Not difficult to answer. It's not relevant.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:52 pmSo you refuse to answer whether the comparison with previous Presidents is relevant or irrelevant? You claimed both in successive sentences. Which is it?glennds wrote: ↑Wed Aug 19, 2020 1:48 pmWhat I'm trying to say is whether you like or dislike a President is irrelevant. Trump has too much power. So did Obama. So did Bush and so did every President going back to Eisenhower at least. Maybe earlier because it is not totally clear to me exactly when the progression of expanded powers for the Office of the President first began. The pattern seems to be after every disaster, war or major calamity, additional powers were accrued, and permanently. Meaning we've only added to the power of the office, never deleted.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 19, 2020 11:54 amYour previous two sentences are mutually contradictory. Is the comparison relevant or irrelevant?glennds wrote: ↑Wed Aug 19, 2020 10:16 am
Since you agree that the Presidency is too powerful, more so than the Founders intended, and thus represents a risk, whether you like Trump or not is irrelevant.
It's not as though excessive power is acceptable in the hands of a President you like but not so in the hands of a President you dislike.
Similarly, what other Presidents have done or not done in the past is irrelevant also, what matters now is the present and the future risks to citizens.
Trump is unique, and helpful, in one respect and that is his willingness to brandish his Presidential executive authority more brazenly than his predecessors.
Assuming that it is relevant, please cite examples of his brazenness, and compare them to the following (incomplete) list of what Obama did:
1. Made treaties without the advice and consent of the Senate (see FATCA enforcement actions directed against foreign governments).
2. Unilaterally declared DACA without any authority to do so.
3. Weaponized the intelligence community and other government agencies against the incoming administration.
4. Used the IRS to attack conservative non-profit organizations.
I agree that the Presidency is too powerful and should be reined in. Of course the media hasn't given him credit for it, as they never give him credit for anything.
So if you feel Trump is good and Obama was bad, that's your prerogative. What I am saying is the preference is irrelevant because both have or had too much power.
Trump's helpful brazenness in my view is his blatancy about broadcasting his power. For example on April 13,2020 he declared "When somebody is President of the United States, the authority is total. And that's the way it's got to be. It's total."
On March 12, 2020, Trump said "I have the right to do a lot of things people don't know about".
You can use words other than brazenness. Maybe forthcoming, honest, boasting, grandstanding, baleful? Pick your word. But my point is that he's been more vocal about presidential power than his predecessors, and what is helpful about it is that it causes inquisitive people like me to start thinking about the limits of presidential power, what was intended in the formation of the Government, and what the pros and cons might be in the future. Other presidents that were more verbally circumspect about their power would not have even triggered the question (at least for me). Nixon might have been one exception because he talked quite brazenly about both his extensive authority and immunity (see the May 1977 Nixon Frost interviews i.e. that things that would otherwise be illegal are legal if the President does them).
Again, to be clear, none of this commentary is about a particular President. It's about the Office itself.
Why is that difficult to answer?
I only pointed Trump out because he has helped recently flag the issue as a topic (for me) by talking about it. Perhaps I can add Ted Koppel because his recent news story did the same. But for my purposes it is irrelevant to compare previous Presidents because they were all holders of the same office. It is the office that I am commenting on.
Comparing the Presidents themselves is not relevant to my post.
I think the power of the Executive Branch of the US government has expanded beyond what was contemplated originally and ought to be reined in for the future.
Did I answer your question?
