Law be damned, Trump asserts unilateral control over executive branch, federal service (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

Following the Project 2025 playbook, in the last week, Trump and his newly installed loyalists have moved to (1) dismiss federal officials deemed unreliable to do his bidding (including 17 inspectors general) - many of which have protections from arbitrary dismissal, (2) freeze all science and public health activity until he can wrest full control, (3) freeze all federal assistance and grant activity deemed inconsistent with Trump's agenda, and (4) moved to terminate all federal employee telework and DEI programs.

The problem is much of this is controlled by federal law and not subject to sudden and complete change by the president through executive order. Most notably is the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 that simply codifies what is the constitutional allocation of resources where Congress appropriates money to the executive branch for a specific purpose, the executive branch must carry out that statutory purpose. This is indeed a constitutional crisis and even if Congress abdicates to Trump by acquiescing, the courts must still apply the law - or rule it unconstitutional.

And meanwhile the architect of much of this unlawful action is Russell Vought, Trump’s OMB nominee who the Senate appears ready to confirm.

120. The Impoundment Crisis of 2025

The Trump administration's Monday spending freeze is likely to provoke a crisis over the constitutionality of "impoundment"—one that the justices could well have to resolve *very* soon.

www.stevevladeck.com

 

[Mr. Blue Sky]

President Donald Trump has removed the security clearances from several more of his perceived enemies.

Trump, who had already removed former President Joe Biden’s clearance this week, now added former Secretary of State Antony Blinkento that list, telling The New York Post he had said: “Bad guy. Take away his passes.”

Trump took aim at eight Democrats, including New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

“This is to take away every right they have [revoking security clearances] including they can’t go into [federal] buildings,” he added when speaking to the Post.
The president said they would be given “exactly the same” kind of retribution as Biden faced.

Bragg prosecuted Trump in the hush money case last year, which led to 34 convictions of falsifying business records for the former president, who escaped punishment after his election victory but remains a convicted felon.

Meanwhile, James brought a civil case against the Trump Organization for misleading banks and insurers about the state of their assets.

While the measure by Trump could be seen as symbolic for James and Bragg, they may face problems as they try to enter courthouses, prisons, and other law enforcement facilities, the Post noted……….

Trump orders security access stripped from new list of enemies

Antony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Letitia James, and Alvin Bragg all included on list of Trump’s perceived enemies

www.independent.co.uk

I know many people of a religious bent who believe dearly in the concepts of ‘forgiveness’ and of ‘showing grace’ towards people whom you believe have wronged you.. i genuinely wonder how they reconcile those strong, core beliefs- beliefs that are the foundation of their very lives- i wonder how they reconcile that with their votes for Donald J Trump .. a guy who seems hellbent on vengeance and on getting back at people .

 

[Optimus Prime]

I know many people of a religious bent who believe dearly in the concepts of ‘forgiveness’ and of ‘showing grace’ towards people whom you believe have wronged you.. i genuinely wonder how they reconcile those strong, core beliefs- beliefs that are the foundation of their very lives- i wonder how they reconcile that with their votes for Donald J Trump .. a guy who seems hellbent on vengeance and on getting back at people .

After all the anti religious anti decency things they’ve already dismissed (or cheered) from Trump forgiveness won’t be a problem at all for them

 

[Sendai]

I would like Sendai and Joe to do a little thought experiment. Imagine this was Biden’s Administration sending in kids without vetting them and giving them access to all of our payment information. Hell. It was just reported today that one of the kids was recently fired from a job for divulging confidential information.

Denying GOP reps an emergency meeting to discuss what’s happening. Making websites disappear and claiming entire departments which were established by Congressional action no longer exist.

You would both be up in arms and extremely concerned. I would be too. I don’t care for these types of actions no matter which party is doing them.

Hell, if Biden had done any of this, MAGA would be rioting in front of the White House by now.

If Biden were doing weird things like trump my reaction would be about the same.

Just because a group of congresscritters say emergency doesn’t make it one.

