Trump can stay in office more than 4-years.
At 78, I'll be happy if he walks out of the WH in 4-years, instead of on a gurney.
Not even considering what would happen in the 2026 mid-terms if Trump went off the rails.

Huh? Where does the Constitution state a new federal office can't be created by Congress?
 
Huh? Where does the Constitution state a new federal office can't be created by Congress?
They can, just not equal or above the president or other Constitutional officers as described.

The only way a president could take absolute power is to "suspend" the Constitution, and that would never fly.
 
Huh? Where does the Constitution state a new federal office can't be created by Congress?
You:
They simply passed a law establishing a new head of state office,

1: Congress has no power granted to it by the constitution to create such an office

2: The head of state and head of government - the unitary executive - are created by the US constitution.

Congress has power to create executive offices -- departments subordinate to the President - any such offices created by Congress fall under the executive branch and are thus both limited and enabled by Article II of the Constitution.
 
Last edited:
"Mr. Trump has shown a character unworthy of the responsibilities of the presidency. He has demonstrated an utter lack of respect for the Constitution, the rule of law and the American people. Instead of a cogent vision for the country’s future, Mr. Trump is animated by a thirst for political power: to use the levers of government to advance his interests, satisfy his impulses and exact retribution against those who he thinks have wronged him.

He is, quite simply, unfit to lead."


Trump committed treasonous, historic crimes: attempting to overturn a presidential election, disenfranchise millions of Americans, and disrupt the peaceful transfer of power – corrupt and dishonest, a pathological liar, an enemy of democracy, and a convicted felon, Trump is unfit to hold any public office.

Vice president Trump, you mean? :badgrin:
 
They can, just not equal or above the president or other Constitutional officers as described.

The only way a president could take absolute power is to "suspend" the Constitution, and that would never fly.

The Constitution doesn't prohibit it. It merely defines the role of a president.
 
A- listers are all worried Trump will raise their taxes....
 
So if the House and Senate passed a law saying that Trump was dictator for life, and he signed it into Law, and that the House, Senate and USSC were disbanded forever, that would stand?

I don't think so.

It doesn't include disbanding other branches. Germany did not disband their parliamentor their judiciary. They merely passed law creating a new office, which was not prohibited by their constitution, which effectively made Hitler a dictator for life.

And again, for clarities sake, I'm not saying it's happening with Trump. I'm not saying Trump wants to be a dictator. I'm not saying Congressional Republicans want him to be a dictator. I'm saying it's happened before and it can happen again, even here.
 
So now that you admit I didn't dodge your question, you come up with a new one?

Regardless, 3 things. One is that the increases, indicating the economy was good, began under Obama and was handed to Trump. Two is that Trump's "greatest economy in history" wasn't that great since they had to start lowering the rate in 2019. And three, even with a rate more than double Trump's highest, Biden has created more jobs on a monthly average (262K in 24 months since surpassing Trump's pre-covid high) in less time than Trump did (180K in 37 months).
With all due respect, Faun? It's laughable to claim that the economy was good under Obama when the Fed hadn't raised the rate from near zero in SEVEN YEARS!!! The first increase came in December AFTER Trump had won the election! The Fed followed that up with seven more increases before lowering the rate years later in 2019.
 
It doesn't include disbanding other branches. Germany did not disband their parliamentor their judiciary. They merely passed law creating a new office, which was not prohibited by their constitution, which effectively made Hitler a dictator for life.

And again, for clarities sake, I'm not saying it's happening with Trump. I'm not saying Trump wants to be a dictator. I'm not saying Congressional Republicans want him to be a dictator. I'm saying it's happened before and it can happen again, even here.
We disagree. It could never happen here.
Even if democrats took power and wanted to make Newsom president for life with migrants voting, it still would not stand.
If you saw the new movie "Civil War", that would probably be the result.
 
Last edited:
15th post
It doesn't include disbanding other branches. Germany did not disband their parliamentor their judiciary. They merely passed law creating a new office, which was not prohibited by their constitution, which effectively made Hitler a dictator for life.

And again, for clarities sake, I'm not saying it's happening with Trump. I'm not saying Trump wants to be a dictator. I'm not saying Congressional Republicans want him to be a dictator. I'm saying it's happened before and it can happen again, even here.
Well...if Trump has no plans to be a dictator and Republicans in the Congress have no plans to make him a dictator...then why, pray tell, does the left media keep claiming that both those things are going to happen if Trump is reelected? Wouldn't that be the very definition of fear mongering?
 
Well...if Trump has no plans to be a dictator and Republicans in the Congress have no plans to make him a dictator...then why, pray tell, does the left media keep claiming that both those things are going to happen if Trump is reelected? Wouldn't that be the very definition of fear mongering?
You know liberals / leftists / Democrats are more than willing to lie as a means to win an election - right?
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom