Where did we Get the Idea that Agencies Created by Congress to be Under the Executive Branch are Supposed to be Independent?

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Care4all, John Edgar Slow Horses, let's get away from the DOJ. I know that was your favorite department since it went after Trump under Obama, Trump, and Biden. Now you're shocked that it won't be allowed to do that to the sitting president, who was overwhelmingly elected.

But, do you apply that to all federal agencies? Is the Department of Commerce also an independent agency, whose actions are directed only by the Secretary of Commerce with no power of the President or Congress to "interfere?"

Department of Education?

Department of Housing and Urban Development?

Each of these is it's only little unelected monarchy, with the Secretary at the top and accountable to no one but their own agendas?

Congress, the American voter, and SCOTUS will not permit a Muskization of the government.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Congress, the American voter, and SCOTUS will not permit a Muskization of the government.

No, they will not.

Because Federal agencies are NOT independent.

Thank you.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No, they will not.

Because Federal agencies are NOT independent.

Thank you.

And the President is not a dictator. Just like Kelly and Milley, the high brass will hold him in check.

Don't try supporting a dictator wanna bee, Seymour.

 

[Seymour Flops]

And the President is not a dictator. Just like Kelly and Milley, the high brass will hold him in check.

Don't try supporting a dictator wanna bee, Seymour.

No, the president's underlings are not charged to "hold him in check." Or if they are, point to the clause in the Constitution that gives them that duty.

That's why he isn't hiring anymore Milley's or Kelly's. If one of his picks turns out to be so arrogant that they believe their role is to hold the elected president in check, they will go post haste.

He's not a dictator. He is a constitutional head of state. He weilds the power of the executive - all of it - just as the constitution directs him to.

I think you are confused after four years of a president who had not the capacity to hold the power of the executive and had it taken by his wife, and whatever committee or cell was running him. But Obama ran the executive, and so did Trump. So did both Bush's, Clinton, Reagain and even Carter.

You shouldn't have forgotten in only four years, but TDS clouded your thinking.

 

[Care4all]

Of course.

When I was a Private in the Army, I was supposed to refuse any unlawful order of my two-star division commander. But that did not make me "independent."

But you say the DOJ is. Let's see if you're serious:

What if the DOJ goes beyond the president's desires? What if Pam Bondi starts prosecuting each of the agents who participated in the raid on Mar-a-Lago for criminal trespass while armed and under color of law? What are they going to say? What could they say, except "I was only following orders?"

Suppose Trump agrees with the agents that they were under orders, and tells her to back off. Suppose she says, "Hell NO! They are supposed to refuse unlawful orders! It is against the law to execute a search warrant for political purposes. US Code 22, section 7102, subsection (1), abuse of law or process. You know how I know that, Fat Boy? Because I'm a lawyer, not a fucking game show host. Leave this to me, I want my independence, God DAMNIT! We gotta nip this in the bud, or those perves will be going through my underwear after I'm president!"

You would side with Bondi, because the DOJ is independent? Or you would be happy that Trump is "interfering?"

Full stop! The Mara Lago search and seizure was lawful. With a court judge's approval. Pam Bondi could not go after them legally, even with Trump's request. She is sworn to uphold the constitution and laws. Not show fealty to the president.

So, maybe I am misunderstanding your assertion?

 

[Man With A Plan]

DOJ has been traditionally independent of the Office of the President.

You think Eric Holder was "independent" of Barack Obama? Or that Merrick Garland was "independent" of Joe Biden? Come on, John...you LOVED it when they were doing the bidding of Democrats but now you're freaking out that Pam Bondi isn't going to have an adversarial relationship with Trump?

 

[Man With A Plan]

Full stop! The Mara Lago search and seizure was lawful. With a court judge's approval. Pam Bondi could not go after them legally, even with Trump's request. She is sworn to uphold the constitution and laws. Not show fealty to the president.

So, maybe I am misunderstanding your assertion?

It would be illegal for a sitting President to use the FBI, the DOJ, or the IRS to go after their political enemies yet that was done repeatedly by both the Obama Administration and the Biden Administration.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No, the president's underlings are not charged to "hold him in check." Or if they are, point to the clause in the Constitution that gives them that duty.

