Post

Conversation

NEW: Trump selects Russ Vought, architect of Project 2025 chapter, to lead White House budget office Vought has: - Asserted presidential authorities to unilaterally claw back spending, w/o Congress - Said "we are living in a post-Constitutional time" - Has crafted plans for Trump to deploy the military to quash civil unrest and seize more control over the Justice Department - Aggressive proponent of using "Schedule F" to strip protections from much of the federal workforce washingtonpost.com/business/2024/
David Watson ๐Ÿฅ‘
Post your reply

Vought led the OMB in Trumpโ€™s previous administration. It isnโ€™t always about Project 2025. Try again. Do better.
Image
Not a fan of Tucker Carlson but he did an interview of Vought where Vought made pretty reasonable arguments and sounded quite rational and level headed.
If project 2025 was so scary and it would cost Republicans election they would never put it up there, they would just wait to be elected and then start doing all the crazy stuff, people are being scared with project 2025 because they know that 99.9% of the people will never read
Show more
Do democrats really want to talk about the validity of the Constitution after the dumpster fire that was the last four years? REALLY? ๐Ÿคฆ
Letโ€™s see. All 3 letter agencies are under the authority of the executive branch of government. With oversight by the legislative branch of government. Hmmmmm me thinks the constitution gives the president the authority to โ€œscaleโ€ back the bueracracies. This has nothing to do
Show more
All of these are true: -Unilaterally clawback spending means โ€œvetoโ€ ๐Ÿ˜ฎโ€๐Ÿ’จ -Leftists hate the constitution and undermine it every day -DoD should be used to deport 10 million illegal invaders who are causing civil unrest waving ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฝ ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ธ ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ช -Schedule F is for bureaucratic tyrants
Making America Great Again was always the plan and we all know what and WHO we voted for Mooch
I'm waiting to see the explanation for how the Constitution says a president can refuse to spend the amount shown on the very same line item that the Constitution says he couldn't veto. Sure, I can see that explained as mechanics, but not as original intent.