Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, February 25, 2020

A bipartisan effort to wrest congressional authority back from the president will get a House hearing next week to look at decades of what many lawmakers view as executive overreach -- not just the actions of President Donald Trump.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

This is LONG overdue!

#1 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-25 01:25 PM | Reply

... the use of national emergencies to circumvent Congress ...

That's the big one, imo.

#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-02-25 01:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

If the GOP really wanted to "wrest congressional authority back from the president", they wouldn't have bent over for him during his impeachment trial.

#3 | Posted by Corky at 2020-02-25 01:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I love it.

#4 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2020-02-25 01:37 PM | Reply

If the GOP really wanted to "wrest congressional authority back from the president", they wouldn't have bent over for him during his impeachment trial.

#3 | POSTED BY CORKY

The GOnP doesn't want it back until a dem is in the whitehouse.

#5 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2020-02-25 02:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

It's about time, Congress has been bending over to POTUS since W started pushing his version of the Unitary Executive with little or no push back from Congress.

#6 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2020-02-25 02:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

All the GOP had to was hold the Dicktator in Chief accountable.

#7 | Posted by Nixon at 2020-02-25 05:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

They'll wait to see if they win the election first.

#8 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2020-02-25 06:46 PM | Reply

Normally I would say this is a good thing - but the Congress is a sick joke as far as getting anything accomplished. I would rather see the POTUS restrained by eliminating government power rather than simply transferring power back to congress.

#9 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2020-02-26 04:26 AM | Reply

The GOnP doesn't want it back until a dem is in the whitehouse.

And the dems will be stupid enough to do it early in the administration of the next dem president. I am all in for congress wresting control back from the executive but do it near the end of the next dem presidency. If there is anything that has previously been very difficult to get bipartisan agreement on (i.e. sensible gun regulation) can be done by executive over reach early in the next dem administration, do it.

#10 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2020-02-26 05:08 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

And the changes will go into effect whenever there is a Dem in the White House and the Dems control the US Senate. In all other cases, nope, no change from the status quo...

#11 | Posted by catdog at 2020-02-26 09:11 AM | Reply

Well the likely thing is either way you will be you need a veto override to do it. I agree it would be stupid for the Dems to do this early in a Democratic President's term.

#12 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2020-02-26 11:47 AM | Reply

Normally I would say this is a good thing - but the Congress is a sick joke as far as getting anything accomplished. I would rather see the POTUS restrained by eliminating government power rather than simply transferring power back to congress.

#9 | POSTED BY IRAGOLDBERG

Thank McConnell who is refusing to even vote on 300 bills, 90% of them bipartisan, that the House passed.

The stack is about 3 feet high at this point.

#13 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-02-26 12:20 PM | Reply

#13

Are you really going to play that card when Reid filled the tree more often than all prior majority leaders combined?

#14 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-26 12:28 PM | Reply

This is LONG overdue!

#1 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Yes, Trump has run away with Executive Power and the GOP has let him do it.

Trump and the GOP demanded huge increases to the military budget for self defense and then Trump stole it for the border wall that Mexico was supposed to pay for and his own party wouldn't fund. And the GOP just nods.

#15 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-02-26 12:44 PM | Reply

Decades..
a House hearing next week to look at decades of what many lawmakers view as executive overreach

#16 | Posted by homerj at 2020-02-26 12:52 PM | Reply

#15 Sycophant

You act like Executive over- reach started with Trump. This goes back decades.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-26 12:58 PM | Reply

Just because something started before Trump doesn't mean Trump (a) hasn't accelerated it and (b) isn't more dangerous due to how stupid and unconcerned with the welfare of the nation he is.

#18 | Posted by joe at 2020-02-26 01:07 PM | Reply

Here's where you tell me, completely unironically, that Trump actually cares about America.

#19 | Posted by JOE at 2020-02-26 01:08 PM | Reply

#15. I don't care what it takes.... I've been screaming for a curb to Executive overreach for a long time. Prior to 2017 I was labeled a racist for my efforts.

#20 | Posted by JeffJ at 2020-02-26 01:32 PM | Reply

Why not truly be done with it? Abolish the position of POTUS and switch to a strong parliamentary system. That would make everything smoother. All voices could then be heard.

#21 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-02-26 03:28 PM | Reply

#21 | Posted by moder8 The form of government is irreverent, the quality and temperament of the leaders is.

#22 | Posted by docnjo at 2020-02-26 04:30 PM | Reply

#22 Our current form of government is very irreverent.

#23 | Posted by JOE at 2020-02-26 04:33 PM | Reply

HELL YASS!!!!!

#24 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-02-26 07:51 PM | Reply

I didn't even read the article...the headline alone was enough to get me excited!

#25 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-02-26 07:52 PM | Reply

"I've been screaming for a curb to Executive overreach for a long time. Prior to 2017 I was labeled a racist for my efforts."

Obama wasn't anywhere near as bad as Trump. And, god forbid, Bernie was elected...he' be even worse. Hell, he's been bragging about how he's going to circumvent congress.

#26 | Posted by madbomber at 2020-02-26 07:55 PM | Reply

Sounds good until the 'political elite' are back in office, then [in their eyes] not so good - once again, slippery slope with The law Of Unintended Consequences: Remember Harry Reid?

The term "nuclear option" is an analogy to nuclear weapons being the most extreme option in warfare. In November 2013, Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments, but not for the Supreme Court.

How did that work out for dems when the 'shoe was on the other foot', i.e., be careful what you wish for as you just may 'get it'.

#27 | Posted by MSgt at 2020-02-26 10:25 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort