Progressives: The Thirst For Absolute Power

[g5000]

Was someone whining about absolute power?

Giuliani: Under constitution, Trump could shoot Comey and not be indicted

This is why the OP cracks me up. It's funny how the tards project their own beliefs and behaviors onto others.

 

[forkup]

Power over you, and how you direct your life. ‘Cause, they just know better……




1.Under tireless pressure from Progressives, we have become a nation of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, and for the bureaucrats.

America’s Founders recognized that the enemy of liberty was unchecked power.


“They rejected a line of thought that stretches from Plato’s Republic through Rousseau’s social contract to any number of modern ideologies that men- the right men, disinterested men- could be trusted with unchecked power.”
Jonah Goldberg, “Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy,”p.165




2. The method is the creation of more and more unaccountable and unchecked bureaus and agencies endowed with ever broader responsibilities and discretion in defining the rules that govern our activities and our lives. And these rules have the full force of law! Congress has increased the number of rules whose infractions are criminalized, waiving the common law requirement that one knows he is breaking the law. Today, one can be jailed for violating a regulation that one had no reason to know even existed!


While the officials in these agencies are generally good people, they become focused on their particular portfolio of duties, that, often, they cannot see the consequences on other parts of society. Put this together with human nature, and one can see bullying, and misuse of power, especially when these individuals are immune to penalty, and supported by free and extensive legal representation: they have sovereign immunity in their positions.
Senator James L. Buckley speaking at the Heritage Foundation, on his book “Freedom at Risk: Reflections on Politics, Liberty, and the State.”




3. According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7



Slowly, but surely, Progressives have reversed the nation our Founders formed and made serfs out of citizens.

And yet it's Guilliani who's claiming the president is above being indicted for murder. The current president who's insisting he can pardon himself. The current president who's making decision in such a manner that even his own aides don't know about it until after it's made. It's a Republican congress that feels it doesn't need to grant a hearing to a SCOTUS nominee that is being put forth by the previous president for no better reason that he isn't nominated by their side. Here you are claiming PROGRESIVES are power-hungry??? A good long look in the mirror seems appropriate.

I'm gonna chalk your post into the category of "Thrown Every Bit of Non Sequitur Against The Wall And See If Any Of It Sticks."


So, we agree that the OP is irrefutable, eh?

Irrefutable? Lets see if I can refute it. Every agency is headed by a political appointee. nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate. Every agency can only regulate what's in their mandate, this mandate is again set by congress. Everyone who runs afoul of these regulations is free to avail themselves of the legal system. So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch? And lastly where was your protests when Hillary went against state department REGULATIONS? Never mind then you sang to this tune.

Will Bill's wife receive the same treatment anyone else would for same infractions?

Shortly we will know how far America has strayed from this:
"in America, the law is King. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countriesthe law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." Common Sense, Thomas Paine.

As to my reply being a non sequitur. Your case for the agencies having unbridled power is sketchy at best. While Trump and his crew are outright saying Trump is above the law. Which one of those is unbridled power?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Power over you, and how you direct your life. ‘Cause, they just know better……




1.Under tireless pressure from Progressives, we have become a nation of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, and for the bureaucrats.

America’s Founders recognized that the enemy of liberty was unchecked power.


“They rejected a line of thought that stretches from Plato’s Republic through Rousseau’s social contract to any number of modern ideologies that men- the right men, disinterested men- could be trusted with unchecked power.”
Jonah Goldberg, “Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy,”p.165




2. The method is the creation of more and more unaccountable and unchecked bureaus and agencies endowed with ever broader responsibilities and discretion in defining the rules that govern our activities and our lives. And these rules have the full force of law! Congress has increased the number of rules whose infractions are criminalized, waiving the common law requirement that one knows he is breaking the law. Today, one can be jailed for violating a regulation that one had no reason to know even existed!


While the officials in these agencies are generally good people, they become focused on their particular portfolio of duties, that, often, they cannot see the consequences on other parts of society. Put this together with human nature, and one can see bullying, and misuse of power, especially when these individuals are immune to penalty, and supported by free and extensive legal representation: they have sovereign immunity in their positions.
Senator James L. Buckley speaking at the Heritage Foundation, on his book “Freedom at Risk: Reflections on Politics, Liberty, and the State.”




3. According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7



Slowly, but surely, Progressives have reversed the nation our Founders formed and made serfs out of citizens.

And yet it's Guilliani who's claiming the president is above being indicted for murder. The current president who's insisting he can pardon himself. The current president who's making decision in such a manner that even his own aides don't know about it until after it's made. It's a Republican congress that feels it doesn't need to grant a hearing to a SCOTUS nominee that is being put forth by the previous president for no better reason that he isn't nominated by their side. Here you are claiming PROGRESIVES are power-hungry??? A good long look in the mirror seems appropriate.

I'm gonna chalk your post into the category of "Thrown Every Bit of Non Sequitur Against The Wall And See If Any Of It Sticks."


So, we agree that the OP is irrefutable, eh?

He makes good points. Do you have the objectivity to agree or at least address what he said in his post?

Did you have anything to say about the premise of the thread to which you voluntarily subscribed, that Progressives have created an unaccountable unconstitutional administrative state?


Then....why the attempt to change the subject?

Not changing the subject at all. Pointing out things that the current administration is doing that falls into the same narrative as your OP is completely valid. Why did you avoid answering?

As for your OP it was riddled with hyperbole however, I’m not a supporter of large government so I think a healthy check on the progressive agenda is a good thing. You just gotta be more honest and objective because these hyperbolic smear rants that you tend to do are useless, they only strengthen the polarization

You can trust that I will give your advice all the consideration it deserves.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Power over you, and how you direct your life. ‘Cause, they just know better……




1.Under tireless pressure from Progressives, we have become a nation of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, and for the bureaucrats.

America’s Founders recognized that the enemy of liberty was unchecked power.


“They rejected a line of thought that stretches from Plato’s Republic through Rousseau’s social contract to any number of modern ideologies that men- the right men, disinterested men- could be trusted with unchecked power.”
Jonah Goldberg, “Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy,”p.165




2. The method is the creation of more and more unaccountable and unchecked bureaus and agencies endowed with ever broader responsibilities and discretion in defining the rules that govern our activities and our lives. And these rules have the full force of law! Congress has increased the number of rules whose infractions are criminalized, waiving the common law requirement that one knows he is breaking the law. Today, one can be jailed for violating a regulation that one had no reason to know even existed!


While the officials in these agencies are generally good people, they become focused on their particular portfolio of duties, that, often, they cannot see the consequences on other parts of society. Put this together with human nature, and one can see bullying, and misuse of power, especially when these individuals are immune to penalty, and supported by free and extensive legal representation: they have sovereign immunity in their positions.
Senator James L. Buckley speaking at the Heritage Foundation, on his book “Freedom at Risk: Reflections on Politics, Liberty, and the State.”




3. According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7



Slowly, but surely, Progressives have reversed the nation our Founders formed and made serfs out of citizens.

And yet it's Guilliani who's claiming the president is above being indicted for murder. The current president who's insisting he can pardon himself. The current president who's making decision in such a manner that even his own aides don't know about it until after it's made. It's a Republican congress that feels it doesn't need to grant a hearing to a SCOTUS nominee that is being put forth by the previous president for no better reason that he isn't nominated by their side. Here you are claiming PROGRESIVES are power-hungry??? A good long look in the mirror seems appropriate.

I'm gonna chalk your post into the category of "Thrown Every Bit of Non Sequitur Against The Wall And See If Any Of It Sticks."


So, we agree that the OP is irrefutable, eh?

Irrefutable? Lets see if I can refute it. Every agency is headed by a political appointee. nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate. Every agency can only regulate what's in their mandate, this mandate is again set by congress. Everyone who runs afoul of these regulations is free to avail themselves of the legal system. So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch? And lastly where was your protests when Hillary went against state department REGULATIONS? Never mind then you sang to this tune.

