Trump floats expanded presidential powers during rally speech, saying he would make every executive-branch employee 'fireable' by POTUS

[Athanasius68]

When the President has the power and authority to fire civil servants not only is the risk of political interference possible it is highly likely. To believe 8n such powers as not being open to political influence is naive at best.

This is true.
However, I cited earlier the article from the (then) anonymous civil servant stating that he and colleagues were working to thwart the Trump Admin from the inside.
Regardless of what one thought of the administration, the expectation that career civil servants work in the direction that the elected leadership directs should be non-negotiable.

 

[RealityNow]

Refer to Post #175

People need to read the above and understand our society is based within and upon Principles of America's Representative Democracy!!!!!

That means: STOP Waffling !!!!!

• And grasp the understanding of the Civics, and Civility of what is America's Representative Democracy....
• And Speak out against these types who push an agenda to damage and destroy it, and stand against any and all Autocratic Ideology.

1. The big question is: who are you?
2. Do you understand what Representative Democracy is?
3. Do you understand what the Civics are of this Republic, ( A republic is a form of government in which "supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives". In republics, the country is considered a "public matter", not the private concern or property of the rulers)

These principals of Representative Democracy don't have a damn thing to do with anyone's skin color, ethnicity or political party mentality.

• (a political party" is nothing more than a lobbyist group, it should not control one's life, nor should it be embraced like its the bible of life!!!! The Constitution has already laid out the basics and principles and values of this nation and its citizens, in THE PREAMBLE, READ IT AND LEARN IT.
• If one learns it, they will better undersand the Articles of The Constitution and they will know why The Constitution addressed the House of Representatives and the Senate (ARTICLE I Sec.1-10) , BEFORE it addressed what is a President)
• BECAUSE it is the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES who crafts legislation to meet the principles, and values and objectives of The Preamble.

It is not that complicated!!!! to understand the Design which The Constitution presents, to ensure we are a Republic form of Representative Democracy.

One of the best things America could do for itself is "Destroy and Discard Political Party's and Abolish The Electoral College".... These things are a destructive infusion into this Republic's Representative Democracy,

There is no one that is 100% Conservative about everything and There is no one that is 100% Liberal about everything.
So, we need to dispense with these stupid labels and simply be "AMERICA PEOPLE' who get One Person, One Vote.

 

[Luckyone]

Sounds good to me. This is something that has been needed for a long time.

btw, what part of "We will pass critical reforms..." do you not understand? This has nothing to do with "expanded presidential powers". This is about Congress.

 

[Callen]

This is true.
However, I cited earlier the article from the (then) anonymous civil servant stating that he and colleagues were working to thwart the Trump Admin from the inside.
Regardless of what one thought of the administration, the expectation that career civil servants work in the direction that the elected leadership directs should be non-negotiable.

It is my understanding that direct subversion such as you describe unless done using official whistleblower channels, is already ground for dismissal.....grounds being the operative word.

 

[KingLeo]

Federal employees, Representatives, Senators, judges, political appointees, the President and Vice President of the United States take an oath of office.
“I, ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.””

Where in that oath do they pledge sole allegiance to the President?
It doesn't.
Trump continues to be the wanna-be dictator in chief.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Generally speaking, the president does have the right to fire executive employees already. This is not expanded powers.

I see what you did there, using just the work "executive". There is a difference between "executive" and "Executive Branch" employees.

Under Article II, Section 2, Para 2 of the United States Constitution:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The United States Congress exercised it's power to determine which "inferior officers" were subject to Presidential appointment and which would be empowered to the heads of Departments when it passed as the Pendleton Act which replaced political cronyism with merit based hiring establishing the Civil Service and providing protections against just such actions as the President being able to fire anyone in the Executive Branch and replace them with cronies.

So yes, the President can fire certain "executives" that serve at the pleasure of the President, those being the ones defined in the Constitution and in addition "inferior" officers that Congress has designated. The President does not have to power to fire career Civil Service workers on a whim to dole out rewards to supporters. (Not to say Civil Service employees can't be fired, but there has to be cause.)

The president does not need cause.

For Civil Service employees protected under the Pendleton Act, yes he does.

WW

 

[justoneman]

I see what you did there, using just the work "executive". There is a difference between "executive" and "Executive Branch" employees.

Under Article II, Section 2, Para 2 of the United States Constitution:


The United States Congress exercised it's power to determine which "inferior officers" were subject to Presidential appointment and which would be empowered to the heads of Departments when it passed as the Pendleton Act which replaced political cronyism with merit based hiring establishing the Civil Service and providing protections against just such actions as the President being able to fire anyone in the Executive Branch and replace them with cronies.

So yes, the President can fire certain "executives" that serve at the pleasure of the President, those being the ones defined in the Constitution and in addition "inferior" officers that Congress has designated. The President does not have to power to fire career Civil Service workers on a whim to dole out rewards to supporters. (Not to say Civil Service employees can't be fired, but there has to be cause.)



For Civil Service employees protected under the Pendleton Act, yes he does.

WW

Well of course.