18 Burst results for "Institution Of Congress"

"institution congress" Discussed on NewsRadio 1020 KDKA

NewsRadio 1020 KDKA

08:23 min | 2 weeks ago

"institution congress" Discussed on NewsRadio 1020 KDKA

"A little idea of exactly what your organization keep. Nine. Is it? Nine is a bipartisan organization that is working to persuade Congress to propose what would be the 28th amendment to the United States Constitution That would say the Supreme Court of the United States is nine justices. Be the shortest amendment in the Constitution, and it would prevent the idea that some people are talking about which is to APAC. The Supreme Court the Supreme Court, is it our most important institution? The United States Constitution is an amazing document, and it creates a balance between the executive legislative and judicial branches. And the Supreme Court is the branch that has been called on time and again to resolve disputes between the executive branch and the legislative branch and to resolve issues that otherwise might Tear the country apart. So it's a critical institution for the survival of American democracy. And the most important element of the Supreme Court is that it is independent. It can't be controlled by the president. It can't be controlled by Congress. And throughout our history. There have been people in the presidency and in Congress that I wanted to destroy the independence of the court. And it may be the most important issue of this election. Whether or not this election results in the election of folks Who want to preserve the independence of the Supreme Court for the election of the folks who want to destroy it. Now the president Any president has no control over the Supreme Court, but it can have a lot of influence because let's face it. President Trump has two picks to the Supreme Court already and Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. There's still two picks from President Obama's era. There's two from the George W. Bush era on there, There's two from the Clinton era on there and one remaining one from the George H. W. Bush era. So let's just Those ugh that if President Trump is reelected, he could get possibly two, maybe three more Supreme Court justice opportunities coming up here, with Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Clarence Thomas, both rumored to be considering retirement. I think Stephen Breyer as well somewhere down the line, but in the next few years, so that proves the importance of the Supreme Court and how much influence we could have for 50 years going forward from the Trump Eric. Correct, Absolutely. But there's an even more fundamental issue more than 100 years, the Supreme Court In an independent institution. Congress has not changed its size. But if after this election we end up with Ah, somebody that wants to pack the Supreme Court. We could end up with not just the names of people on the Supreme Court changing but the nature of the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court became a political football between the two parties, with one party packing it when they were in charge and another party packing and when they were in charge, we would lose one of the most important institutions in the country. And that independence is mohr important, then who is appointed and we're very fortunate right now, in that both candidates appear to say that they don't want a packed court. Trump is attack court packing. And Biden said, I don't want a packed court either. But the problem is that there's some people on the Biden a team, including Kamala Harris, who said in the past that they like the idea of court packing and the Democratic Party platform. Includes language that says they favor court restructuring. And Senator Chuck Schumer has said that he might restructure the court if the court doesn't rule in ways that he likes. So there's a threat out there. And our appeal is two candidates in both parties who say that they don't want to pack the court to endorse the Keep Nine Amendment so that we are permanently protected against efforts to pack the court. And we think that's a critical issue that voters ought to care about because it will show what kind of governance we're gonna have over the next four years. If we have people who support to keep nine Amendment, we can rest assured that the court is not going to be packed. But if we have people who won't support to keep nine Amendment, we've gotta worry and so candidates for Congress candidates for the president. We think we ought to be asked. Do you support to keep nine Amendment because if they would pack it like you mentioned that would lead to political chaos The Supreme