Ralph you are welcome to your opinion but this is a slippery slope. Once you let a part of the Constitution go away then the rest of it is up for grabs. Just like when congress gave up their right to levy Tariffs we now have a President that uses them to beat up on our neighbors. That used to be Congress’s job. Now you have a President creating agencies and putting people in it. Some of them right out of high school and given access to all of the countries information, and each persons information. All without being vetted.
If this stands this will be the law of the land. Everyone should be mad about this because now every President will be able to do this. I can think of a lot of agencies the next Democrat President will institute all without the oversight of Congress. You can bet Congress is thinking this over too.
Nobody needs to tell you what to do. Your a grown man and you have already made up your mind about what you are going to do. I respect that.
Sorry Ralph I don’t tell people what to do anymore. I let them do what they think is right. I already did what I am going to do but I am not an activist anymore. I retired from that role.
You don’t know, even after reading all the above, or can’t Google for yourself, if a private citizen unappointed by Congress has the legal ability to force an agency of the government (such as the Treasury) not not pay monies allocated lawfully by Congress to be paid?
Sort of like creating the Office of College Loan Forgiveness?
And, IIRC legally basing it on a National Emergency. I agree that during Covid it was appropriate to defer payments and interest. But not just cancelling loans outright.
Certainly, one can debate the need for a better way to help higher education, etc. But then super easy access to loans may just help schools charge more.
Bottom line: IMO Congress needs to actually ACT to prevent the executive branch from reaching too far, on both sides.
I’m not going to claim any such thing.
You need a bona fide legal expert to answer your questions.
here’s my decision tree:
Something to be ‘done’.
judge if 'what Musk and Trump are doing legal or illegal?
Please note that I’m going with strictly LEGAL. Not an ‘emotional gut’ want-it-to-be feeling.
Is it doable?
No, then full stop.
Yes. then who’s responsibility to do it?
Answer - Yes. so…
Bona fide legal, and constitutional experts in a Court room, with a Judge with the ‘correct’ expertise.
Can ralph do it?
no. full stop. This where this ‘decision’ stops for me, for this question.
But, if ‘yes’ then I go here:
yes
is it ralph’s to do?
no. full stop.
Yes
does ralph want to do it?
no. full stop. but, if it only gets done if ralph actually does it, regardless of ‘don’t want to’… then ralph will do it.
Why would you think it would be anything more substantial than what Inspector Generals - people trained to find such - from both parties over the last 20 years didn’t uncover?
We are claiming that it MUST be determined by a court before any of this can be cancelled. Especially by a private citizen. Nothing has been proven to be illegal or fraudulent yet. Only the word of a Ketamine addict. Why is this so hard to wrap your head around?
