Behind Trump’s latest moves: A return to constitutional government

[Right_in_Virginia]

Behind Trump’s latest moves: A return to constitutional government
NY Post, Oct 13, 2017, F.H. Buckley

***

Obama kept the Affordable Care Act looking healthy via an extra-constitutional grant of $1 trillion to health-insurance companies. That required congressional approval, and Obama’s decision to bypass Congress was held unconstitutional by a federal court. President Trump’s decision Thursday to halt the bailout makes the litigation moot and represents a return to constitutional government.

The same can be said of Trump’s Friday decision to throw the Iran deal back to Congress, by refusing to certify that Iran is in compliance with the deal.

Recall that this was a treaty that should never have been adopted without two-thirds approval in the Senate, as required by the Constitution. That didn’t happen — because a compliant Republican Congress passed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, which provided that the president certify to Congress every 90 days that the suspension of sanctions against the regime is “appropriate and proportionate” with respect to its illicit nuclear program.

More: http://nypost.com/2017/10/13/behind-trumps-latest-moves-a-return-to-constitutional-government/

[kevindavis007]

I don't that Trump has read the Constitution

[Right_in_Virginia]

I don't that Trump has read the Constitution

 

[Bigun]

A YOUGE breath of fresh air that many will not perceive!

[Applewood]

Yes --constitutional government on some things like Obamacare -- and I applaud Trump for that. 

But then he takes to social media and suggests something very unconstitutional -- stifling free press.

No, I don't see him as a savior or defender of the Constitution in all things -- just the ones that don't adversely affect him personally.

[endicom]

But then he takes to social media and suggests something very unconstitutional -- stifling free press.

You don't need a government license to express yourself via print material.

You don't need a government license to express yourself via the internet.

You do need a government  license to express yourself via the airwaves.

[montanajoe]

For the eight years of Obama there was not a day that those on the right were not complaining that EO's were unconstitutional. Suddenly Trump's EO's are apparently Constitutional..

I find it almost impossible to muster any interest in what so called "Conservatives" say anymore and in their phony calls for Constitutional governance....

I think I will have to start referring to myself as "unaffiliated and uninterested" as I have no desire to be associated with today's "Conservatives"..

[Bigun]

For the eight years of Obama there was not a day that those on the right were not complaining that EO's were unconstitutional. Suddenly Trump's EO's are apparently Constitutional..

I find it almost impossible to muster any interest in what so called "Conservatives" say anymore and in their phony calls for Constitutional governance....

I think I will have to start referring to myself as "unaffiliated and uninterested" as I have no desire to be associated with today's "Conservatives"..

Yes! Stopping illegal payments to insurance companies IS most definitely constitutional!

[aligncare]

I don't that Trump has read the Constitution

No, but he hires people who have. Feel better?

[XenaLee]

For the eight years of Obama there was not a day that those on the right were not complaining that EO's were unconstitutional. Suddenly Trump's EO's are apparently Constitutional..

I find it almost impossible to muster any interest in what so called "Conservatives" say anymore and in their phony calls for Constitutional governance....

I think I will have to start referring to myself as "unaffiliated and uninterested" as I have no desire to be associated with today's "Conservatives"..

Not a day goes by that somebody isn't, per usual, blaming Conservatives around here for one thing or another.  Funny.... how Conservatives would appear to have so much power and be so numerous to wield that power....

except in the 'real' world.

Look around.  It's not the Conservatives saying and doing all this BS... it's the ones that are anti-Conservative.

[Concerned]

Yes --constitutional government on some things like Obamacare -- and I applaud Trump for that. 

But then he takes to social media and suggests something very unconstitutional -- stifling free press.

No, I don't see him as a savior or defender of the Constitution in all things -- just the ones that don't adversely affect him personally.

Sadly this appears to be entirely true to me. The second Trump perceives a slight, a grievance, or attack that can addressed by circumventing the Constitution, I think he’ll do everything possible to circumvent it. This NBC licensing threat is an example.

