Replies

"2) we the people should be asking these questions of any federal official including Trump and making sure that our guy is moving us in the direction of recovery of our Free Constitutional Republic - our ultimate goal."

He is. He's also trying to roll back a coup 25 years in the making, and needs some breathing room to work.

Overly-specific legislation can be just as bad as overly vague legislation. It becomes just as unenforceable. The general problem is that we have far too many laws on the books, and too many bureaucrats running agencies with personal agendas running completely counter to the public interest. These people actually are attempting to legislate without authority by purposely misinterpreting legislation to suit their agenda. EOs are the only tool available to rein them in.

There has been no recent boom in the number of executive orders issued by presidents, unless you think of 1900 as recent. I'm not sure what you're seeing from Trump that would raise any genuine constitutional alarm bells. I see someone who's doing their job, and being constantly flamed by the enemedia for relatively passe executive actions.

You said it yourself. We're not operating under normal conditions. Jefferson and Washington had the benefit of presiding over a much less expansive and nebulous state. There were few if any British loyalists sitting in the halls of government trying to actively undermine the country. If they tried, they would have been jailed, convicted, and hung for treason. No EOs necessary.

I count six EO’s for Reagan. FDR holds the record with over 3,000. The Leftist presidents after Reagan were in the 200-300 range.

One of the main problems with EO’s is they typically are efforts to do the wrong things the right way - but of course there is no right way to do the wrong things. The wrong things are the surfeit of unconstitutional acts and bureaucracies and the noxious and unconstitutional Administrative/Regulatory State.

The feds in an effort to implement unconstitutional laws use EO’s to both make law (often regulations) and enforce law which is basically unconstitutional since Congress is the only constitutionally authorized branch to legislate. So here is a perfect example of how the feds layer unconstitutional means in order to achieve unconstitutional ends.

EO’s, especially excessive EO’s, are a problem. But the bigger problem is the undoing the 70% to 80% unconstitutional portion of the feds. which needs a stake driven into its heart - kill it ‘till it’s dead.

Every freedom-loving American should be concerned about EO’s because they basically unconstitutionally combine lawmaking (ie. regulations) and execution in one Branch and act. Some say they’re necessary. But those who say that generally don’t understand that these “necessary” EO’s are as I said, a means of carrying out unconstitutional laws. All of it needs to go.