See this is what I'm talking about. Naming the executive orders is not the issue, it's a red herring that you keep insisting is the issue. You are free to look up his executive orders at whitehouse.gov and see for yourself which ones are not matters of national security and then you have your answer.
You do not need to save me from worship and veneration of the president-elect. Although your altruistic efforts to prevent me from supporting a president that I already do not support are touching. If you read my previous posts without you would see that it is my opinion that Trump is dangerous, and that the precedent set by previous presidents, which includes Bush and Clinton, is part of the reason he is so dangerous because it has set him up with the power to make unilateral edicts without the checks and balances that should limit the power of the presidential office.
Respectfully, your responses indicate that you may lack the political and social context to fully engage in this conversation. Maybe reading Bonhoeffer will help though since I read in a previous post that you lived through the events of the 30's. It's similar to the führer principle that he was fighting against in which he believed that relinquishing power to one man or even one party was a deadly error. As we have continued to allow presidents to use their office to accomplish sociopolitical agendas, we have effectually relinquished liberty a little bit at a time to the point where a president may more easily succumb to the temptation to secure supreme power and have thus expanded a public perception of the role of the president and of the government. We will all pay a dear price if we don't limit this and other executive tools.