He is allowed to increase efficiency by the means available within the law (including, where a change in law would make things more efficient, presenting a proposal for such a change to Congress.)
And the judicial branch hasn't okayed what he has tried to do, which is why there have been multiple orders issued by multiple courts against his stopping of payments.
- This ruling doesn't say the government isn't breaking the law, it says the people suing didn't go through the right channels.
- This ruling is not the government winning the case, or the plaintiffs losing the case. Plaintiffs asked for a restraining order and didn't get one.
- There are about 80 different lawsuits against Elon/DOGE right now, for various actions. Multiple judges have granted restraining orders against the government because they think the plaintiffs are likely to prevail in their claim.
He is allowed to increase efficiency by the means available within the law (including, where a change in law would make things more efficient, presenting a proposal for such a change to Congress.)
And the judicial branch hasn't okayed what he has tried to do, which is why there have been multiple orders issued by multiple courts against his stopping of payments.
Counterpoint - how can you have a functional democracy when citizens(?) have such a poor understanding of our system of government?
And by "the judicial branch has OK'd it", are you referring to the President's immunity from prosecution for official acts?
That is fundamentally different than "presidents have the power to do whatever they want".
[flagged]
You do not know what you're talking about.
- This ruling doesn't say the government isn't breaking the law, it says the people suing didn't go through the right channels.
- This ruling is not the government winning the case, or the plaintiffs losing the case. Plaintiffs asked for a restraining order and didn't get one.
- There are about 80 different lawsuits against Elon/DOGE right now, for various actions. Multiple judges have granted restraining orders against the government because they think the plaintiffs are likely to prevail in their claim.
3 replies →
When did he promise that during the campaign trail?
I keep hearing all these things about how the voters voted for this and that but uh when did the candidate promise those items?
> he judicial branch has OKed it.
This is not true as evidenced by your own link below.
"How can you have a functional democracy without a king" is what you seem to be asking. Do you see the problem?
Did you miss the election?
Yes, and Trump wasn't elected King, he was elected to an office whose duty is to see to it that the laws are faithfully executed.
Trump has zero intrest in stopping waste or corruption.
He is firmly pro corruption
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-fcpa-anti-bribery-law-exe...