Is the US Constitution flawed?

You post links to your own comments as if they are some gospel handed down from high. I don't even both looking at your links to this forum. They are just your comments. No more. No less.

 

No, "separation of powers" is not well defined in the Constitution. It is axiomatic, assumed and implied. Where in the Constitution does it state that the president cannot subpoena congress' private and confidential records and information, let alone hack their computers like Brennan did.

 

He didn't abuse his power

 

Separation of powers is defined and assigned to each branch in Articles I, II and III and LIMITED by the 10th Amendment, there's nothing assumed or implied about it. They cannot be shared and there is no power granted to any branch that authorizes it to grant or transfer any of these assigned (or any other) powers to another branch.

Very little this government does is compliant with the Constitution. Again, all the powers granted to the ALL 3 branches are clearly defined in the Constitution and all unenumerated powers (i.e. powers that are NOT listed and distributed into Articles I, II and III) are prohibited by the 10th Amendment because they belong to the States or The People. This is elementary, Constitution 101. And so "Executive Privilege", whatever "powers" that's supposed to contain outside of those listed in Article II, is strictly prohibited by the 10th Amendment.

 

"I have article two where I have the right to do what I want as president" - Donald Trump

Please post where in Article II it says that.

 

Before you discuss or debate the separation of powers doctrine you should understand what "separation of powers" means. HINT: it does not mean assignment or allocation of powers.

 

Please post where he has acted on his comment.

 

Wasn't it Obama threatened to push his agenda with or without Congress?

 

HINT: Try an English language dictionary if YOU don't understand what it means or Google it. I already posted what it means, perhaps YOU didn't understand.

 

Just the fact that he made that claim and believes it is an outrageous abuse of power. Beyond that the list is too long for one post but if you haven't figured it out yet or can't see any, you never will so there's no point.

BTW, just about every President has abused his powers in one way or another.

 

So, we live in a dictatorship now, umm ok... well I'm safe you better watch what you say on here.. and i suppose the November election has been called off??

When do we start trying and sentencing congressional democrats??

We building prison camps for dissidents, uf so where???

Or. Has the definition of dictatorship changed simply to mean not giving progressives everything they want?

 

Trump's own defense didn't argue that he didn't abuse power. They claimed that abuse of power is not impeachable. And the Senate voted to acquit him based on that premise. Thus legally making Trump (and any future President of any party, BTW) a dictator. I can't wait to see what President Biden, or President.. AOC (if Trump gets re-elected) will do with that much power. Can you?

Anyway.... all this is explained and referenced on the links I sent.

 

you're not in a prison camp therefore this is not a dictatorship.... some times you have to look past the research of the overly educated, take a look around and recognize the truth..
Trump is not a dictator, is not acting like a dictator and the American people aren't acting as though they live in a dictatorship..

or does Trump weigh the same as a duck?

 

Not quite true. They did no say that abuse of power was not impeachable. They said this particular case did not reach a level that justified removable. There was also a question of whether it was actually abuse of power at all, since at no time did Trump actually say to do what he said or else.

 

They said many things. But the legal argument that prevailed was Dershowithz's. Anyway... if anybody wants to add to the threads I referenced, they are open, or they can open a new one. This is a different topic.

 

Dershowithz prevailed? I did not realize that the argument was limited to him. Looks more like you picking and choosing.

You are the one who brought up the subject. Don't complain when someone responds to it.

 

How has the U.S. become a dictatorship?

 

This pretend government is a fascist oligarchy or a corporatocracy, take your pick it amounts to the same thing. It certainly is nothing like the Constitutional Republic guaranteed by Article IV.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-dictator_n_5b23c3c3e4b0d4fc01fdb2b0

Neither are millions of North Koreans or Germans in Nazi Germany. A dictatorship is not defined by everyone being put in a prison camp.

 

It is however defined by dissenters being put in prison..

Ohh. And Nazi Germany, yes there were prison camps.. you think there aren't political prison camps in north Korea?

Try again..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisons_in_North_Korea#Reeducation_camps

 

Answered above


http://www.politicalforum.com/index...years-to-build-is-destroyed-in-7-days.567526/

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-can-the-next-democratic-president-do.568497/

 

You made the false claim:

Dictatorships are not defined by everyone being put in a prison camp, so your initial claim is false. Now you want to redefine it, ok so you agree you were wrong and now it's "dissenters".

 

Websters...

dictatorship
noun


dic·ta·tor·ship | \ dik-ˈtā-tər-ˌship , ˈdik-ˌtā- \
Definition of dictatorship


1: the office of dictator
2: autocratic rule, control, or leadershippeople suffering under his dictatorship
3a: a form of government in which absolute power is concentrated in a dictator or a small cliqueCommunism and dictatorship
b: a government organization or group in which absolute power is so concentratedrising up against a military dictatorship
c: a despotic state establishing a dictatorship

the only way to accomplish this is to imprison of kill dissenters
Trump aint doing that or in any way exhibiting even modest totalitarian tendencies.

he just says no to progressives and you guys go ballistic, thinking your being oppressed or held down.. pure unadulterated BS. you are more free today than under Obama, pandemic aside..

you are correct dictatorships are not defined by putting dissenters in prison . That however is a universally adopted practice of dictators. dictators put opponents in prison...

 

Already done.

Complete misunderdtanding of what Trump was talking about. In terms of the executive branch he is pretty much spot on. He is the chief executive officer there of, and if he thinks corruption in a country to which we are giving aid should be investigated first he has every right to do so.

 

Article II says the president is vested with the executive power.... period. It list other things where he has sole power, and lists only two things that he is obligated to do: take an oath, and from time to time report on the state of the union to congress.. It lists nothing that says what a president cannot do. Executive power of the United States means that the president has the authority to do whatever he deems necessary so long as it does not violate legislation.