Politics

1000 readers

448 users here now

For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.

Rule 1-3, 6 & 7 No longer applicable

Rule 4: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.

Rule 5: Be excellent to each other. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.

The Epstein Files: Trump, Trafficking, and the Unraveling Cover-Up

Info Video about techniques used in cults (and politics)

Bookmark Vault of Trump's First Term

USAfacts.org

The Alt-Right Playbook

Media owners, CEOs and/or board members

Video: Macklemore's new song critical of Trump and Musk is facing heavy censorship across major platforms.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

Supreme Court to hear case that could vastly expand presidential powers (m.kuow.org)

submitted 1 month ago by pelespirit@sh.itjust.works to c/politics@sh.itjust.works

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Proving that history does repeat itself, in 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to fire an FTC commissioner over ideological disagreements. In that case, called Humphrey's Executor, the court unanimously held that while the president has the power to remove purely executive officers for any reason, that unlimited power does not extend to agencies like the FTC, whose duties "are neither political nor executive, but predominantly quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative."

Following that 1935 decision, Congress went on to create many more multimember, independent agencies whose members likewise can only be removed for cause. Since January, Trump has also removed Democratic members from some of those agencies, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

that could be a detriment though. There was some indication they did not want to kill hitler so much because he was an idiot and his replacement could be worse war wise. Similarly trump is a kinda useful idiot and there are certainly puppeteers who will through another in his place. The real thing comes down to if the people fight this shit 100% which requires right and maga types waking up to some degree and ultra left fighting it even if its a compromise for now.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

that could be a detriment though. There was some indication they did not want to kill hitler so much because he was an idiot and his replacement could be worse war wise.

The person replacing him would have to be as popular as he is. Who would that be? Johnson, Vance or Miller? There's no one legally or illegally that could replace him.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean its kinda nuts that he is that popular given his actions. As long as they rally under one instead of fight for the position the project will likely keep going.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I disagree. The r's lost a position that had been republican since the civil war this last election. There's a reason so many r's are freaking out.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago

well yeah as long as people keep up the fight. thier biggest thing now is to get people to give up. We need a massive house cleaning and shoring up of the ability to enforce the law on the enforcers. We really need some congressional and court run departments to make sure the executive is following the law.