Court is always seen is at the institution that is more rational and steady and less fashionable, right and throughout our history, the biggest beneficiary of an independent Supreme Court are minorities because it's the Supreme Court that protects the unpopular rights of minorities. Every once in a while, you get a wave in Congress, so we got to do something. People say Well, it could affect minorities and sometimes in Congress. They don't care and the classic example of the Supreme Court standing up for minorities was almost 200 years ago, when Andrew Jackson decided that he was going to see the land of the Cherokee Indians and deport them all. The Oklahoma and the Supreme Court stood up and said, it's wrong. Unfortunately, at that time, Andrew Jackson said, Well, how many regiments does the Supreme Court have and ignored their ruling? Now? That wouldn't happen today, The Supreme Court has enough power to resist that kind of defiance. But if a president could say, Well, I don't like your decision. I'm going to pack the Supreme Court put my own people on the rights of minorities would be AH, gravely at risk. There were other presidents in the past have threatened to stack the Supreme Court as well. Back in the early 19 hundreds correct right. The most recent memory was Franklin Roosevelt in 1937. He had just won an overwhelming victory in 1936. Hey, had overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress. And so he decided that he was going to use that opportunity to put some of his allies on the Supreme Court because at the time they were ruling against some of the legislative proposals that he had made and what he didn't expect was a outpouring of public opposition in both parties. And it basically destroyed his ruling coalition in his second term, and our message to both parties is don't go too far proposed your policies past them in Congress, but preserve the independence of the Supreme Court. Because if you try to upset that you're risking all the other items in your agenda. How did they come to nine as the final number in the Supreme Court? Well, it's very interesting history for the first almost 90 years of American history. The Supreme Court was, in fact, a political football and the Republican majority after the civil War was stuck with a Supreme Court that had been appointed by pro slavery president prior to the civil war, And so they basically was a naked power grab. They expanded the size of the court put their own people on. And you can argue that that may have been the right strategy after after a civil war, but very soon thereafter, the tradition grew At the Supreme Court ought to be independent was a tradition honored by both parties after 18 69 and people thought, you know people would honor tradition and in 1937. When FDR said, I'm going to pack the court, it was a great shock to people Now. It's interesting that FDR also broke another long standing tradition in American politics. He ran for a third term, and there had been a tradition ever since the founding of the republic that presidents only ran for two terms. And what happened in that case was, there was a public outcry and the 22nd amendment to the Constitution, which limits presidents to two terms was a response to Roosevelt's running for a third term. And our view is that just as the 22nd amendment put into the Constitution, a longstanding tradition, a new 28th amendment that says the Supreme Court of United States should be nine justices is the right way together. NT the independence of the Supreme Court for the future and is keep nine dot org website the best place for people to go to either support your idea for an amendment or just get more information. Absolutely. And if you go to that website, you'll see an E mail address where you can email us with specific questions or if you want to get involved in this effort. We're hoping that in the next two months, an army of citizens will AH demand that candidate for Congress for Senate and for the White House will answer the very simple question. Do you support to keep Nine Amendment? To keep the Supreme Court at nine justices and by the way, our hero on this issue was Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who has said she opposes court packing and she thinks nine is a good number for the Supreme Court. Roman Bueller, executive director director of of Keep Keep Nine Nine I I really really Appreciate Appreciate you you joining joining us us in in the the lending lending your your voice voice to to the the Voice Voice of of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh today. today. Well, Well, thank thank you you so so much. much. I I really really