 

[TampaJoe]

If you think what's happening now isn't something much different than what's typically happened in previous administration's, there's really no sense in continuing this discussion.

So tell me Dave, when is obstruction okay in your book? When are conflicts of interest okay in your book? When are ethical breeches ok in your book? Or is it you just want the ability to select based on party?

If you think DC isn’t full of self dealing, ethical breeches and conflicts of interest then you are naive. We have Congress critters spending millions to get themselves elected and then leaving office as millionaires. I have watched both parties obstruct the other for years and then pretend otherwise. So spare me the lecture on ethics, and integrity and backbone.

Republicans and Democrats crack me up when they start beating their chests talking about ethics. Why is it that we don’t have rules governing insider trading? Why is it we don’t have standards around conflicts of interest?
How does a public servant who makes a couple hundred grand become a multimillionaire after a few years in office?

I’m waiting on the day when there is one set of standards applied evenly and consistently regardless of party. I’m not holding my breath.

In the meantime, the Democrats can avail themselves of the same options that were available to Republicans when they were in the minority and didn’t like what the administration was doing.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

President Donald Trump has removed the security clearances from several more of his perceived enemies.

Trump, who had already removed former President Joe Biden’s clearance this week, now added former Secretary of State Antony Blinkento that list, telling The New York Post he had said: “Bad guy. Take away his passes.”

Trump took aim at eight Democrats, including New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

“This is to take away every right they have [revoking security clearances] including they can’t go into [federal] buildings,” he added when speaking to the Post.
The president said they would be given “exactly the same” kind of retribution as Biden faced.

Bragg prosecuted Trump in the hush money case last year, which led to 34 convictions of falsifying business records for the former president, who escaped punishment after his election victory but remains a convicted felon.

Meanwhile, James brought a civil case against the Trump Organization for misleading banks and insurers about the state of their assets.

While the measure by Trump could be seen as symbolic for James and Bragg, they may face problems as they try to enter courthouses, prisons, and other law enforcement facilities, the Post noted……….

Trump orders security access stripped from new list of enemies

Antony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Letitia James, and Alvin Bragg all included on list of Trump’s perceived enemies

www.independent.co.uk

This guy is pathetic "This is to take away every right they have [revoking security clearances] including they can’t go into [federal] buildings”.

 

[TampaJoe]

If Biden were doing weird things like trump my reaction would be about the same.

Just because a group of congresscritters say emergency doesn’t make it one.

Agreed. I don’t have a problem with the questions to the administration. It is the insistence that we accept what is being reported at face value as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That is rarely the case. That doesn’t cut it in court. That is why the have witnesses under oath. Sworn statements.

TravelingJim asked me the other day if we should be skeptical about reports coming from this administration. Sure. I would be. I don’t believe or accept everything the government says at face value. On the other hand, why should I not be skeptical of what gets reported by the opposition party or the press or on the internet.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

So tell me Dave, when is obstruction okay in your book? When are conflicts of interest okay in your book? When are ethical breeches ok in your book? Or is it you just want the ability to select based on party?

If you think DC isn’t full of self dealing, ethical breeches and conflicts of interest then you are naive. We have Congress critters spending millions to get themselves elected and then leaving office as millionaires. I have watched both parties obstruct the other for years and then pretend otherwise. So spare me the lecture on ethics, and integrity and backbone.

Republicans and Democrats crack me up when they start beating their chests talking about ethics. Why is it that we don’t have rules governing insider trading? Why is it we don’t have standards around conflicts of interest?
How does a public servant who makes a couple hundred grand become a multimillionaire after a few years in office?

I’m waiting on the day when there is one set of standards applied evenly and consistently regardless of party. I’m not holding my breath.

In the meantime, the Democrats can avail themselves of the same options that were available to Republicans when they were in the minority and didn’t like what the administration was doing.

Blah, blah, blah, both sides!

Great job at showing your work!

 

[RobF]

Blah, blah, blah, both sides!

Great job at showing your work!

It's genuinely laughable. What's the previous equivalent of a billionaire acting through a dubious appointment to a not-actually-a department declaring that he "spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper,” within two weeks of the President he funded being sworn in?