Will Bill's wife receive the same treatment anyone else would for same infractions?

Shortly we will know how far America has strayed from this:
"in America, the law is King. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countriesthe law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." Common Sense, Thomas Paine.

As to my reply being a non sequitur. Your case for the agencies having unbridled power is sketchy at best. While Trump and his crew are outright saying Trump is above the law. Which one of those is unbridled power?

"So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch?"

You should learn to read more carefully.

According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7

 

[Kosh]

The far left has always wanted the people of this country to be subjects of their control. They want to be the absolute rulers with zero opposition.

 

[Slade3200]

And yet it's Guilliani who's claiming the president is above being indicted for murder. The current president who's insisting he can pardon himself. The current president who's making decision in such a manner that even his own aides don't know about it until after it's made. It's a Republican congress that feels it doesn't need to grant a hearing to a SCOTUS nominee that is being put forth by the previous president for no better reason that he isn't nominated by their side. Here you are claiming PROGRESIVES are power-hungry??? A good long look in the mirror seems appropriate.

I'm gonna chalk your post into the category of "Thrown Every Bit of Non Sequitur Against The Wall And See If Any Of It Sticks."


So, we agree that the OP is irrefutable, eh?

He makes good points. Do you have the objectivity to agree or at least address what he said in his post?

Did you have anything to say about the premise of the thread to which you voluntarily subscribed, that Progressives have created an unaccountable unconstitutional administrative state?


Then....why the attempt to change the subject?

Not changing the subject at all. Pointing out things that the current administration is doing that falls into the same narrative as your OP is completely valid. Why did you avoid answering?

As for your OP it was riddled with hyperbole however, I’m not a supporter of large government so I think a healthy check on the progressive agenda is a good thing. You just gotta be more honest and objective because these hyperbolic smear rants that you tend to do are useless, they only strengthen the polarization

You can trust that I will give your advice all the consideration it deserves.

Dodging again huh?

 

[forkup]

Power over you, and how you direct your life. ‘Cause, they just know better……




1.Under tireless pressure from Progressives, we have become a nation of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, and for the bureaucrats.

America’s Founders recognized that the enemy of liberty was unchecked power.


“They rejected a line of thought that stretches from Plato’s Republic through Rousseau’s social contract to any number of modern ideologies that men- the right men, disinterested men- could be trusted with unchecked power.”
Jonah Goldberg, “Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy,”p.165




2. The method is the creation of more and more unaccountable and unchecked bureaus and agencies endowed with ever broader responsibilities and discretion in defining the rules that govern our activities and our lives. And these rules have the full force of law! Congress has increased the number of rules whose infractions are criminalized, waiving the common law requirement that one knows he is breaking the law. Today, one can be jailed for violating a regulation that one had no reason to know even existed!


While the officials in these agencies are generally good people, they become focused on their particular portfolio of duties, that, often, they cannot see the consequences on other parts of society. Put this together with human nature, and one can see bullying, and misuse of power, especially when these individuals are immune to penalty, and supported by free and extensive legal representation: they have sovereign immunity in their positions.
Senator James L. Buckley speaking at the Heritage Foundation, on his book “Freedom at Risk: Reflections on Politics, Liberty, and the State.”




3. According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7



Slowly, but surely, Progressives have reversed the nation our Founders formed and made serfs out of citizens.

And yet it's Guilliani who's claiming the president is above being indicted for murder. The current president who's insisting he can pardon himself. The current president who's making decision in such a manner that even his own aides don't know about it until after it's made. It's a Republican congress that feels it doesn't need to grant a hearing to a SCOTUS nominee that is being put forth by the previous president for no better reason that he isn't nominated by their side. Here you are claiming PROGRESIVES are power-hungry??? A good long look in the mirror seems appropriate.

I'm gonna chalk your post into the category of "Thrown Every Bit of Non Sequitur Against The Wall And See If Any Of It Sticks."


So, we agree that the OP is irrefutable, eh?