Supreme Court Congress President Trump president United States President Obama Arnold Palmer Regional Airport Larry Richard Latrobe Lina Senator Chuck Schumer Andrew Jackson George W. Bush Trump Oklahoma Institute of Pittsburgh News Stephen Breyer George H. W. Bush executive director
"institution congress" Discussed on NewsRadio 1020 KDKA

NewsRadio 1020 KDKA

05:39 min | 2 weeks ago

"institution congress" Discussed on NewsRadio 1020 KDKA

"K Radio morning show Larry Richard off this Labor Day. I'm Kevin battle last week when President Trump was in Latrobe for a big rally at Arnold Palmer Regional Airport, he said. This is the most important election off our lives. I know you've heard that before. But why is it so important? A lot of people say the most important thing is always the Supreme Court and joining us on the disc Institute of Pittsburgh News. Lina's Thie executive director ofthe Keep nine Roman Bueller. Good Morning, Sir. Good morning. We really appreciate you. Time really appreciate you joining us today on this Labor Day weekend. Could you explain? Forgive the listener a little idea of exactly what your organization keep. Nine. Is it? Nine is a bipartisan organization that is working to persuade Congress to propose what would be the 28th amendment to the United States Constitution That would say the Supreme Court of the United States is nine justices. Be the shortest amendment in the Constitution, and it would prevent the idea that some people are talking about which is to APAC. The Supreme Court the Supreme Court, is it our most important institution? The United States Constitution is an amazing document, and it creates a balance between the executive legislative and judicial branches. And the Supreme Court is the branch that has been called on time and again to resolve disputes between the executive branch and the legislative branch and to resolve issues that otherwise might Tear the country apart. So it's a critical institution for the survival of American democracy. And the most important element of the Supreme Court is that it is independent. It can't be controlled by the president. It can't be controlled by Congress. And throughout our history. There have been people in the presidency and in Congress that I wanted to destroy the independence of the court. And it may be the most important issue of this election. Whether or not this election results in the election of folks Who want to preserve the independence of the Supreme Court for the election of the folks who want to destroy it. Now the president Any president has no control over the Supreme Court, but it can have a lot of influence because let's face it. President Trump has two picks to the Supreme Court already and Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. There's still two picks from President Obama's era. There's two from the George W. Bush era on there, There's two from the Clinton era on there and one remaining one from the George H. W. Bush era. So let's just Those ugh that if President Trump is reelected, he could get possibly two, maybe three more Supreme Court justice opportunities coming up here, with Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Clarence Thomas, both rumored to be considering retirement. I think Stephen Breyer as well somewhere down the line, but in the next few years, so that proves the importance of the Supreme Court and how much influence we could have for 50 years going forward from the Trump Eric. Correct, Absolutely. But there's an even more fundamental issue more than 100 years, the Supreme Court In an independent institution. Congress has not changed its size. But if after this election we end up with Ah, somebody that wants to pack the Supreme Court. We could end up with not just the names of people on the Supreme Court changing but the nature of the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court became a political football between the two parties, with one party packing it when they were in charge and another party packing and when they were in charge, we would lose one of the most important institutions in the country. And that independence is mohr important, then who is appointed and we're very fortunate right now, in that both candidates appear to say that they don't want a packed court. Trump is attack court packing. And Biden said, I don't want a packed court either. But the problem is that there's some people on the Biden a team, including Kamala Harris, who said in the past that they like the idea of court packing and the Democratic Party platform. Includes language that says they favor court restructuring. And Senator Chuck Schumer has said that he might restructure the court if the court doesn't rule in ways that he likes. So there's a threat out there. And our appeal is two candidates in both parties who say that they don't want to pack the court to endorse the Keep Nine Amendment so that we are permanently protected against efforts to pack the court. And we think that's a critical issue that voters ought to care about because it will show what kind of governance we're gonna have over the next four years. If we have people who support to keep nine Amendment, we can rest assured that the court is not going to be packed. But if we have people who won't support to keep nine Amendment, we've gotta worry and so candidates for Congress candidates for the president. We think we ought to be asked. Do you support to keep nine Amendment because if they would pack it like you mentioned that would lead to political chaos The Supreme Court is always seen is at the institution that is more rational and steady and less fashionable, right and throughout our history, the biggest beneficiary of an independent Supreme Court are minorities because it's the Supreme Court that protects the unpopular rights of minorities. Every once in a while, you get a wave in Congress, so we got to do something. People say Well, it could affect minorities and sometimes in Congress. They don't care and the classic example of the Supreme Court standing up for minorities was almost 200 years ago, when Andrew Jackson decided that he was going to see the land of the Cherokee Indians and deport them all. The Oklahoma and the Supreme Court stood up and said, it's wrong. Unfortunately, at that time, Andrew Jackson said, Well, how many regiments does the Supreme Court have and ignored their ruling? Now? That wouldn't happen today, The Supreme Court has enough power to resist that kind of defiance. But if a president could say, Well, I don't like your decision..

