Trump and Allies Forge Plans to Increase Presidential Power in 2025

[hislegacy]

I suspect "rogue bureaucrats" and "corrupt actors" are those that don't jump to his desires immediately, want to stick to the law of the land.

A dictator would want the same thing with himself being the one to decide who is corrupt or rogue.

Beyond what you suspect - got any proof?

I suspect his intentions are to get rid of corrupt people -

 

[hislegacy]

The proof is is in post #30.

There is nothing to debate.

Cool - then have a good day - I'll debate with others - thank you.

 

[hislegacy]

How about his previous effort to do so? Just before the election (that he lost (fair and square)). Does that count?

"President Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order creating a new classification of “policy-making” federal employees that could strip swaths of the federal workforce of civil service protections just before the next president is sworn into office."

Absolutely fair to consider - the Federal Government has little to no venue to remove employees, even if they are not doing their job - that is what he is addressing and I believe it will help the good employees feel empowered.

 

[DarylFawcett]

How to start a dictatorship?

Yes, that would be the way to begin a dictatorship, therefore, if I could, I would personally vote against such an idea.

 

[DarylFawcett]

Unelected bureaucrats should not have so much control over our nation.

That would include the Supreme Court of the USA.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Shouldn't the proper, conservative, non-authoritarian response then be to reduce the president's power to mandate decisions best left to medical or economic experts?

Shouldn't we celebrate the independence of the FCC and the FTC from political interference from our president?

Sure. IF that were true. With all the evidence we have of agencies working against political foes of this regime, that is in question. It did not used to be, but it is now.

Public Trust in Government: 1958-2022

Public trust in government remains low, as it has for much of the 21st century. Only two-in-ten Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always” (2%) or “most of the time” (19%).

www.pewresearch.org

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

The Heritage Foundation has a plan...whether it be Trump or someone else...

"Project 2025"

Project 2025

With the Biden administration half over and with the immediate dangers inherent to one-party rule in Washington behind us for now, it’s past time to lay the groundwork for a White House more friendly to the right. For decades, as the left has continued its march through America’s institutions...

www.heritage.org

Apparently you are unfamiliar with all the other plans already made for us. Check out WEF meetings.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Imagine how much worse it would be if even more power were concentrated in Biden's hands. Of course, Donald has made it crystal clear that if he ever gets into office again, he intends to stay there come hell or high water.

Please cite anywhere in a legitimate news source where Trump said if he is elected, he will NEVER leave office and will "stay there come hell or high water." Never happened.

One cannot discuss issues with non-serious responses like this being spouted.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Sure. IF that were true. With all the evidence we have of agencies working against political foes of this regime, that is in question. It did not used to be, but it is now.

That's not very perspicacious. If these independent commissions are somehow failing, and are secretly under the thumb of Biden's political machine, the solution is not to make them openly under the thumb of the president.

 

[DaisyDay]

Please cite anywhere in a legitimate news source where Trump said if he is elected, he will NEVER leave office and will "stay there come hell or high water." Never happened.

Even before the election was held Donald was shopping his stolen election scenario.

One cannot discuss issues with non-serious responses like this being spouted.

That you don't take his attempt to subvert the 2020 election seriously is your problem.

 

[Vambram]

That would include the Supreme Court of the USA.

I believe that the role of the United States Supreme Court is clearly identified and spelled out in the Constitution.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

Even before the election was held Donald was shopping his stolen election scenario.


That you don't take his attempt to subvert the 2020 election seriously is your problem.

So you cannot cite a source that "Trump would NOT leave office come hell or high water." Then do not make false assertions.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

That's not very perspicacious. If these independent commissions are somehow failing, and are secretly under the thumb of Biden's political machine, the solution is not to make them openly under the thumb of the president.

No, they should actually be independent and not just say they are. We have too much evidence that they are doing the Administration's bidding.

 

[essentialsaltes]

No, they should actually be independent and not just say they are. We have too much evidence that they are doing the Administration's bidding.

None of the current FCC Commissioners were appointed by Biden. 1 Obama, 3 Trump and 1 vacant seat.

 

[wing2000]

No, they should actually be independent and not just say they are. We have too much evidence that they are doing the Administration's bidding.

Cite this evidence.

 

[DaisyDay]

I believe that the role of the United States Supreme Court is clearly identified and spelled out in the Constitution.

As is how they get their position.

 

[DaisyDay]

So you cannot cite a source that "Trump would NOT leave office come hell or high water."

I cited his own actions as the source for my opinion.

Then do not make false assertions.

Don't make false accusations.

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

I cited his own actions as the source for my opinion.


Don't make false accusations.

You stated it authoritatively and cannot back it up.

You did not say, "I believe, or my opinion is...." State what you mean. If it is your speculative opinion, fine. But it never happened, as you stated it.

 

[DaisyDay]

You stated it authoritatively and cannot back it up.

I’m going by his actions and words as I have already said.

You did not say, "I believe, or my opinion is...." State what you mean. If it is your speculative opinion, fine. But it never happened, as you stated it.

I stated what I meant. Are you often confused about the difference between editorials and news? Are you completely bewildered by paraphrases?

Did you see any quotation marks? Did I say that those were Donald’s own words?

How about you knock off the personal attack?

 

[RestoreTheJoy]

I’m going by his actions and words as I have already said.


I stated what I meant. Are you often confused about the difference between editorials and news? Are you completely bewildered by paraphrases?

Did you see any quotation marks? Did I say that those were Donald’s own words?

How about you knock off the personal attack?

How about you state that something is your speculation, and not something actually said? Then we're good.