Muh authoriteh
Trump says he can do whatever he wants:
President Donald Trump issued the second veto of his presidency Tuesday, stopping a congressional resolution that would have sought to end US involvement in the Saudi-led war in Yemen.
“This resolution is an unnecessary, dangerous attempt to weaken my constitutional authorities, endangering the lives of American citizens and brave service members, both today and in the future,” Trump wrote to the Senate Thursday.
His constitutional authority – as if it were personal to him as opposed to attaching (or not) to the office. I’m pretty sure normal presidents use the third person in statements of that kind – they talk of the executive branch or the president but not their personal selves. Trump is too dumb to grasp the difference.
Supporters of the War Powers Resolution argued the US shouldn’t be involved in the war without explicit permission from Congress. Opponents argued the US does not have “boots on the ground” and is offering noncombat technical assistance to Saudi Arabia, an ally.
Several supporters made clear their votes were also aimed at expressing their frustrations with Trump’s continued support for Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has been implicated in the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
The bill passed the House 247-175. Sixteen Republicans voted yes with Democrats and one voted present. In the Senate the vote was 54 to 46, with seven Republicans voting with Democrats.
But everybody loves him! He says so himself!
Someone needs to weaken Executive Branch authority. Much of what is assumed to be Executive Branch authority is extra-constitutional, seized over the past century by stronger and stronger presidents and allowed by weaker and weaker Congresses. It needs to stop before it leads to an all powerful president and a worthless or non-existent Congress existing only to rubberstamp executive decisions and give a semblance of democracy until even that is gone.
Trouble is, the only someone is Congress.
Yeah, Bruce, that’s sort of the Catch-22, isn’t it?
Many people wondered what it would take for the United States to be under a dictatorship. The answer seems pretty clear: 270 electoral college votes, and 34 compliant senators.
Screechy, it’s always amazed me that people assume it would require a military takeover for a dictatorship here. That always seemed to me the least likely scenario. Of course, I did get a BA in Poli Sci, and I studied some history of other empires, so maybe that gave me an advantage, though I am by no means an expert, especially since I deviated into Biology before I completed any graduate credits in my initial field…still, it’s not hard to see how things work here if you’re willing to open your eyes.
And I still have people telling me, oh, it’ll never happen, because the military will never allow it. First, I don’t want to live under military rule any more than I want to live under a quasi-elected dictator who has seized power by the strength of his orange will. Second, our military are taught to obey orders, and while there are always those who follow their conscience, most of them will obey because that is what they do, that is their job, etc. I see that in every field. It is tough to get change because most people just do their job, what their told, and don’t question.
iknklast, I think it has to do with America’s Constitution-worship, and the related veneration of the Founding Fathers (capitalized be thy name). A lot of Americans — even, and sometimes especially, highly-educated ones — are convinced that James Madison et al bequeathed America with the magic document that guarantees a healthy democracy. And hey, overall I’d say they did a fine job, considering the realities and prejudices of the time, the paucity of other examples to work from, and the ugly compromises necessary to keep a half-slave, half-free Union together. But it’s far from free of flaws and omissions and potential for crisis and mischief. My understanding is that there was a time when scholars used to push a U.S.-style constitution on new/rebuilding nations, but that it’s generally not considered a good approach any more.
And more importantly, no piece of paper is going to save the rule of law if the will to preserve it isn’t there.