Irrefutable? Lets see if I can refute it. Every agency is headed by a political appointee. nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate. Every agency can only regulate what's in their mandate, this mandate is again set by congress. Everyone who runs afoul of these regulations is free to avail themselves of the legal system. So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch? And lastly where was your protests when Hillary went against state department REGULATIONS? Never mind then you sang to this tune.

Will Bill's wife receive the same treatment anyone else would for same infractions?

Shortly we will know how far America has strayed from this:
"in America, the law is King. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countriesthe law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." Common Sense, Thomas Paine.

As to my reply being a non sequitur. Your case for the agencies having unbridled power is sketchy at best. While Trump and his crew are outright saying Trump is above the law. Which one of those is unbridled power?

"So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch?"

You should learn to read more carefully.

According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7

I read it carefully and I called bullshit. Were is my reasoning wrong? If ANY agency puts out a regulation that is unconstitutional someone who runs afoul of it is free to take their case all the way to the supreme court. Every agency is headed by a political appointee nominated and confirmed by the 2 other branches of government.. And every agency has clear restrictions on what they can regulate. Those are all restrictions put on them. And as usual you are to chicken to acknowledge both your own and the Republican hypocrisy clearly on display. Furthermore unless you have some way to prove that the bureaucracy is led by the left the entire premise is a non starter.

 

[Borillar]

5. Learning from John Locke, our Founders based the nation on the concept of equality before the law. It is not America if this idea is not observed in both theory and in fact. Therefore, government officials are subject to the same laws as everyone else.

Not so under the Progressives’ instituted ‘administrative state,’ under which bureaucrats are insulated from the rule of law.



If a corporation were guilty of poisoning a river, would the corporation, and its officials be held civilly and criminally responsible???

You betcha’!!!




How about bureaucrats?????

“EPA causes a major environmental disaster, the question is: will it fine itself and fire those involved?

EPA crews trying to collect and contain waste water in the Gold King mine in Durango, Colorado, loosed 1.1 million gallons of “acidic, yellowish” discharge, causing the pollution – which includes levels of arsenic, lead, cadmium, aluminum and copper – to flow into the Animas River (an early tributary of the Colorado) at a rate of 1200 gallons per minute.

The EPA has now released new figures, and its now 3 million gallons of toxic wastewaterand climbing.” EPA causes a major environmental disaster, the question is: will it fine itself and fire those involved?



“The EPA has taken responsibility for the incident, but refused to pay for any damages claims filed after the accident on grounds of sovereign immunity, pending special authorization from Congress or re-filing of lawsuits in federal court.” 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill - Wikipedia


Sovereign immunity????????


“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

And yet it was the right who gave us the EPA. They also gifted us with the DHS, the TSA, the War on (some) Drugs, the Patriot Act, warrant-less wiretaps and searches, no-knock raids, and the DEA. You're worried about the left accumulating power, but it has been your side that created the police state we live under today.

 

[Slade3200]

The far left has always wanted the people of this country to be subjects of their control. They want to be the absolute rulers with zero opposition.

Oh boy, here comes the soapbox drone with his stale talking points and proclaimations. Save the rants for those who care. If you want to engage then bring something good to the table.

 

[Kosh]

The far left has always wanted the people of this country to be subjects of their control. They want to be the absolute rulers with zero opposition.

Oh boy, here comes the soapbox drone with his stale talking points and proclaimations. Save the rants for those who care. If you want to engage then bring something good to the table.

Poor little far left drone!

You post the truth about their debunked religion and you see how they respond!

But then again to these drones the Constitution is just a GD piece of paper!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Power over you, and how you direct your life. ‘Cause, they just know better……




1.Under tireless pressure from Progressives, we have become a nation of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, and for the bureaucrats.

America’s Founders recognized that the enemy of liberty was unchecked power.


“They rejected a line of thought that stretches from Plato’s Republic through Rousseau’s social contract to any number of modern ideologies that men- the right men, disinterested men- could be trusted with unchecked power.”
Jonah Goldberg, “Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy,”p.165




2. The method is the creation of more and more unaccountable and unchecked bureaus and agencies endowed with ever broader responsibilities and discretion in defining the rules that govern our activities and our lives. And these rules have the full force of law! Congress has increased the number of rules whose infractions are criminalized, waiving the common law requirement that one knows he is breaking the law. Today, one can be jailed for violating a regulation that one had no reason to know even existed!