Supreme Court Congress President Trump president United States President Obama Arnold Palmer Regional Airport Larry Richard Latrobe Lina Senator Chuck Schumer Andrew Jackson George W. Bush Trump Oklahoma Institute of Pittsburgh News Stephen Breyer George H. W. Bush executive director
The 'Keep Nine' Amendment

The KDKA Radio Morning News

08:23 min | 2 weeks ago

The 'Keep Nine' Amendment

"A little idea of exactly what your organization keep. Nine. Is it? Nine is a bipartisan organization that is working to persuade Congress to propose what would be the 28th amendment to the United States Constitution That would say the Supreme Court of the United States is nine justices. Be the shortest amendment in the Constitution, and it would prevent the idea that some people are talking about which is to APAC. The Supreme Court the Supreme Court, is it our most important institution? The United States Constitution is an amazing document, and it creates a balance between the executive legislative and judicial branches. And the Supreme Court is the branch that has been called on time and again to resolve disputes between the executive branch and the legislative branch and to resolve issues that otherwise might Tear the country apart. So it's a critical institution for the survival of American democracy. And the most important element of the Supreme Court is that it is independent. It can't be controlled by the president. It can't be controlled by Congress. And throughout our history. There have been people in the presidency and in Congress that I wanted to destroy the independence of the court. And it may be the most important issue of this election. Whether or not this election results in the election of folks Who want to preserve the independence of the Supreme Court for the election of the folks who want to destroy it. Now the president Any president has no control over the Supreme Court, but it can have a lot of influence because let's face it. President Trump has two picks to the Supreme Court already and Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. There's still two picks from President Obama's era. There's two from the George W. Bush era on there, There's two from the Clinton era on there and one remaining one from the George H. W. Bush era. So let's just Those ugh that if President Trump is reelected, he could get possibly two, maybe three more Supreme Court justice opportunities coming up here, with Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Clarence Thomas, both rumored to be considering retirement. I think Stephen Breyer as well somewhere down the line, but in the next few years, so that proves the importance of the Supreme Court and how much influence we could have for 50 years going forward from the Trump Eric. Correct, Absolutely. But there's an even more fundamental issue more than 100 years, the Supreme Court In an independent institution. Congress has not changed its size. But if after this election we end up with Ah, somebody that wants to pack the Supreme Court. We could end up with not just the names of people on the Supreme Court changing but the nature of the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court became a political football between the two parties, with one party packing it when they were in charge and another party packing and when they were in charge, we would lose one of the most important institutions in the country. And that independence is mohr important, then who is appointed and we're very fortunate right now, in that both candidates appear to say that they don't want a packed court. Trump is attack court packing. And Biden said, I don't want a packed court either. But the problem is that there's some people on the Biden a team, including Kamala Harris, who said in the past that they like the idea of court packing and the Democratic Party platform. Includes language that says they favor court restructuring. And Senator Chuck Schumer has said that he might restructure the court if the court doesn't rule in ways that he likes. So there's a threat out there. And our appeal is two candidates in both parties who say that they don't want to pack the court to endorse the Keep Nine Amendment so that we are permanently protected against efforts to pack the court. And we think that's a critical issue that voters ought to care about because it will show what kind of governance we're gonna have over the next four years. If we have people who support to keep nine Amendment, we can rest assured that the court is not going to be packed. But if we have people who won't support to keep nine Amendment, we've gotta worry and so candidates for Congress candidates for the president. We think we ought to be asked. Do you support to keep nine Amendment because if they would pack it like you mentioned that would lead to political chaos The Supreme Court is always seen is at the institution that is more rational and steady and less fashionable, right and throughout our history, the biggest beneficiary of an independent Supreme Court are minorities because it's the Supreme Court that protects the unpopular rights of minorities. Every once in a while, you get a wave in Congress, so we got to do something. People say Well, it could affect minorities and sometimes in Congress. They don't care and the classic example of the Supreme Court standing up for minorities was almost 200 years ago, when Andrew Jackson decided