Separation Of Powers

Wow, this thread is still going strong!

Just a word about Trump's delayed response. There wasn't one. As soon as Maria moved out to where Navy ships could move in, it was the Navy and Marines that first hit the ground. In fact, Marines setup a desalinization station for clean drinking water. The rest of the Armed Services pitched in too, and need I remind everyone, there was a ton of crap on the tarmac, so planes could not land, nevermind the power being out.

There is a narrative in the media. Even if you are liberal in your politics, you have to see the bias of reporting.

However, I do find it funny, the Mayor of San Juan, has long been affiliated with separatists groups, in that, those groups that no longer want to be a territory of the USA anymore. Yet, a big ole hurricane comes through, USA isn't looking too bad now, especially when your entire power grid just got wiped out.

Honestly, I feel for the Puerto Ricans, but some of their local political leaders, they've not exactly built bridges themselves, and this is going back years.

 

Typically with disasters (same here) the Forces are normally first to hit the ground to help out as soon as the area is accessible which is great for those in desperate need of assistance.

Regardless of the situation/attitude of Puerto Ricans' political takes and even if they haven't "exactly built bridges" (which I take you put as a metaphor), Puerto Rico became a U.S. territory in the 19thC and by mid-20thC became recognised as a Commonwealth of the U.S.

So why should they be given less consideration than any other American state touched by disaster?

This was the general view of Trump's attitude and delay towards Puerto Rico when help was most needed - ​

​

As President, (regardless if he is trying to project a different style of POTUS), he should be doing what he is typically and constantly claiming, that he always puts no other consideration before the well being of American citizens. [1] This didn't come through with the Puerto Rican disaster, it took a lot of criticism before he pulled his finger out...






​

[1] Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord June 01, 2017 Rose Garden 3:32 P.M. EDT
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pres...tatement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord

​

 

Really? Both Texas senators and 23 representatives voted against aid for the NYC/NJ area after Hurricane Sandy.. They even have a sizable secession movement (that means they don't want to be in the US either). When Harvey hit, the US didn't look so bad to them either and they had no problem asking for a handout and adding to the national debt to save their asses. Ain't that funny too?

 

I find this total BS
https://www.yahoo.com/news/north-korea-emp-attack-could-105719348.html

If we do get hit with an EMP it's nothing new to the US.An EMP only last for so long.

If any one here has watched Live Free or Die Hard from die hard 4 than you know what i am talking about.The system can recover people would not starve.It's called people could plant there own veg and stuff like that.

 

It's nothing like the movie. An NEMP would destroy affected electrical devices in it's range. It's effects are permanent and the only remedy would be to replace all damaged equipment and infrastructure.

 

I don't get it. You stated and I believe acknowledged that US Armed Forces were the first to respond. They move on the orders from the POTUS. So how can you or anyone else say he wasn't moving, when the evidence of such points to the contrary?

You don't send in Navy ships right into the middle of a storm, until that storm passes, or you can go around it safely. That's exactly what happened, but the media portrayed that nothing was being done, when again, goto the Twitter feeds of the Navy and Marines, and you will see evidence to the contrary.

 

Basic needs still not being met as at 18 October 2017:

About 1 million Americans without running water. 3 million without power. This is life one month after Hurricane Maria.
By John D. Sutter, CNN Video by McKenna Ewen, CNN Updated 2338 GMT (0738 HKT) October 18, 2017
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/18/health/puerto-rico-one-month-without-water/index.html


This guy took it upon himself to do something towards helping Puerto Ricans help themselves for their basic need – water. He’s done a lot more than Trump towards finding a solution for such a basic need, particularly with so much contaminated water the Puerto Ricans have been drinking because they had no other choice…

Crazy Legs Of Rock Steady Crew Brings Clean Water To Puerto Rico
https://www.vibe.com/2017/10/crazy-legs-puerto-rico-clean-water/
Oct 3, 2017 -

“…Colón is disgusted with Donald Trump’s neglect toward the island. “Trump’s lack of care or empathy or sympathy is just one of those things where, why are you even planning to come to PR?,” he questioned. “Me, just a b-boy from Bronx, how the hell is it that I’m able to get here before the president of the United States?”…”


Trump still finding excuses as at 16 October 2017

Trump blames difficulty accessing water in Puerto Rico on local distribution
By Eli Watkins, CNN Updated 2300 GMT (0700 HKT) October 16, 2017
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/16/politics/donald-trump-puerto-rico-water-distribution/index.html


Puerto Rico Rep. Calls Trump Comments ‘Shocking’
The island territory’s top representative in Washington says the president’s efforts to blame Puerto Rico for its desperate hurricane recovery are 'shocking.'
October 17, 2017
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/17/off-message-puerto-rico-trump-maria-215718


Not more I could add…

 

Interesting to read current views of political analysts and academics on how Trump exercises his Executive Power and its effects:

“Will President Trump’s assault on the norms underpinning constitutional democracy permanently alter American political life?...

