IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Congressional hearings , donald trump , impeachment , Trump administration , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 7th April 2020, 07:27 AM   #1961
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,675
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Congress (both houses) can change the law so that a President would not be able to fire an agency IG unilaterally.

Obviously there's a whole other discussion about whether they would, but they absolutely can do it (assuming it was signed or the veto overridden).
There's also a whole other discussion about whether the Legislature has constitutional authority to dictate Executive staffing decisions in this way. The constitution is pretty clear about which Executive jobs require Legislative "advice and consent". All three branches of government are pretty jealous of their constitutional privileges, and have historically rejected attempts to take them away.

I doubt any president would agree to comply with a law that prohibited him from making hiring and firing decisions within the Executive branch. It would require a Supreme Court ruling, at the very least.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th April 2020, 02:37 PM   #1962
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 5,371
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There's also a whole other discussion about whether the Legislature has constitutional authority to dictate Executive staffing decisions in this way. The constitution is pretty clear about which Executive jobs require Legislative "advice and consent". All three branches of government are pretty jealous of their constitutional privileges, and have historically rejected attempts to take them away.

I doubt any president would agree to comply with a law that prohibited him from making hiring and firing decisions within the Executive branch. It would require a Supreme Court ruling, at the very least.
Requiring advice and consent to fill some positions doesn't mean that requirement can't exist for other positions. In fact that are a lot of top postings that require advice and consent that are not named in the Constitution and did not exist until some 100+ years after it was written, proposed, and/or ratified.

Requiring advice and consent to fill some positions doesn't mean that no restrictions whatsoever can exist on firings.

The current standoff is such that Congress has strict guidelines on what circumstances the heads of agencies and commissions may be removed under. This means the executive can do so, but is inherently making a very hostile claim against the ousted individual that would almost certainly draw the administration into a potentially high-profile case of a politically motivated sacking and smear job.

The real hard limit is that Congress can't retain full, autonomous control of positions it creates. It is entirely possible that some agencies could have a clause where a firing of an office holder triggers (or allows the fired individual to appeal for) a Congressional review that can uphold or overturn it.

Although the real problem is that most of the rules for retaining some oversight are all predicated on the idea that the President doesn't want the office to be empty and without leadership, funding, etc. That creates a real problem when grappling with an ideology that wants to cripple social services.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 10th April 2020 at 02:39 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2020, 11:24 AM   #1963
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,675
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Requiring advice and consent to fill some positions doesn't mean that requirement can't exist for other positions. In fact that are a lot of top postings that require advice and consent that are not named in the Constitution and did not exist until some 100+ years after it was written, proposed, and/or ratified.
Can you give some examples?

Quote:
Requiring advice and consent to fill some positions doesn't mean that no restrictions whatsoever can exist on firings.
It does mean that new restrictions have to have some sort of constitutional basis. The Senate can't simply say, "because we're constitutionally authorized to approve Cabinet nominees, we're also authorized to approve any and all Executive branch employees."

And I doubt Congress can simply pass a law making it so.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2020, 01:00 PM   #1964
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 5,371
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Can you give some examples?
Many term-limited positions cannot be removed once confirmed. Fed chair, for example.

A Special Counsel cannot be unilaterally fired by the President (this requires a weasely, weak-willed AG to go along).

EPA and NRC and endless other alphabet soup agencies have various verbiage about what cause of action may allow a firing. As I said, that makes the firing much more incendiary (which mattered once, in a bygone era). Point still remains, the law says the President can't just do it whimsically, there are rules about the hows and whys of it.

Quote:
It does mean that new restrictions have to have some sort of constitutional basis. The Senate can't simply say, "because we're constitutionally authorized to approve Cabinet nominees, we're also authorized to approve any and all Executive branch employees."

And I doubt Congress can simply pass a law making it so.
I'm not sure why you think that the Constitution not specifically forbidding or requiring a thing means the Constitution somehow blocks that thing.

The laws that are in place now are technically unconstitutional by your reasoning.

We can disagree on what the rules "should" be all we want, but to reject that there even can be any rules is absurd on its face.

If you wish to maintain that posture, then there's nothing left to discuss because it will only end with "we can do nothing." Pointless conversation.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 11th April 2020 at 01:03 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2020, 05:51 AM   #1965
dann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 13,615
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Sen. Susan Collins on saying she'll vote to acquit Trump:

BWAAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAA!! !!!!!!!!!!!!

Apparently Collins has never met Trump.