There isn't one. Obviously.

 

[TampaJoe]

Blah, blah, blah, both sides!

Great job at showing your work!

Blah blah blah DJ. Right back at you. The system will never be fixed as long as there are double standards. So complain and whine all you want. Nothing will change. Matters not who is in charge.

 

[DaveXA]

So tell me Dave, when is obstruction okay in your book?

Never, regardless who does it.

When are conflicts of interest okay in your book?

Never, regardless who does it. Well, actually, it's OK in some cases if it's properly disclosed.

When are ethical breeches ok in your book?

Never, regardless who does it. Fwiw, I think you meant unethical breaches...right?

Or is it you just want the ability to select based on party?

No. And I'm not a member of either party.

If you think DC isn’t full of self dealing, ethical breeches and conflicts of interest then you are naive.

Never said or implied that it isn't. But thats not the issue here.

We have Congress critters spending millions to get themselves elected and then leaving office as millionaires.

So what? That's actually legal. Change the law if you don't want that to happen.

I have watched both parties obstruct the other for years and then pretend otherwise.

Sure, but what Trump and Elon are doing is far and away worse than anything we've ever seen. Tell me what compares.

So spare me the lecture on ethics, and integrity and backbone.

No, I will not. The Republicans control all of it, and they have the power to stop it, yet they continue to cower and kowtow to Trump. Its utterly disgusting. It sure seems like you're carrying his water.

Republicans and Democrats crack me up when they start beating their chests talking about ethics. Why is it that we don’t have rules governing insider trading?

There should be, but Congress refuses to hold themselves to a higher standard.

Why is it we don’t have standards around conflicts of interest?

There actually are rules on that, but Congress refuses to hold themselves accountable for ethics violations. I mean the number of Congress members who have not been held accountable for actual crimes is stunning.

How does a public servant who makes a couple hundred grand become a multimillionaire after a few years in office?

Some do. Some don't.

I’m waiting on the day when there is one set of standards applied evenly and consistently regardless of party. I’m not holding my breath.

You'll be waiting until the end of time then.

In the meantime, the Democrats can avail themselves of the same options that were available to Republicans when they were in the minority and didn’t like what the administration was doing.

You're just full of lame "both side's!" excuses though. Keep deflecting and making excuses for Trump. If you would for once unequivocally say what you're seeing from Trump and Elon is highly questionable at best and outright illegal at worst, I'd respect that. But the way you've framed the discussion makes it appear you believe this is business as usual.

 

[FullMonte]

And now Trump is shutting down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. So, no more oversight to make sure banks and lenders aren’t ripping off customers.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is ordered by acting director to stop fighting financial abuse | CNN Business

Russell Vought, the newly installed acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, sent an email Saturday night ordering all employees at the consumer watchdog to stop virtually all work — including fighting financial abuse.

www.cnn.com

 

[DaveXA]

And now Trump is shutting down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. So, no more oversight to make sure banks and lenders aren’t ripping off customers.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is ordered by acting director to stop fighting financial abuse | CNN Business

Russell Vought, the newly installed acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, sent an email Saturday night ordering all employees at the consumer watchdog to stop virtually all work — including fighting financial abuse.

www.cnn.com

This is supposed to be an independent federal agency established by law. Trump can't unilaterally shut them down can he? I'm trying to figure out how he can do this.

And if anyone thinks this isn't Trump, remember the director is doing Trump's bidding.

Congress has to step in here, but they're sitting there twiddling their thumbs while the government burns.

Fork every Republican enabling this nonsense.

 

[MT15]

It is the insistence that we accept what is being reported at face value as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Nobody but nobody said this. You consistently put up straw men like this and then try to invent straw men to use against me. I have consistently pointed out that this isn’t hearsay: there are some very troubling things happening that have never happened before.

What you and Sendai are doing is ignoring clear abuses of power like this country has never seen before. Because it’s “your team” abusing power? I don’t know but I’m reaching that conclusion.

