Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

President Trump signs Executive Order


acidhead

Recommended Posts

The Big Fellow is scoring a high average then compared to his two predecessors. 101 already in only two years! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
1 hour ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

The Big Fellow is scoring a high average then compared to his two predecessors. 101 already in only two years! 

It's not a contest, but if it was, the winner would be Jimmy Carter, the least effective President in my lifetime.  That's going by the rate per year, the only fair comparison.  But what also needs to be considered is the times and political climate.  Such a study is way beyond my abilities but I can see those two things as significant variables.  It's a power granted to Presidents by the Constitution because the Founders seemed to be aware that the system of checks and balances they had designed to slow the government down might work against us in critical times.  In Trump's case, and probably others, there might not be a need for so many if Congress had been more interested in what was best for the country and not just for them, their district or their party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Big Jim said:

It's not a contest, but if it was, the winner would be Jimmy Carter, the least effective President in my lifetime.  That's going by the rate per year, the only fair comparison.  But what also needs to be considered is the times and political climate.  Such a study is way beyond my abilities but I can see those two things as significant variables.  It's a power granted to Presidents by the Constitution because the Founders seemed to be aware that the system of checks and balances they had designed to slow the government down might work against us in critical times.  In Trump's case, and probably others, there might not be a need for so many if Congress had been more interested in what was best for the country and not just for them, their district or their party.

He had a Republican house, senate and presidency those two years........

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

He had a Republican house, senate and presidency those two years........

That's only one factor.  Our government is designed to move slowly no matter who holds the majority.  The EO is a tool given to Presidents to cut through the normal red tape.  But like a lot of tools it can be used for more than one purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Big Jim said:

That's only one factor.  Our government is designed to move slowly no matter who holds the majority.  The EO is a tool given to Presidents to cut through the normal red tape.  But like a lot of tools it can be used for more than one purpose.

I amazed at how fast executive orders went from being "the actions of a dictator bypassing congress" under Obama to "a tool given to Presidents to cut through the normal red tape" under Trump.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

I amazed at how fast executive orders went from being "the actions of a dictator bypassing congress" under Obama to "a tool given to Presidents to cut through the normal red tape" under Trump.

 

I'm amazed at how you can take the opinions of two different people and compare them as if they were spoken by one.  My opinion is on the purpose of the EO itself and why the Founders included it in the Constitution.  It applies equally to all President's.  Try to find whoever said that during Obama's term and take it up with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Big Jim said:

I'm amazed at how you can take the opinions of two different people and compare them as if they were spoken by one.  My opinion is on the purpose of the EO itself and why the Founders included it in the Constitution.  It applies equally to all President's.  Try to find whoever said that during Obama's term and take it up with him.

That's the crux of it after all.  Two years ago you would have never voiced your opinion, whereas the people who voiced that opinion back then would never voice it now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

That's the crux of it after all.  Two years ago you would have never voiced your opinion, whereas the people who voiced that opinion back then would never voice it now. 

You don't know me or what I have or would have done.  I've voiced my opinion ever since I could form sentences.  I speak only for myself, not any group, party or person.  You seem to think you can speak for groups and people you don't know and don't represent.  I posted many opinions about Obama.  As I've said in other threads on UM, I look at voting for a President the same as hiring a plumber.  I want the best man for the job, not a best buddy.  Some I like and some I don't but the way the Constitution defines and limits the office is the same for all of them. I don't like everything about Trump and I didn't dislike everything about Obama.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And under the cover of the frenzy surrounding the Mueller report the US Constitution takes a huge body blow from the regime.

Pentagon Transfers $1 Billion In Funding For Trump’s Border Wall

Quote

The Pentagon notified Congress on Monday that it had transferred $1 billion in military personnel funding to construct President Donald Trump’s wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. 

In a memo addressed to Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen, Patrick Shanahan, the acting defense secretary, said he’d authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to begin planning and building 57 miles of fencing along the southern border, as well as improving roads in Yuma, Arizona, and El Paso, Texas, CNN reported.

Democratic lawmakers were swift in their rebuke of the Pentagon chief’s move.

In a letter to Shanahan on Monday, a group of Democratic Senators led by Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Richard Durbin of Illinois said they “strongly” objected to the transfer of funds, which they described as a violation of congressional appropriations.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.