That's why he isn't hiring anymore Milley's or Kelly's. If one of his picks turns out to be so arrogant that they believe their role is to hold the elected president in check, they will go post haste.

He's not a dictator. He is a constitutional head of state. He weilds the power of the executive - all of it - just as the constitution directs him to.

I think you are confused after four years of a president who had not the capacity to hold the power of the executive and had it taken by his wife, and whatever committee or cell was running him. But Obama ran the executive, and so did Trump. So did both Bush's, Clinton, Reagain and even Carter.

You shouldn't have forgotten in only four years, but TDS clouded your thinking.

Hopefully, there will be no mercy on Trump or anyone who tries to protect Trump in dictatorial behavior.

The DOJ is not the President's personal attorney.,

 

[Stryder50]

I think it was due to common sense ethics, because presidents are not emperors.

You all ignored that with Biden, Obama, and Clinton.

 

[Stryder50]

Hopefully, there will be no mercy on Trump or anyone who tries to protect Trump in dictatorial behavior.

The DOJ is not the President's personal attorney.,

Your dictator Biden and fellow DumbocRATs never got that memo.

 

[Stryder50]

Means nothing because the DOJ is not the President's personal law firm but only the nations.

Does not apply when the POTUS is DemocRAT, as we've seen with the last three such.

 

[Stryder50]

No one cares, my little bud.

Would seem you don't care, especially when it comes to knowing the Constitution, which is a public document and taught in civics classes.

 

[Stryder50]

And the President is not a dictator. Just like Kelly and Milley, the high brass will hold him in check.

Don't try supporting a dictator wanna bee, Seymour.

You all seemed to have forgotten that when it came to your dictators Obama and Biden !

 

[Stryder50]

Actually he’s not. But we’re going to find out how you like a private citizen not elected to anything looking at your personal data in four years.

See you down the road sunshine.

A lot of private businesses and un-elected bureaucrats already do that and have for decades.

Get a clue "sunshine".

 

[the watcher]

I think it was due to common sense ethics, because presidents are not emperors.

A group of unelected cronies running things can be a lot worse than an emperor, and you may not even know who they are. The Constitution set up the branches of government to provide some system of checks and balances, and it worked for a while. The Supreme Court was set up to be independent and specified terms for life in an attempt to shield them from political pressure, and it also worked for a while. Money and hunger for power by corporations changed all the balance which was fragile from the start. When the Federal Reserve was set up, it was advertised as being "independent" from the legislative and executive branches except for approved appointments of the figurehead, and you see how that is working. All department heads under the Exec serve at the discretion of the President, and the DOJ has always been an extension of the White House. The FBI has been permanently compromised by Gay Edgar Hoover who instilled a culture of blackmail, bullying legislators, and deceit which has been retained and taken over by political operatives from both parties, and can't be considered normal in any way.

 

[Care4all]

It would be illegal for a sitting President to use the FBI, the DOJ, or the IRS to go after their political enemies yet that was done repeatedly by both the Obama Administration and the Biden Administration.

What exactly did they do to you that you believe is even slightly comparable to this regime?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Full stop! The Mara Lago search and seizure was lawful. With a court judge's approval. Pam Bondi could not go after them legally, even with Trump's request. She is sworn to uphold the constitution and laws. Not show fealty to the president.

You're dodging the question. If she DID go after them, rightly or wrongly, under a theory of law that you would not understand nearly as well as her, she being an educated and experienced lawyer, would you want Trump to stop her?

Or would you want him to honor the independence of the DOJ?

So, maybe I am misunderstanding your assertion?

Deliberately, yes. I made it a little simpler for you, but that won't help if you are determined not to answer the question.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Would seem you don't care, especially when it comes to knowing the Constitution, which is a public document and taught in civics classes.

which you slept through

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

You all ignored that with Biden, Obama, and Clinton.

Prove it.

 

[martybegan]

And the President is not a dictator. Just like Kelly and Milley, the high brass will hold him in check.

Don't try supporting a dictator wanna bee, Seymour.

Only the House can hold the President "in check" via impeachment, or the Supreme Court can via decisions.

His own branch has no such power as per the Constitution.