While the officials in these agencies are generally good people, they become focused on their particular portfolio of duties, that, often, they cannot see the consequences on other parts of society. Put this together with human nature, and one can see bullying, and misuse of power, especially when these individuals are immune to penalty, and supported by free and extensive legal representation: they have sovereign immunity in their positions.
Senator James L. Buckley speaking at the Heritage Foundation, on his book “Freedom at Risk: Reflections on Politics, Liberty, and the State.”




3. According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7



Slowly, but surely, Progressives have reversed the nation our Founders formed and made serfs out of citizens.

And yet it's Guilliani who's claiming the president is above being indicted for murder. The current president who's insisting he can pardon himself. The current president who's making decision in such a manner that even his own aides don't know about it until after it's made. It's a Republican congress that feels it doesn't need to grant a hearing to a SCOTUS nominee that is being put forth by the previous president for no better reason that he isn't nominated by their side. Here you are claiming PROGRESIVES are power-hungry??? A good long look in the mirror seems appropriate.

I'm gonna chalk your post into the category of "Thrown Every Bit of Non Sequitur Against The Wall And See If Any Of It Sticks."


So, we agree that the OP is irrefutable, eh?

Irrefutable? Lets see if I can refute it. Every agency is headed by a political appointee. nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate. Every agency can only regulate what's in their mandate, this mandate is again set by congress. Everyone who runs afoul of these regulations is free to avail themselves of the legal system. So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch? And lastly where was your protests when Hillary went against state department REGULATIONS? Never mind then you sang to this tune.

Will Bill's wife receive the same treatment anyone else would for same infractions?

Shortly we will know how far America has strayed from this:
"in America, the law is King. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countriesthe law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." Common Sense, Thomas Paine.

As to my reply being a non sequitur. Your case for the agencies having unbridled power is sketchy at best. While Trump and his crew are outright saying Trump is above the law. Which one of those is unbridled power?

"So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch?"

You should learn to read more carefully.

According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7

I read it carefully and I called bullshit. Were is my reasoning wrong? If ANY agency puts out a regulation that is unconstitutional someone who runs afoul of it is free to take their case all the way to the supreme court. Every agency is headed by a political appointee nominated and confirmed by the 2 other branches of government.. And every agency has clear restrictions on what they can regulate. Those are all restrictions put on them. And as usual you are to chicken to acknowledge both your own and the Republican hypocrisy clearly on display. Furthermore unless you have some way to prove that the bureaucracy is led by the left the entire premise is a non starter.

You've been told twice:
a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7

....and by an expert:

"Philip Hamburger is an American legal scholar. Hamburger holds a Juris Doctor from Yale Law School (1982) and a Bachelor of Arts from Princeton University(1979).[1]

Hamburger is the Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law at the Columbia University School of Law. He is a legal historian and a scholar of constitutional law. Before moving to Columbia, Hamburger was John P. Wilson Professor at the University of Chicago Law School, where he was also Director of the Bigelow Program and the Legal History Program. He was previously Oswald Symyster Colclough Research Professor at George Washington University Law School and, before that, he taught at the University of Connecticut Law School. He has been a visiting professor at the University of Virginia Law School and was the Jack N. Pritzker Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law at Northwestern Law School. Early in his career, he was an associate at the law firm of Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis LLPin Philadelphia."
Philip Hamburger - Wikipedia


And given this example:

“EPA causes a major environmental disaster, the question is: will it fine itself and fire those involved?

EPA crews trying to collect and contain waste water in the Gold King mine in Durango, Colorado, loosed 1.1 million gallons of “acidic, yellowish” discharge, causing the pollution – which includes levels of arsenic, lead, cadmium, aluminum and copper – to flow into the Animas River (an early tributary of the Colorado) at a rate of 1200 gallons per minute.