…The danger in the United States… is the possibility that the Trump administration will use the power of the presidency to undermine the procedures and institutions essential to the operation of democracy…

…At the Yale conference, Daniel Ziblatt, a professor of government at Harvard, warned that Trump and other right-wing leaders have breached traditional political boundaries that serve as “the soft guardrails of democracy.” The two “master norms,” in Ziblatt’s view, are mutual toleration, that is, the acceptance of “the basic legitimacy of our opponents,” and institutional forbearance — the responsible exercise of power by those in office.

Both his detractors and his supporters recognize that Trump has flouted countless rules — and revels in doing so…

…Trump’s recklessness is disturbing enough on its own. But what makes it especially threatening is that much of the public — well beyond the 40 percent of the electorate that has shown itself to be unshakable in its devotion to the president…”[1]




[1] Democracy Can Plant the Seeds of Its Own Destruction
Thomas B. Edsall OCT. 19, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/opinion/democracy-populism- trump.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FExecutive%20Power&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection

 

I applaud Senator Flake’s speech[1] today which pointedly refers to executive power (presidency) and Trump's behaviour in his office. It is a shame that other senators going for re-election continue to remain silent. Senator Flake’s speech follows Senator Corker’s comments re Trump being an 'utterly untruthful president'. [2] Here are excerpts from Flake’s speech:

“… Roosevelt had this to say about the president and a citizen's relationship to the office:

‘The President....should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct…Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly as necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile...To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public…’”

Senator Flake continued to say:

“…Reckless, outrageous, and undignified behavior has become excused and countenanced as ‘telling it like it is,’ when it is actually just reckless, outrageous, and undignified.

And when such behavior emanates from the top of our government, it is something else: It is dangerous to a democracy. Such behavior does not project strength -- because our strength comes from our values. It instead projects a corruption of the spirit, and weakness…

Mr. President, I rise today to say: Enough. We must dedicate ourselves to making sure that the anomalous never becomes normal…”

Following his speech, Senator McCain commented: “…I have seen Jeff Flake stand up for what he believes in, knowing full well there would be a political price to pay…”[3]


[1] Jeff Flake's full speech announcing he won't run for re-election
Updated 1925 GMT (0325 HKT) October 24, 2017
(As prepared for delivery)
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/jeff-flake-retirement-speech-full-text/index.html

[2] Bob Corker says Trump 'utterly untruthful president'
1 hour ago From the sectionUS & Canada
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41729586

[3] Sen. John McCain's remarks from the Senate floor Tuesday, after Sen. Jeff Flake announced he will not run for reelection following his current term.
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news...enate-run-announcement-full-speech/796103001/

 

Who is Jeff Flake anyway? Has he done anything in gov to be noticed or to stand out from others? Can't say I ever heard or remember his name. He seems to be dodging some of the things he says in his speech. Instead of standing up to the things he says he disagrees with, he'll just quit. Now he might be remembered for just that.

I do see he is involved in the slow down of the relief to hurricane damaged Puerto Rico, also fighting against the damaged South Florida area using the Davis-Bacon act for work done on federal projects over a certain cost per contract. I usually make above the Davis-Bacon scale but some younger and junior mechanics in the south do get a pay bump on these jobs, but they still don't equal the pay of workers in the northern or upper east coast workers!

These two acts of his gives me more reason to question his own sincerity despite his words today. This is probably what I will remember him for.

 

My understanding from past readings and references re Senator Flake is that he is a committee member in areas which I expect probably would have been in opposition with some of Trump’s changes e.g. Energy, Mining.

How successful a Senator appears will ultimately depend upon (as you pointed out) how effective he may have been on a concern/issue of a citizen. But then the concerned citizen needs to identify if the works of that Senator is relevant to the particular citizen’s concern – e.g. if Senator’s work is not in that area of concern.

As a Republican Senator from Arizona, he hasn’t been idle. Here’s a summation I found which may answer your question(s): https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/jeff_flake/400134

But bear in mind, my post was more in tune with his standing up against Trump’s behaviour and conduct as POTUS which in itself, is a “death toll” to the speaker – Put simply, would you stand on your desk and publicly rebuke your boss’ conduct and behaviour that others secretively agree to but won’t voice, and then expect life to go on as before for you at work? I doubt it.