Joe acts like Biden did a whole bunch of unethical things with zero proof but wants to accept that Trump isn’t doing anything unprecedented with blind faith when his crap is being done out in the open.

Bad faith posting all around.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Is there a way to hold Congress accountable for not holding the Trump Admin accountable?

If (God willing) there is a blue wave in the midterms I’m sure there will be inquiries, investigations and committees

After all kinds of illegal forkery is revealed can Congress members get in trouble for not pursuing it?

I’m sure they have discretion to decide what investigations to do but is there a limit to it?

There is a difference between a cop letting a speeder off with a warning and a cop knowing about a meth lab or witnessing a murder and not doing anything about it

When does discretion turn into to duty?

 

[TampaJoe]

Never, regardless who does it.

Never, regardless who does it. Well, actually, it's OK in some cases if it's properly disclosed.

Never, regardless who does it. Fwiw, I think you meant unethical breaches...right?

No. And I'm not a member of either party.

Never said or implied that it isn't. But thats not the issue here.

So what? That's actually legal. Change the law if you don't want that to happen.

Sure, but what Trump and Elon are doing is far and away worse than anything we've ever seen. Tell me what compares.

No, I will not. The Republicans control all of it, and they have the power to stop it, yet they continue to cower and kowtow to Trump. Its utterly disgusting. It sure seems like you're carrying his water.

There should be, but Congress refuses to hold themselves to a higher standard.

There actually are rules on that, but Congress refuses to hold themselves accountable for ethics violations. I mean the number of Congress members who have not been held accountable for actual crimes is stunning.

Some do. Some don't.

You'll be waiting until the end of time then.

You're just full of lame "both side's!" excuses though. Keep deflecting and making excuses for Trump. If you would for once unequivocally say what you're seeing from Trump and Elon is highly questionable at best and outright illegal at worst, I'd respect that. But the way you've framed the discussion makes it appear you believe this is business as usual.

You say Congress hasn’t held itself responsible and then you ask why Republicans aren’t doing that which Democrats wouldn’t do either. I don’t believe for a second that if this were Biden and Soros for example, that Democrats would behave differently. They would not. They would circle the wagons and make the same excuses.

Biden and Schumer, one a sitting Senator and one an ex Senator have been on both sides of just about every issue. The filibuster for example. They are for it when it benefits them and against it when it doesn’t. So until both sides decide to have one set of rules applied consistently regardless of party, this won’t change.

 

[MT15]

Is there a way to hold Congress accountable for not holding the Trump Admin accountable?

If (God willing) there is a blue wave in the midterms I’m sure there will be inquiries, investigations and committees

After all kinds of illegal forkery is revealed can Congress members get in trouble for not pursuing it?

I’m sure they have discretion to decide what investigations to do but is there a limit to it?

There is a difference between a cop letting a speeder off with a warning and a cop knowing about a meth lab or witnessing a murder and not doing anything about it

When does discretion turn into to duty?

They are openly defying the Oaths they all took but you raise good questions here.

 

[MT15]

Biden and Schumer, one a sitting Senator and one an ex Senator have been on both sides of just about every issue. The filibuster for example. They are for it when it benefits them and against it when it doesn’t.

This is just patently false. Biden and Schumer have both been consistent in their approach to the filibuster in that they don’t want it abolished.

 

[DaveXA]

You say Congress hasn’t held itself responsible and then you ask why Republicans aren’t doing that which Democrats wouldn’t do either. I don’t believe for a second that if this were Biden and Soros for example, that Democrats would behave differently. They would not. They would circle the wagons and make the same excuses.

Biden and Schumer, one a sitting Senator and one an ex Senator have been on both sides of just about every issue. The filibuster for example. They are for it when it benefits them and against it when it doesn’t. So until both sides decide to have one set of rules applied consistently regardless of party, this won’t change.

Excuses, excuses is all I'm hearing from you. Keep carrying that water.

Also, I'm done with this. I feel like I'm talking to a wall. I'd rather debate with someone who's willing to, in good faith, call out current nonsense when they see it instead of making excuses for it.