[endicom]

Sadly this appears to be entirely true to me. The second Trump perceives a slight, a grievance, or attack that can addressed by circumventing the Constitution, I think he’ll do everything possible to circumvent it. This NBC licensing threat is an example.

Government licensed news outlets are to your mind free press?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Yes --constitutional government on some things like Obamacare -- and I applaud Trump for that. 

But then he takes to social media and suggests something very unconstitutional -- stifling free press.

No, I don't see him as a savior or defender of the Constitution in all things -- just the ones that don't adversely affect him personally.

You are confusing actions with just words.  Has he acted on what you call unconstitutional?

[Concerned]

Government licensed news outlets are to your mind free press?

Fairly issued licenses are one heck of a lot closer to free press than the President of the United States threatening the licenses of news outlets negative to him. That’s the stuff of facists countries yet I think that’s exactly what Trump would prefer if he thought he could get away with it.

I don’t think more government regulation and/or control is what most true conservatives want but Trump Cultists seem to want it simply because their Cult Leader wants it. Sad.

[Meldrew]

You are confusing actions with just words.  Has he acted on what you call unconstitutional?

It would sure be helpful if the WH or even Trump himself could find a way to let us know which are "just words" and which are real words we should take seriously.  For someone who speaks english, he sure needs a lot of translation. 

[aligncare]

It would sure be helpful if the WH or even Trump himself could find a way to let us know which are "just words" and which are real words we should take seriously.  For someone who speaks english, he sure needs a lot of translation.

In Trump’s world, Trump is always negotiating. What I hear him saying are opening positions, the bluster of a negotiating tactic. Not the final deal, which I trust to be in traditional America’s best interest.

But, I understand. In politics, utter a word like Macaca and the entire democrat party loses their mind. Trump rattles a rhetorical saber and NeverTrump loses its mind.

I suggest to his critics they sit back and wait for the details to come out before slamming the president for what he initially says. So far, I’m pleased about the concrete things he has actually accomplished in office.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

For the eight years of Obama there was not a day that those on the right were not complaining that EO's were unconstitutional. Suddenly Trump's EO's are apparently Constitutional..

Can you let the rest of us know which of the EO's by Trump you are considering when you made that statement?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

It would sure be helpful if the WH or even Trump himself could find a way to let us know which are "just words" and which are real words we should take seriously.  For someone who speaks english, he sure needs a lot of translation.

For your education, if he signs an Executive Order, that is what one calls an 'action'.

Speaking as he did via Twitter, that is not considered an Executive Action. 

Do you see the difference yet?

Also,  he was correct in saying it is "Bad for Country" to publish fake news.

[Meldrew]

I suggest to his critics they sit back and wait for the details to come out before slamming the president for what he initially says.

Sit back and wait for him to do what, promote more anti-constitutional action?  Continue to expose himself as not particularly well versed on network licencing (which doesn't exist)? Divert attention from a pretty good tax reform speech given shortly before? Or am I just waiting for the detail that he didn't really didn't mean what he said?

Like most, I'd like the president to succeed.  It's hard to judge if he's being successful if only some of what he says is sincere and truthful and no one's in a position to let me know which is which. 

[Meldrew]

Speaking as he did via Twitter, that is not considered an Executive Action. 

It does result in a White House statement though on official letterhead and everything.  That's Executive action of some kind isn't it?  And besides, my issue here is that you seem to be saying that it's ok for him to (forgive me) talk out of his ass in public just judge him on his actions.  Is that right?

[montanajoe]

Can you let the rest of us know which of the EO's by Trump you are considering when you made that statement?

No...I don't read or follow Trump's Bullshite any more than I did Obama's...and I have no interest in engaging those who will support this guy no matter what he does..we simply have nothing in common...

What I do do however is substitute the word Obama for Trump in stories praising Trumps constitutional prowess and ask myself what I would have thought had obama done the same thing..

[IsailedawayfromFR]

It does result in a White House statement though on official letterhead and everything.  That's Executive action of some kind isn't it?  And besides, my issue here is that you seem to be saying that it's ok for him to (forgive me) talk out of his ass in public just judge him on his actions.  Is that right?