In any case, it takes some doing to reach position as a Member of Congress, so one must give credit where credit is due…he hasn’t been sitting on his hands.

 

I've heard plenty senators voice against Trump. I would be impressed if he instead said "I'll be the first to run against him in 3 years!"

 

Excellent points. But this wasn’t petty Twitter bickering between Trump and one of his Republican members.

Flake sees Trump’s behaviour and conduct as being beyond the boundaries of what is acceptable for a POTUS and how he views it is reflected in his speech (which I’ve read).

As for a future challenge to Trump’s presidency – I don’t know what political/personal reasons apart from what he put in his speech for considering his total withdrawal.

 

I read it also since it seemed to be the point of your post. And it seemed to me he kept talking of the destruction of those values and things needing to be done. Then he just says - Oh, I'm bowing out! That's my memory of him now.

 

Here's an article by someone else whose name I don't recall. But his feelings on this is similar to mine.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...10/24/jeff-flake-is-making-a-selfish-mistake/

 

From my understanding, he wanted to make affirm his view per his book which from what I've read toppled him from Trump's "grace", as did his numbers, which doesn't make his 2018 chances for renomination look good. As I can't look inside his head to know his reasoning for leaving, I can only reckon, he sees it logical to resign. In any case, he has his term to serve, so he still has work to do as Member of Congress.

​

Good viewpoint. But then again, I really don't know all the facts or Flake's reasoning. I can only reckon there's possibly something else that has gone on behind the scenes that's unknown and may have influenced his stance.

 

Yeah I wondered if he saw something (someone) beating his chance come along? Grandstanding? And I never knew the man.

 

Call it what you will. You're entitled to do so.

Personally, I found his speech spot on and applaud him for going to the trouble of articulating his concerns and more so for reaffirming his views of his book. Damned if he stays, damned if he goes. I reckon good on him regardless of what anyone else thinks.

 

Tend to agree with you. Bannon is "...prepared to go after anybody who does not faithfully fight for Donald Trump’s agenda..."[1] (personally, I reckon it's more than just the agenda, more like anyone who says anything against Trump).

So I reckon those contenders would have Bannon and Trump's backing.

I'd say Bannon has now "placed Flake and Corker's scalps onto his belt," and I reckon he's looking to add Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's scalp as well.


[1] Steve Bannon declares war on every Republican politician except Ted Cruz
He plans on targeting anyone who gets in the way of the President's agenda
Clark Mindock New York @ClarkMindock Tuesday 10 October 2017 14:57 BST
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...r-candidates-campaigns-ted-cruz-a7993036.html

 

Every single source you posted, has been proven to be biased to the hilt in reporting in just about anything. Hurricane Maria notwithstanding. However, let's get to the nitty gritty.

I noticed that you totally did not address my statement, to wit, you stated that Trump did not respond, when in fact Navy and Marines were first to hit the ground.

BTW, this is what CNN, Politico, et al, do as well. Ignore facts.

The fact is Puerto Rico was not just hit by Maria, but by Harvey as well. These were CATASTROPHIC events, unprecedented really, that came literally back to back within weeks of each other, and you expect that after the fact that their entire power grid was wiped out, that power would be restored to 1 million people in as little as a month? That is being 100% unrealistic. Also, please take into account, that Puerto Rico's building structures were not exactly the best in terms of construction, and the ability to weather storms, nor was their infrastructure. This is not laying blame, but again, stating what is widely known to be a fact about Puerto Rico.

Even in Houston right now, there are many, many, many homes that people are not able to live in, will probably take a year or more to demolish and rebuild, and that is not including the damage to local commerical buildings. It just seems the way that you, or others, are trying to portray things like it's no problem to restore power to an entire island that had their grid destroyed. You cannot compare responding to a hurricane aftermath on the mainland versus an island. The logistics are not even remotely close to being similar. The challenges of getting anything to an island are way harder than the mainland.

 

How? Please explain specifically how "...biased to the hilt in reporting about anything..." and what other sources should be instead referred to?

Specifically, which post number(s) have I “…stated that Trump did not respond…”?

Not only have I watched news, but I have posted references to URLs of news items which corresponded to those I viewed by Australian correspondents - and I trust my own Australian sources who can be "watchdogs" for news accuracy. Or are we also producing "fake news" in your eyes?