The EPA has now released new figures, and its now 3 million gallons of toxic wastewaterand climbing.” EPA causes a major environmental disaster, the question is: will it fine itself and fire those involved?



“The EPA has taken responsibility for the incident, but refused to pay for any damages claims filed after the accident on grounds of sovereign immunity, pending special authorization from Congress or re-filing of lawsuits in federal court.” 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill - Wikipedia



No doubt you imagine.....I almost said 'think'....you're more of an expert.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. Under pressure from Progressives/Liberals, and entirely new class of citizens has been created: bureaucracy.

While nominally citizens, they are effectively feudal lords, immune to the laws and regulations the rest of the citizenry is subject to.


“The power which a multiple millionaire, who may be my neighbour and perhaps my employer, has over me is very much less than that which the smallest functionaire possesses who wields the coercive power of the state, and on whose discretion it depends whether and how I am to be allowed to live or to work.”
Friedrich Hayek, “The Road to Serfdom,” p.108





One need look no further than the Mueller-Comey-McCabe Axis to see the effects of the insidious and incestuous relationship between the Democrat Party and the Deep State bureaucracy.


“Members of Special Counsel Bob Mueller's team leading the Russia investigation have donated almost exclusively to Democratic candidates, according to the FEC.

Why it matters: Former House Speaker Newt Gingrish tweeted it's "Time to rethink" if the Mueller-led investigation will be fair, given their donation history. But Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller, said he sees no problem with the donations.” The Democratic leanings of Bob Mueller's team


Impartiality: equal treatment of all rivals or disputants; fairness.




Sooooo.....where is that vaunted 'equality' the Left carps about so frequently????

 

[forkup]

And yet it's Guilliani who's claiming the president is above being indicted for murder. The current president who's insisting he can pardon himself. The current president who's making decision in such a manner that even his own aides don't know about it until after it's made. It's a Republican congress that feels it doesn't need to grant a hearing to a SCOTUS nominee that is being put forth by the previous president for no better reason that he isn't nominated by their side. Here you are claiming PROGRESIVES are power-hungry??? A good long look in the mirror seems appropriate.

I'm gonna chalk your post into the category of "Thrown Every Bit of Non Sequitur Against The Wall And See If Any Of It Sticks."


So, we agree that the OP is irrefutable, eh?

Irrefutable? Lets see if I can refute it. Every agency is headed by a political appointee. nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate. Every agency can only regulate what's in their mandate, this mandate is again set by congress. Everyone who runs afoul of these regulations is free to avail themselves of the legal system. So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch? And lastly where was your protests when Hillary went against state department REGULATIONS? Never mind then you sang to this tune.

Will Bill's wife receive the same treatment anyone else would for same infractions?

Shortly we will know how far America has strayed from this:
"in America, the law is King. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countriesthe law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." Common Sense, Thomas Paine.

As to my reply being a non sequitur. Your case for the agencies having unbridled power is sketchy at best. While Trump and his crew are outright saying Trump is above the law. Which one of those is unbridled power?

"So when you claim unbridled power, you mean power that's bridled by the executive, judicial and legislative branch?"

You should learn to read more carefully.

According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7

I read it carefully and I called bullshit. Were is my reasoning wrong? If ANY agency puts out a regulation that is unconstitutional someone who runs afoul of it is free to take their case all the way to the supreme court. Every agency is headed by a political appointee nominated and confirmed by the 2 other branches of government.. And every agency has clear restrictions on what they can regulate. Those are all restrictions put on them. And as usual you are to chicken to acknowledge both your own and the Republican hypocrisy clearly on display. Furthermore unless you have some way to prove that the bureaucracy is led by the left the entire premise is a non starter.

