The strength of those checks is not inexhaustible. If it were just one rogue politician from the great state of Alabama, that would be one thing, but that’s not the case. Kansas’ GOP has just in the past year or so proposed impeaching judges for virtually nothing more than invalidating their policies. Joe Arpaio flaunted civil rights laws and the judiciary and was rewarded with a presidential pardon. GOP states continue to propose frivolous ID requirements for voting. And worst of all, voters who participate keep rewarding the GOP with even more power. This is not how a healthy democracy functions. When voters reward anti-democratic candidates and parties with power, you can expect more of the same.
But to keep this relevant to the thread, I go back to 2001 when Congress passed the Patriot Act with little review. It was understandable given the enormity of the damage and trauma of the time, but now we’re left with a national security apparatus that everyone from Ron Wyden to Rand Paul would acknowledge is invasive and nebulous. That system can be abused by the wrong people. And we’re electing the wrong people now. An ‘emergency’ in the era of Trump will almost surely empower the state with greater power and secrecy and the individual citizen with less privacy and liberty.
You’re gonna take the word of an admiral/slash/former NATO high commander with 37 years of military service over the opinions of the credentialed and erudite SDMB War College? Pfft.
You don’t know what you are talking about. Senior military commanders are expected to know about foreign affairs and international policy because it’s part of their job. They need this knowledge to formulate strategy and anticipate events.
I think the Trump presidency will increase the public demands for checks and balances. The refusal of the GOP congress to act as a brake on Trump, and Trump’s flaunting of convention is going to make people want to see more checks and balances.
I’ve heard talk of making the executive branch get approval from congress before using nuclear weapons, or getting approval before declaring war (some war powers act greatly expanded the executive’s war making abilities). Plus there are some efforts to pass laws protecting the special counsel.
But as it stands right now, Trump barely got his travel ban passed. The courts, the states, the special counsel (who barely got in since Trump technically controls the judiciary) all are working. However congress is useless and if Sessions hadn’t recused himself we wouldn’t have Mueller. We’d still have Schneidermann though.
I do worry what if the next autocrat isn’t incompetent like Trump is. Trump got 63 million votes despite doing everything he can to show the public he is too deranged and incompetent to handle power. What if the next autocrat is intelligent and devious?
His access to NK is no more than any of the rest of us unless he was actually commanding forces in SK. He is hysterical and being used for political purposes.
If we are hit by a nuke first strike it would be moronic to need congressional approval. And Congress has always needed to pass a declaration of war. But no one uses those anymore.
What are you talking about? Skinny repeal was McConnell’s baby. 49 Republicans voted for it. It wasn’t Trump’s train, he was just honking the horn, and the only “brake” was literally one guy with brain cancer. The only time congressional Republicans haven’t let Trump mount them from the rear was over the Russia sanctions, which weren’t a big priority for him anyway.
Oh wow, we should be grateful that 4 senators stopped the Republican party and Trump from sending tens of millions of people for no reason other than to appease the Koch brothers.
Anti-Trumpists want more checks and balances; pro-Trumpists want fewer. And the apathetic middle is still, well, apathetic. I don’t really think that there’s anything that has moved the needle in the center. The economy is still doing well. There’s increased potential for conflict but no conflict. Most things now are still ‘normal’. As they were on January 20.
It’s talk. If we were worried about Trump nuking a defenseless country, that would be one thing. But most Americans are fine with Trump nuking North Korea – hell I’m fine with it under the right circumstances. Moreover, we live in a dangerous world, a world with an ascendant China and an aggressive Russia. We’re not going to de-fang a president, even if it’s one we don’t like.
They’re all working, eh? It’ll be interesting to see what happens to public unions once Neil Gorsuch gets done with them. There’s probably a philosophical argument to be made against public unions, but there’s also a philosophical argument against unlimited soft money and individual campaign donations, too.
Trump doesn’t necessarily have to be that competent - at least not now. The economy is still growing, there’s still domestic tranquility, and there’s still global peace. The people who voted for him - no offense - are incompetent voters.
The autocrat that I fear the most is probably a recently-retired military general who happens to have the gift of oratory and a penchant for religious fundamentalism. Someone who could politicize and divide the military, promote loyalists, and fire dissenters, and then use the armed services as a real lever of power. That would be the ultimate nightmare.
The author writes: “Far more than when I previously visited, North Korea is galvanizing its people to expect a nuclear war with the United States,” and “…my visit gave me a sense of déjà vu, reminding me of a trip to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq on the eve of the American invasion. The difference is that a war here would be not just a regional disaster but a nuclear cataclysm.”
Huh? Did you miss McCain killing Trump’s ACA “skinny repeal”? That was precisely an example of “the GOP congress [acting] as a brake on Trump”.