I have been up front in acknowledging Defense forces hitting the ground as they do here whenever there is a disaster. At no time did I dispute this.

The point I was making was that Trump has been slow in his support, instead he was busy Tweeting rhetoric. Case in point this cartoon which pretty much summed up my thoughts from an earlier Post:

"This was the general view of Trump's attitude and delay towards Puerto Rico when help was most needed –"


​

Re CNN:
That is your view point which you are entirely entitled to express.

However, I totally disagree, as I find CNN produces facts at each instance and are always quick to make a correction should they be in error. I have also found their news corresponds with our own overseas correspondents’ news – those facts prove true to me. Same applies with those other URLs I have referenced.

Are you now also going to accuse Australian overseas news correspondents as posting fake news?

Valid point.

However, where specifically have I said power should have been “restored to 1 million people in as little as a month?”

Another point also, when there have been similar disasters here, e.g. electricity, then generators have been put in place as an interim solution where possible. Has that happened anywhere in Puerto Rico? What has been done as an interim solution at least in some places (realistically not expected to be all over)?

Most importantly, what of the basic need of water? A civilian took it upon himself to provide a solution (see my earlier post). What has been done about water? Sure, there were loads of water on docks and roads blocked to get to the populace in need. However, a civilian took it upon himself to provide a solution in same said "inaccessible areas" - so I applaud the attempt made by this person (see an earlier post).

I suggest you note facts when it comes to what I have personally stated in my posts. I try to maintain accuracy rather than falsehoods by referring to URLs of news items - if you find my sources so unsatisfactory, then I put to you that I would be quite happy to refer to other URLS of your choice so long as they are honest and factual to those I have relied upon to date.

Cheers

LS

 

It appears you also overlooked the extent of the meaning of support...it goes beyond material things - the cartoon (above post) expressed it accurately. Instead, Trump can learn from previous Presidents when it comes to fully understanding what "support" entails particularly for a person of his standing and how much it means to those victims of disasters. Even here, our own politicians literally roll up their sleeves and grab a broom, mop to help out to show their support...can't see Trump going down to that level:

Former presidents help in times of disaster
By Christopher Connell - Sep 27, 2017
When U.S. presidents leave office, they draw a pension for life. But they also take on volunteer work, rallying Americans to respond after humanitarian disasters such as the hurricanes that recently struck the United States.
https://share.america.gov/former-presidents-help-when-disasters-strike/

Obama Photographer Reminds Us How Presidents Used To Act During Disasters
“At a time like this, it shouldn't be about selling baseball hats or commenting on crowd size. It's about helping our fellow human beings.”
01/09/2017 5:28 AM AEST | Updated 01/09/2017 5:29 AM AEST
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/en...natural-disasters_us_59a821dbe4b010ca289ad713

Obama photographer highlights one key difference between Donald Trump and former President’s disaster responses
Mike Wright 1 SEPTEMBER 2017 • 1:56PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...r-highlights-one-key-difference-donald-trump/


Is this all fake news also?

 

But, but, but..... #45 threw some rolls of paper towels to the masses in Puerto Rico. Doesn't that count?

 

Oh, so no kitchen variety? So those paper towels were embroidered in gold with the letters D T ??

 

In that case these could have been made with the finest silk that China has to offer, just like his ties! lol

 

He's great in making China great again but very much denigrating the Puerto Ricans by throwing those towels to them.

 

https://www.facebook.com/DeptofDefe...14648515718/10155891827120719/?type=3&theater

This just came into my feed tonight. Bottom line is legalsuit, it was heavily implied that you were stating Trump had not responded. This is not the case. Again, Two major hurricanes in two weeks. I mean, what are the odds? I dare say that if a typhoon hit Melbourne of the size of Harvey, you likely would be in a similar situation as Puerto Rico.

Incidentally, the Huffington Post putting a ".AU" on their url still doesn't change the fact that the company Arianna Huffington found has made no bones about where her political loyalties lie.

 

1. Cannot access your link. Not a Facebook fan nor do I have an account. I go by our Australian broadcasters to confirm what I read/see re overseas news - so are our Australian correspondents providing fake news to you?
2. "...it was heavily implied that you were stating Trump had not responded..." Your assumption that it was "implied". It still stands I had not stated it. Don't try semantics with me.
3. I did not specifically look for URLs with an "AU". I am not going to repeat myself as to how I use references and personally confirm facts to my satisfaction for accuracy. Again, put forward your own that is reliable and accurate and checkable.
4. "Two hurricanes in two weeks" look at my posts Hurricanes, Floods, And Fires which express my feelings and concerns about how devastating and unbelievable I found it.

No more I will say to you here as it is becoming nonsensical.

Cheers

LS

 

Thank you...had overlooked that point...but then had not seen Newsweek.

Cheers

LS

 

Personally, I've thought him a douchebag[1] ever since that "Grab them by the pussy" tape.[2] That's quite a quote for a POTUS to be remembered by - huh?

As POTUS he gets away with murder. I just don't understand how he gets away with sexually assaulting women and Weinstein hasn't been let off the hook. Go figure.



[1] an obnoxious or contemptible person, typically a man.
[2] Transcript: Donald Trump’s Taped Comments About Women
OCT. 8, 2016
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/donald-trump-tape-transcript.html

 

Trump's irreverence is his appeal to many.

 

So this is how he appeals...


????
I'd be surprised if dads and brothers, cousins, boyfriends would like to see the girls/women they care for treated in such a manner...

You can also add this as another extension of his irreverence… ​

​

Ignorance through not reading being unacceptable for one of his status as POTUS.


And this is how he expects the strength of his position as POTUS should be…one that overrides the other two arms of Power (i.e. Judicial and Congressional) being two of the three branches which make up the Separation of Powers as per The Constitution...

However, it will be interesting to see his reaction if anything adverse comes out of…

​

...that is, if it turns out he may consider exercising his power as POTUS to Pardon once again...(e.g. per his controversial pardon of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio).

Trump's use of his position as POTUS provides interesting insights and observations into American law/legislation/Statutes causing some discussions among my group here.​

​

 

Had I seen this tweet[1] of you-know-who's, I probably wouldn't have bothered to start this thread on Separation of Powers (being a system of checks and balances), because I would have had a better understanding of trump's thought processes:


‘So-called judge’

One of Donald Trump’s tweets | Donald J. Trump via Twitter

"This may be the most damaging of Trump’s tweets when it comes to the system of checks and balances upon which our government is founded. For no reason, Trump calls into question the legitimacy of a (perfectly legitimate) federal judge who struck down his misguided and poorly-executed travel ban, then falsely alleges that the ban was the nation’s only effective form of law enforcement...the judge’s ruling won’t be overturned..."





[1] https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/trumps-worst-tweets-so-far.html/?a=viewall

 

LS - where were you when Bill Clinton or B Obama were in office? You would of had plenty material to work with. Too bad to have missed it.

 

I was born when Ronald Reagan was in office.

Oh what a time that was.

 

You missed the 60's and 70's!

 

I was born when Franklin D Roosevelt was in office but of course don't have a recollection of it.

 

The only thing that raises my interest is if it affects me – one of the little people in the world. So, if our markets, Treaties with other countries, import/export agreements are affected, this trickles down to our economy and in essence, my Superannuation which is made up of national and international market investments. This is my security for when I retire, so yeah, I then become interested – and Trump’s actions which affects our Treaties and Agreements trickles down to me – a little person in the world. (I highlighted this in an earlier post in some thread.) Legal matters (naturally) also raises my attention, and since Trump has become president, debates here with comparisons rage.

Clinton era as President – I was “head down, bum up” with a demanding 60hr-80hr week job while studying law at night and taking care of family – so I only looked at on site relevant matters worth my time. I was interested more in Clinton’s wife and what she was doing in the background while supporting him – the Lewinsky scandal temporarily raised an eyebrow, (mainly through legal debates) – so he wasn’t particularly outstanding for me personally as an Australian.

Obama – I instantly liked him, his wife and his family with their down to earth attitude and my attention was raised with his winning The Nobel Peace Prize 2009; eliminating the Bin Laden threat and the withdrawing of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan Wars (Australia as an ally was supporting US so this also affected us); and the Treaties and Agreements we had in place with US – otherwise, he was just another leader from another nation.

Whereas, trump I was aware of him through his TV “The Apprentice” and he always raised eyebrows with some unfavourable, unsavoury news item, which was always looked upon as typical of him. So, when he tried for a presidential candidacy, it raised attention, him being seen as a clown and not taken seriously. But he made president and continued to suck all the air out of the news particularly with the effects and content of his tweets, ensuring a continual flood light focused on him. His presidency by far stands out and raises anyone’s attention whether favourable or non-favourable – particularly the way policies appear to come from his tweets (without going through the expected processes).

 

Yeah, right

 

Yes, true! Year 1942.

 

Gotta give you credit...you don't come across as though from that era (and that's complimentary - not critical)

 

What's with the "sigh"? You ain't that old kiddo!