The Lincoln Project (Aug. 4, 2020):
President Trump officially endorses Susan Collins
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2020, 07:30 AM   #1966
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,353
Originally Posted by dann View Post
The Lincoln Project
My favorite thing about them: John Weaver, one of their founders, was a registered foreign agent for Russia.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2020, 07:31 AM   #1967
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,693
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
My favorite thing about them: John Weaver, one of their founders, was a registered foreign agent for Russia.
So you'll vote for them for President then?
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2020, 07:35 AM   #1968
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,353
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
The real hard limit is that Congress can't retain full, autonomous control of positions it creates. It is entirely possible that some agencies could have a clause where a firing of an office holder triggers (or allows the fired individual to appeal for) a Congressional review that can uphold or overturn it.
I don't think that's true. I don't think Congress is constitutionally capable of reviewing any firing decisions in the sense you mean. They can (and have) passed laws that dictate the terms under which an executive branch firing can happen (ie, it may require "just cause", etc.), but if such a firing is contested, it goes through the courts, NOT congress, because congress has no role in enforcing laws. And oversight is distinct from enforcement.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2020, 07:36 AM   #1969
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,353
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
So you'll vote for them for President then?
Your lamest rule of so yet.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2020, 10:12 PM   #1970
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 31,711
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
So you'll vote for them for President then?
Nah, he just won't care if the person is a Russian agent.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 05:18 AM   #1971
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 17,124
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Quote:
My favorite thing about them: John Weaver, one of their founders, was a registered foreign agent for Russia.
So you'll vote for them for President then?
Don't be silly... He won't support them if they have registered agents. Only if those agents are acting in secret. (You know, like those in the Trump administration)


Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 05:49 AM   #1972
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,693
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Your lamest rule of so yet.
I love how the Trumpers have been reduced to making up rules that don't exist and claiming arguments against their God-king break them as a way to try and save face.
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 06:09 AM   #1973
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,353
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I love how the Trumpers have been reduced to making up rules that don't exist and claiming arguments against their God-king break them as a way to try and save face.
You're desperately hanging on to a conspiracy theory that collapsed long ago, and you think you are in a position to lecture me about saving face? You are hypocrisy incarnate.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 06:23 AM   #1974
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 91,442
Which conspiracy theory collapsed? Certainly not the Russia-TrumpAdmin one. Acquittal in the Senate was a given; it had no relation to the truth of the accusations.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 06:28 AM   #1975
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,693
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You're desperately hanging on to a conspiracy theory that collapsed long ago, and you think you are in a position to lecture me about saving face? You are hypocrisy incarnate.
"Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer."
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 10:00 AM   #1976
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 87,000
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
My favorite thing about them: John Weaver, one of their founders, was a registered foreign agent for Russia.
This is wonderful. It means Russia has switched sides. They've had enough of the mentally ill guy that hangs on Putin's leg when he visits.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 10:18 AM   #1977
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,353
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
This is wonderful. It means Russia has switched sides.
The rationalizations you have to go through to keep your conspiracy theory alive are a sight to behold.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 10:19 AM   #1978
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 91,442
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The rationalizations you have to go through to keep your conspiracy theory alive are a sight to behold.
Again: what conspiracy theory?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 10:20 AM   #1979
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,178
Did BrooklynBaby hack Ziggurat's account?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 10:26 AM   #1980
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 91,442
It's a fact that the Russian state has interfered with the presidential elections in 2016. It's a fact that a suspiciously disproportionate number of contacts existed between people directly related to Trump and his campaign and Russian assets, which raises important questions. Trump himself has a long history of using his properties to help Russian oligarchs and mobsters launder money extracted from the motherland, seems to have had a political epiphany on his first trip to Russia in the 80s, and fawns over Putin like a schoolboy in puberty. Add to that a number of other odd facts, like the involvement of Deutschebank and Trump's ties to Russian markets, and it's not really a conspiracy theory that the Trump campaign had some sort of coordination with the Russian state during the elections; it's instead a very plausible scenario.

Now, maybe it turns out to be false, but it's nothing like a conspiracy theory.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 03:53 PM   #1981
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,277
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
"Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer."
I like it. Seriously. That's cool. What's it from?


(I have a feeling I am demonstrating a lack of pop culture awareness, but them's the breaks. One of these days I'll get around to watching "Game of Thrones", too.)

ETA: And of course, I should have just googled it. It's from Rick and Morty.......whatever that is.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 5th August 2020 at 03:55 PM.
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 05:08 PM   #1982
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,433
He asked Russia to interfere on national TV. He said he'd take assistance again.

It isn't a question that he wanted and sought Russian help. He did, on camera, several times. End of.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 05:22 PM   #1983
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 31,066
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Did BrooklynBaby hack Ziggurat's account?
No, "rule of so" was pretty much The Big Dog, aka some number that I forget.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 05:26 PM   #1984
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 13,178
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
No, "rule of so" was pretty much The Big Dog, aka some number that I forget.
A lot of others picked that one up. I was thinking more along the lines of how anything that goes against Dear Leader is a 'hoax' or similar term, no matter what the evidence.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th August 2020, 06:06 PM   #1985
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 18,029
Originally Posted by dann View Post
The Lincoln Project (Aug. 4, 2020):
President Trump officially endorses Susan Collins
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Thanks. I enjoyed that!
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th August 2020, 05:48 AM   #1986
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,693
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I like it. Seriously. That's cool. What's it from?
Rick and Morty. It's basically a new, more quippy "I've been called worse by better people."
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2021, 06:27 AM   #1987
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 97,096
Mod InfoI’ve split the discussion about a 2nd impeachment to its own thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=348878
Posted By:Darat
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:14 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.