You've been told twice:
a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7

....and by an expert:

"Philip Hamburger is an American legal scholar. Hamburger holds a Juris Doctor from Yale Law School (1982) and a Bachelor of Arts from Princeton University(1979).[1]

Hamburger is the Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law at the Columbia University School of Law. He is a legal historian and a scholar of constitutional law. Before moving to Columbia, Hamburger was John P. Wilson Professor at the University of Chicago Law School, where he was also Director of the Bigelow Program and the Legal History Program. He was previously Oswald Symyster Colclough Research Professor at George Washington University Law School and, before that, he taught at the University of Connecticut Law School. He has been a visiting professor at the University of Virginia Law School and was the Jack N. Pritzker Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law at Northwestern Law School. Early in his career, he was an associate at the law firm of Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis LLPin Philadelphia."
Philip Hamburger - Wikipedia


And given this example:

“EPA causes a major environmental disaster, the question is: will it fine itself and fire those involved?

EPA crews trying to collect and contain waste water in the Gold King mine in Durango, Colorado, loosed 1.1 million gallons of “acidic, yellowish” discharge, causing the pollution – which includes levels of arsenic, lead, cadmium, aluminum and copper – to flow into the Animas River (an early tributary of the Colorado) at a rate of 1200 gallons per minute.

The EPA has now released new figures, and its now 3 million gallons of toxic wastewaterand climbing.” EPA causes a major environmental disaster, the question is: will it fine itself and fire those involved?



“The EPA has taken responsibility for the incident, but refused to pay for any damages claims filed after the accident on grounds of sovereign immunity, pending special authorization from Congress or re-filing of lawsuits in federal court.” 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill - Wikipedia



No doubt you imagine.....I almost said 'think'....you're more of an expert.

So, firstly to your expert. All supreme court justices are supposed to be experts, yet they come to different conclusions on how to interpret law all the time. So I don't care about credentials I care about my view on an issue.Overnight Regulation: Court sides with Trump in consumer agency fight | High court wrestles with whistleblower protections | FCC chief slams 'Hollywood celebrities' over net neutrality | AT&T, Time Warner extend merger deadline
Here for instance the courts decided to not go by the regulations put forth by the agencies but instead choose to side with the political line of succession. An example of the fallacy of the claim that the agencies don't answer to branches of government.
Your second point is flawed in the same way. It even confirms it by this sentence.

pending special authorization from Congress or re-filing of lawsuits in federal court.

here the agency is saying we will not pay any damages, but acknowledges it needs permission to not do so by the legislative or judicial branch. Btw simply refusing to acknowledge my other beefs with your argumentations, mainly that you aren't capable of supporting your claim that the agencies are led by the left, the fact that you yourself have no problem with regulations if it hurts a Democrat, or that whatever abuse of power these agencies supposedly do pails in comparison by the established abuses of power the GOP and the president in particular are doing now. Just shows me time and again how much of a coward you are.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Power over you, and how you direct your life. ‘Cause, they just know better……




1.Under tireless pressure from Progressives, we have become a nation of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, and for the bureaucrats.

America’s Founders recognized that the enemy of liberty was unchecked power.


“They rejected a line of thought that stretches from Plato’s Republic through Rousseau’s social contract to any number of modern ideologies that men- the right men, disinterested men- could be trusted with unchecked power.”
Jonah Goldberg, “Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy,”p.165




2. The method is the creation of more and more unaccountable and unchecked bureaus and agencies endowed with ever broader responsibilities and discretion in defining the rules that govern our activities and our lives. And these rules have the full force of law! Congress has increased the number of rules whose infractions are criminalized, waiving the common law requirement that one knows he is breaking the law. Today, one can be jailed for violating a regulation that one had no reason to know even existed!


While the officials in these agencies are generally good people, they become focused on their particular portfolio of duties, that, often, they cannot see the consequences on other parts of society. Put this together with human nature, and one can see bullying, and misuse of power, especially when these individuals are immune to penalty, and supported by free and extensive legal representation: they have sovereign immunity in their positions.
Senator James L. Buckley speaking at the Heritage Foundation, on his book “Freedom at Risk: Reflections on Politics, Liberty, and the State.”




3. According to prominent legal historian Philip Hamburger, professor at Columbia University, the wielding of progressive power by appointees, agencies, bureaucrats, is the Left’s effort to restore the sort of lawless absolute power forbidden by the Founders.