What do you believe is an Executive action?  Do you believe that is some type of formal Constitutional device that is used for some reason?

Am having difficulty in understanding what it is you are saying.

In this country, there are clearly defined actions which constitutionally have weight when it comes to direction.  There are laws by Congress, rulings by our court system and, in the case of Executive, Orders and Memoranda that direct the Executive branch.

Where do you believe 'talking' by a President conveys some type of enforceable Executive action?

Are you saying he should never talk unless it is for Executive decisions?

I happen to like his Tweets, as it is unfiltered communications that bypass the biased media.  And nothing he said is enforceable for anything, so once again, what is your complaint?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

No...I don't read or follow Trump's Bullshite any more than I did Obama's...and I have no interest in engaging those who will support this guy no matter what he does..we simply have nothing in common...

What I do do however is substitute the word Obama for Trump in stories praising Trumps constitutional prowess and ask myself what I would have thought had obama done the same thing..

Without providing any evidence at all to back up what you convey, your rant can be discarded out of hand.

Come back when you offer something to discuss rather than a diatribe rant.

[truth_seeker]

In Trump’s world, Trump is always negotiating. What I hear him saying are opening positions, the bluster of a negotiating tactic. Not the final deal, which I trust to be in traditional America’s best interest.

But, I understand. In politics, utter a word like Macaca and the entire democrat party loses their mind. Trump rattles a rhetorical saber and NeverTrump loses its mind.

I suggest to his critics they sit back and wait for the details to come out before slamming the president for what he initially says. So far, I’m pleased about the concrete things he has actually accomplished in office.

Brilliant analysis of the reality of the Trump Presidency. Considering all the forces that oppose him, he has worked wonders.

1. He is probably the ONLY GOP candidate that could have won.
2. He has honored Congress' Constitutional responsibility to act on several major issues, but they have thus far failed to act. (Obamacare, immigration, wall, Iran nukes, taxes etc.)
3. He has taken administrative actions within the law, to get the best result possible. IOW to do things conservatives have stated they wanted.
4. Unlike his many detractors, he is NOT on vacation every 3 weeks out of 4. Or when in town, working from Tuesday noon to Thursday noon.
5. His term in not yet 19% complete. Still there is ample time to accomplish a lot of what conservatives have said they wanted.
6. Usually when he pokes somebody in the eye, they asked for it.
7. He is a huge "paradigm shifter," and a "master persuader."

Scott Adams, predicted Trump's win in October 2015

This video is from October 2016, still before the election


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55NxKENplG4 

[Meldrew]

What do you believe is an Executive action?  Do you believe that is some type of formal Constitutional device that is used for some reason?

Am having difficulty in understanding what it is you are saying.

In this country, there are clearly defined actions which constitutionally have weight when it comes to direction.  There are laws by Congress, rulings by our court system and, in the case of Executive, Orders and Memoranda that direct the Executive branch.

Where do you believe 'talking' by a President conveys some type of enforceable Executive action?

Are you saying he should never talk unless it is for Executive decisions?

I happen to like his Tweets, as it is unfiltered communications that bypass the biased media.  And nothing he said is enforceable for anything, so once again, what is your complaint?

Well thanks for the clarification of Executive action.  I took it a little more literally.  My complaint is simply that I'd like for the President to say what he means and mean what he says whether it's in a tweet, a speech or an EO.  He should not require people to constantly explain what he meant or that it was a joke.

I would also appreciate it if he would stop saying stupid things.  Even inferring that the gov should control speech is kinda stupid.  Asking to remove the license of a network that isn't licensed is kinda stupid. I understand where his frustration comes from but ill-informed statements spoken from frustration undermine whatever it is that's supposed to be his agenda. For every potentially good thing the Pres does, there a kinda stupid thing still floating around that makes one wonder if the guy has any clue what he's talking about. I don't think it's asking too much of an adult, much less a president, to at least try to say what he means and keep mouth closed (his fingers off the keyboard) if he can't.

All of which gets me back to my original question - how am I supposed to know which comments he means and which I should ignore, or should I just look at the official actions?  And forget me, how's "rocketman" or anyone else supposed to know?