Richard Mondale Loc: Montana

The framers of the Constitution divided the power between branches one way. The politicians could not live with it, so they changed it. In a quid pro quo with the President, they took revenue raising and spending they gave him the power to set the agenda and then do it. He is King Donald. If you don't like it then make them change it back.

Larry the Legend Loc: Not hiding in Milton

Yes, legislative, executive and judicial. Each (supposedly) being a check on the other. That 'check' has been forgotten many, many years ago. Still, the illusion of the division of power remains.



Indeed they did. They found things in their founding documents that ordinary people are way too blind to see. Like the Whiskey Tax of 1791, as instituted by then president George Washington. The ink wasn't even dry on the new constitution and they were 'discovering' all kinds of mystic powers. Of course, that didn't go down too well and he was forced to 'back off' but the first shot had been fired.



Are you referring to the United States? Because that never happened in the US. In the US, the President delivers his 'State of the Union' address to a joint session of Congress once a year, and in that speech he outlines the progress made in the previous year and what he would like to see going into the next year and sometimes beyond. Congress may approve or not, as is their prerogative. The 'agenda' is set by the party in power through their e******n manifesto, not what the President has to say about what he wants for the country, though they are often in accordance with each other. As for raising revenue and spending that revenue, that is the purview of the House of Representatives alone. This is rooted in the idea that the people do the paying therefore the people, through their representatives in the House, decide how the money is raised and what it gets spent on. This is a very well-understood and long established tenet of American governance.



President Donald. His last name is Trump, and he is the President of the United States, not its King. The only king to hold sway over this land was ejected quite forcefully and obliged to accept that fact on September 3rd, 1783. That's well over 230 years ago. There has been no reigning king in the United States since that specific date. Quite frankly, to state that there is a king ruling over the United States is patently offensive to those who understand what that means. It's akin to calling someone who disagrees with you a N**i, whilst having no inkling of what the word actually refers to. Also, above and beyond all of that, it highlights the obvious fact that you make no distinction between a monarchy and a republic as forms of governance. I suppose it says something that you chose to conflate the only two stable forms of governance known to man, at least thus far.



I think we just covered that, but just out of morbid curiosity, change it 'back' to what?

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Tell me exactly what "King Donald" did that was not within his Constitutional duties...

Give DACA amnesty? Fund bailouts of insurance companies because Obamacare was such a train wreck? Use the FBI to target a rival's campaign? Use the IRS to silence the opposition? No, that was all Queen Obama.


But please... Go back and log into your ridiculous h**e-sites, skip over the vague cookie-cutter whining, and try to find a specific unconstitutional act that Trump has committed.

Richard Mondale Loc: Montana

Okay Larry, look at what you have said, “and what he would like to see going on in the next year.” That is setting the agenda.
Then, you agree that raising revenue and then directing the spending of it is what Congress does. It is their “purview” you say. You have confirmed the problem.
A budget cannot be balanced by 534 people making their constituents happy. Please read Article One; Section 7. An individual must have the following powers if it is to be successful 1 good judgment, 2 the ability to think and plan, 3 the sk**ls and manpower to do the job, and 4 the where with all to pay the bills. Which of these mandatory abilities are given to Congress?

Richard Mondale Loc: Montana

King Donald came to DC with a plan in hand. That is what he did that is in violation of the Constitution of the United States. The people's house is supposed to guide the nation, and set taxes. The President is supposed to Execute the orders given him by Congress, but politicians can't do that. They need to control the spending, and they will never make a decision until it is no longer of any relevance. It is all in the crapper because we v**e for our representatives.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

No... Having a plan is not unconstitutional.

Try again... Think this time.

vernon

Richard Mondale Loc: Montana

He can put it in front of Congress and they might agree but the President is supposed to have all Executive powers.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

You said he can't make plans without Congress.

Do you agree now that you were mistaken and the whole premise of your initial post was rediculous?

Richard Mondale Loc: Montana

Congress gets the power to raise revenue, so they have the ability to pay the bills, and they get Order, Resolve, and V**e. V****g is decision making. Order is command and control.
And, resolutions are institutional memory. Those three are the thought process, so Congress is given the power to do the thinking for the Government.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

If you're acting dumb to be funny, it's working.

On the off chance you're serious, no, Presidents are not prohibited from thinking. But you thinking that explains your name.

Just to help you out in the future, remember:

Thinking is never unconstitutional. Actions can be, but thinking cannot.

Richard Mondale Loc: Montana

Dave, what caused the 20 trillion dollar debt? The fact that we v**e has given us the US politician, and they have needs for popularity and funding for ree******n. My dad claimed he was in the room then Congress made the deal with FDR.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

The debt wasn't caused by unconstitutional thinking, it was caused by irresponsible actions.

Richard Mondale Loc: Montana

The founders and Framers were well aware of human nature and they took measures to eliminate any wiggle room that would permit dastardly BS. Unfortunately they did not leave a paper trail. This is a major example of why t***sparency is good.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

That had nothing to do with the subject.

There is no prohibited thinking.