Professor Hamburger explains why investing this sort of power is unconstitutional:

a. This sort of bureaucratic power is not answerable to any of the three branches of government.

b. The power is ‘supralegal,’ judges actually defer to their authority.

c. The administrative regime assumes for itself, powers that the Constitution allocates to different branches.
Philip Hamburger, “Is Administrative Law Unlawful?,” p.6-7



Slowly, but surely, Progressives have reversed the nation our Founders formed and made serfs out of citizens.

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

"As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong? In the meantime, the never ending Witch Hunt, led by 13 very Angry and Conflicted Democrats (& others) continues into the mid-terms!"

Odd comment in a, b & c above, in light of Art. I, sec 8 and in particular clause 18. One need not wonder why PolitialChic (PC) is once again posting ultra partisan threads. is it her fear that the Democrats will once again fix what the GOP has damaged?

Is PC an agent provocateur, or is she just one more toxic troll? That is the question!

Does she support and will she defend Donald Trump's assertion that he is above the law? Or will she not respond to his claim, and default to her usual deflection from this critical issue, and label this response as foolish?

There is nothing about President Trump in my posts.

Nothing.....as is also true of your head.....not a thing in there.


The only conclusion to be drawn is that I have wounded you deeply, revealing the anti-American designs and desires of Liberals/Progressives.....

Absolute Power over other Americans.





Now....for your confession: when did you first develop the Fascist tradition????

As a foreseer I once again proved my ability. Nothing in your response is a rebuttal, and the essence of your post is the ad hominem.

Though I cannot pretend to know the future, however, you're so predictable, insipid and hackneyed, having had statistics and probability helped me to be correct.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. Progressivism began during the time of the greatest ascendancy of Marxism, communism, and a close inspection of the bureaucrat class would find it beginning in the same time frame.



Milovan Djilas wrote about that ‘new class’ in communist countries…..but it applies equally to what Progressives have unleashed in America.

“The new class is used as a polemic term by critics of countries that followed the Soviet type of Communism to describe the privileged ruling class of bureaucratsand Communist Party functionaries which arose in these states. Generally, the group known in the Soviet Union as the nomenklatura conforms to the theory of the new class. The term was earlier applied to other emerging strata of the society.

Milovan Đilas' "New Class" theory was also used extensively by anti-Communist commentators in the West in their criticism of the Communist states during the Cold War.

The term "red bourgeoisie" is a pejorative synonym for the term new class,…” New class - Wikipedia


American bureaucrats also tend to put society to the Left.

“This new class did not come to power to complete a new economic order, but to establish its own, and in doing so, to establish its power over society.” Milovan Djilas




Do you know who your masters are?

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. Perhaps the early Progressives actually imagined that unaccountable bureaucrats would be motivated to perform in the best interests of their fellow citizens. Perhaps they were actually that naïve….and blind to the power of human nature…..or, believed, as socialists do, that human nature can be harnessed for the benefit of society.

If so, that degree of ignorance should be enough of a reason to keep their sort from ever holding the reins of power.




“As the Progressive Era, and then the New Deal, unfolded with an expanding array of “alphabet” agencies — the FTC, FCC, SEC, NLRB and so forth — under a newly-conceived “living Constitution,” Wilson’s acolytes continued to argue that traditional understandings of the Constitution must not be allowed to restrict broad agency power.” Woodrow Wilson’s case against the Constitution




10.“All of the educated Liberals who cannot fathom why so many working-class Americans voted for Donald Trump need to take some vigorous moral- and policy- introspection. For modern Progressives have not only helped set up a system that millions of Americans believe is dedicated to making their lives more difficult and their path to success more daunting; the Progressives heap scorn on them for complaining about it.

The shadow government of the new class has fortified itself against democratic accountability and is sawing off the ladder to success beneath it.” Jonah Goldberg, “Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy,”p.207-208




Whether Communists, Fascists, Nazis.......or Progressives.......all have the very same endgame planned for society......and it isn't democracy.