Roundybout Posted February 11 Posted February 11 BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT 1 1
JDHillFan Posted February 11 Posted February 11 Media supercut incoming for constitutional crisis. Think “gravitas”, “ sharp as a tack” and “ joy and vibes” 1
SoonerBillsFan Posted February 11 Posted February 11 2 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: I have been shocked this idiot has enough brain power to feed herself.
Doc Posted February 11 Posted February 11 I guess this phrase tested well in their focus groups... 1 1 1
JFKjr Posted February 11 Posted February 11 3 hours ago, Roundybout said: BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted February 11 Posted February 11 Trump already squawking about having another term. Will the GOP even hold primaries?
JFKjr Posted February 11 Posted February 11 Just now, Trump_is_Mentally_fit said: Trump already squawking about having another term. Will the GOP even hold primaries? After the "selection" of Kamala you're worried about primaries? For the other party?
daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 1 hour ago, BillsFanNC said: What happened to option C : Don't send the check, and arrest the fraudster.
RiotAct Posted February 12 Posted February 12 11 hours ago, Roundybout said: BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT BUT WHAT ABOUT DEFLECT DEFLECT DEFLECT MuH rIgHtS, amirite?
BillsFanNC Posted February 12 Author Posted February 12 Leftists don't live in a scripted echo chamber at all. 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted February 12 Posted February 12 The Constitutional question is what are the limits on Federal judges to tell the President, the person in charge of the executive branch, how to run the executive branch? Especially with regards to agencies like USAID which was created through Presidential executive order in 1961 and therefore requires no Congressional approval to proceed with any changes.
daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 6 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said: The Constitutional question is what are the limits on Federal judges to tell the President, the person in charge of the executive branch, how to run the executive branch? Especially with regards to agencies like USAID which was created through Presidential executive order in 1961 and therefore requires no Congressional approval to proceed with any changes. This is more about spending appropriations than the organizational aspect, which is the executive's job.
Orlando Buffalo Posted February 12 Posted February 12 The part that is truly confounding to me is that the judges are supposed to show deference to the executive branch on items that only effect the executive branch, and same with legislature, but here we are with them making themselves the arbiters, which is not their role. Unless they have the right to deny the president the right to hire people they do not have the right to stop him from firing people in his line of command.
daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 50 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: The part that is truly confounding to me is that the judges are supposed to show deference to the executive branch on items that only effect the executive branch, and same with legislature, but here we are with them making themselves the arbiters, which is not their role. Unless they have the right to deny the president the right to hire people they do not have the right to stop him from firing people in his line of command. They are arbitrating the Constitution. They're also arbitrating who he's legally and constitutionally allowed to fire, and when.
Recommended Posts