Suddenly, Repubs okay with Executive overreach

[Conservative65]

Congressional Republicans Suddenly Lose Interest in Executive Overreach

Frigin Hypocrites....

Democrats suddenly care about executive overeach.

Frigin Hypocrites...

Suddenly Democrats consider it overreach at all.

 

[JimH52]

and coming from an Orange Clown...

 

[MarcATL]

And after eight years of it you left wingers suddenly have an issue with it. I don't care for governing by executive order not now with Trump nor when Obama did it we have a government with checks and balances for a reason there is hypocrisy on the right over this but those on the left who had nothing to say when Obama decided to govern with just his phone and pen have no room to talk about hypocrisy.

You use the word "hypocrisy", but I don't think you know what it means.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[blackhawk]

And after eight years of it you left wingers suddenly have an issue with it. I don't care for governing by executive order not now with Trump nor when Obama did it we have a government with checks and balances for a reason there is hypocrisy on the right over this but those on the left who had nothing to say when Obama decided to govern with just his phone and pen have no room to talk about hypocrisy.

You use the word "hypocrisy", but I don't think you know what it means.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Try taking off those partisan glasses you view everything through and you won't have this problem.

 

[mudwhistle]

And after eight years of it you left wingers suddenly have an issue with it. I don't care for governing by executive order not now with Trump nor when Obama did it we have a government with checks and balances for a reason there is hypocrisy on the right over this but those on the left who had nothing to say when Obama decided to govern with just his phone and pen have no room to talk about hypocrisy.

And Obama was struck down by the federal and supreme court on the Executive orders that were not constitutional, the EO's that were, stood.

Trump needs to be sued, just like Republicans sued Obama's E/O's.

Sorry, but this juvenile argument has no basis.
Trump is simply putting things back in line with the laws as written.
Obama was operating outside the laws and that's why his EOs were struck down, period.

 

[mudwhistle]

And after eight years of it you left wingers suddenly have an issue with it. I don't care for governing by executive order not now with Trump nor when Obama did it we have a government with checks and balances for a reason there is hypocrisy on the right over this but those on the left who had nothing to say when Obama decided to govern with just his phone and pen have no room to talk about hypocrisy.

You use the word "hypocrisy", but I don't think you know what it means.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Non-sequitur.

 

[mudwhistle]

The question of the thread is WHY ARE REPUBLICANS OKAY WITH EXECUTIVE ORDERS NOW?

Has any Republican answered, honestly, without deflection? If so, can you point me to the the post?

What is there not to be ok with, he undoing the crap your dear leader did using the same method. He promised to do exactly that during the election, I know you're not accustomed to a president keeping his word, but you'll get used to it.

that's bull crud and you know it! Just a couple of things of Obama's E/O's like the international abortion funds cut off....but 90% of Trump's executive orders ARE NEW, and have absolutely NOTHING TO DO with anything Obama did via E/O being undone.....BRAND SPANKING NEW

Do you even know what they say?
Do you think that Obama never instituted a hiring freeze?
That's normal whenever a new president takes office. Reagan even made it retroactive to election day. I lost my permanent position because of it. Right now alot of people in the State Department and other departments are sweating bullets because their jobs are gone or will be gone if they don't get with the program.

 

[Nosmo King]

There was no overreach in Trumps EO...completely legal and 100% within the powers of the office.

But tomorrow Dems will be hunky dory with blocking a presidents Supreme Court appointment indefinitely.

How many wrongs does it take to make a right?

 

[oreo]

There was no overreach in Trumps EO...completely legal and 100% within the powers of the office.

But tomorrow Dems will be hunky dory with blocking a presidents Supreme Court appointment indefinitely.

His over reach is clear these executive orders that do need congressional approval first.

1. The WALL---Congress holds the purse strings.
2. Mandating that two states do an investigation. They won't pay for it, we would, so that again has to be approved by congress.
3. Congress is wholly responsible for immigration policy in this country. Presidential powers do NOT extend beyond refugees.

 

[Missourian]

There was no overreach in Trumps EO...completely legal and 100% within the powers of the office.

But tomorrow Dems will be hunky dory with blocking a presidents Supreme Court appointment indefinitely.

How many wrongs does it take to make a right?

That's a great question Nosmo. So good I'll let you answer it. Dems are planning to block Gorsuch for the sole reason that Repubs blocked Merrick, which your side claims was wrong...so, how many wrongs does it take to make a right?

I'll expect to see you out in front opposing Dems blocking Gorsuch...because your ethics are not situational.

 

[easyt65]

'Suddenly, Repubs okay with Executive overreach'

Part of me wants to point out that government overreach is never okay...

...and part of me, after snowflakes turned a blind eye to Barry's repeated overreach, wants to respond by saying

 

[Dschrute3]

It's the 'new norm.' Nothing can be done about it. Thank Obama for that.

 

[rightwinger]

There was no overreach in Trumps EO...completely legal and 100% within the powers of the office.

But tomorrow Dems will be hunky dory with blocking a presidents Supreme Court appointment indefinitely.

As they should

The Dems are under no obligation to cooperate with Trumps appointment

 

[Nosmo King]

There was no overreach in Trumps EO...completely legal and 100% within the powers of the office.

But tomorrow Dems will be hunky dory with blocking a presidents Supreme Court appointment indefinitely.

How many wrongs does it take to make a right?

That's a great question Nosmo. So good I'll let you answer it. Dems are planning to block Gorsuch for the sole reason that Repubs blocked Merrick, which your side claims was wrong...so, how many wrongs does it take to make a right?

I'll expect to see you out in front opposing Dems blocking Gorsuch...because your ethics are not situational.

I oppose Gorsuch on his 'originalist' interpretation of the constitution. Not because the senate Republicans played such an egregious game of politics with President Obama's nominee, not because of 'situational ethics.

However, since we're likely to get one 'originalist' to replace the late Scalia, I believe that Trump's NEXT SCOTUS appointee deserves to be blocked unless we get another one-for-one swap.

 

[Missourian]

That's a great question Nosmo. So good I'll let you answer it. Dems are planning to block Gorsuch for the sole reason that Repubs blocked Merrick, which your side claims was wrong...so, how many wrongs does it take to make a right?

I'll expect to see you out in front opposing Dems blocking Gorsuch...because your ethics are not situational.

I oppose Gorsuch on his 'originalist' interpretation of the constitution. Not because the senate Republicans played such an egregious game of politics with President Obama's nominee, not because of 'situational ethics.

However, since we're likely to get one 'originalist' to replace the late Scalia, I believe that Trump's NEXT SCOTUS appointee deserves to be blocked unless we get another one-for-one swap.

Fair enough...but you will sternly rebuke those who are advocating opposition based on retaliation...correct?