that he was going to see the land of the Cherokee Indians and deport them all. The Oklahoma and the Supreme Court stood up and said, it's wrong. Unfortunately, at that time, Andrew Jackson said, Well, how many regiments does the Supreme Court have and ignored their ruling? Now? That wouldn't happen today, The Supreme Court has enough power to resist that kind of defiance. But if a president could say, Well, I don't like your decision. I'm going to pack the Supreme Court put my own people on the rights of minorities would be AH, gravely at risk. There were other presidents in the past have threatened to stack the Supreme Court as well. Back in the early 19 hundreds correct right. The most recent memory was Franklin Roosevelt in 1937. He had just won an overwhelming victory in 1936. Hey, had overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress. And so he decided that he was going to use that opportunity to put some of his allies on the Supreme Court because at the time they were ruling against some of the legislative proposals that he had made and what he didn't expect was a outpouring of public opposition in both parties. And it basically destroyed his ruling coalition in his second term, and our message to both parties is don't go too far proposed your policies past them in Congress, but preserve the independence of the Supreme Court. Because if you try to upset that you're risking all the other items in your agenda. How did they come to nine as the final number in the Supreme Court? Well, it's very interesting history for the first almost 90 years of American history. The Supreme Court was, in fact, a political football and the Republican majority after the civil War was stuck with a Supreme Court that had been appointed by pro slavery president prior to the civil war, And so they basically was a naked power grab. They expanded the size of the court put their own people on. And you can argue that that may have been the right strategy after after a civil war, but very soon thereafter, the tradition grew At the Supreme Court ought to be independent was a tradition honored by both parties after 18 69 and people thought, you know people would honor tradition and in 1937. When FDR said, I'm going to pack the court, it was a great shock to people Now. It's interesting that FDR also broke another long standing tradition in American politics. He ran for a third term, and there had been a tradition ever since the founding of the republic that presidents only ran for two terms. And what happened in that case was, there was a public outcry and the 22nd amendment to the Constitution, which limits presidents to two terms was a response to Roosevelt's running for a third term. And our view is that just as the 22nd amendment put into the Constitution, a longstanding tradition, a new 28th amendment that says the Supreme Court of United States should be nine justices is the right way together. NT the independence of the Supreme Court for the future and is keep nine dot org website the best place for people to go to either support your idea for an amendment or just get more information. Absolutely. And if you go to that website, you'll see an E mail address where you can email us with specific questions or if you want to get involved in this effort. We're hoping that in the next two months, an army of citizens will AH demand that candidate for Congress for Senate and for the White House will answer the very simple question. Do you support to keep Nine Amendment? To keep the Supreme Court at nine justices and by the way, our hero on this issue was Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who has said she opposes court packing and she thinks nine is a good number for the Supreme Court. Roman Bueller, executive director director of of Keep Keep Nine Nine I I really really Appreciate Appreciate you you joining joining us us in in the the lending lending your your voice voice to to the the Voice Voice of of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh today. today. Well, Well, thank thank you you so so much. much. I I really really

Supreme Court Congress President Trump United States Ruth Bader Ginsburg Executive President Obama Franklin Roosevelt Senator Chuck Schumer George W. Bush Stephen Breyer FDR George H. W. Bush Oklahoma Andrew Jackson Democratic Party Biden Donald Trump
"institution congress" Discussed on 760 KFMB Radio

760 KFMB Radio

07:22 min | 8 months ago

"institution congress" Discussed on 760 KFMB Radio

"A president who believes that he can do whatever he wants so we must consider how our actions will reverberate for decades to come and the impact they will have on the functioning of our democracy and as we consider this critical decision it's important to remember that no matter what you decide to do here what you decide to hear witnesses and relevant testimony the facts will come out in the end even over the course of this trial we have seen so many additional facts come to light the facts will come out in all of their horror they will come out and there are more cuts court documents and deadlines under the freedom of information act witnesses will tell their stories hearings seventeen of folks in the media this week has made that abundantly clear all the documents the president is hiding will come out the witnesses the president is concealing will tell their stories and we will be asked why we didn't want to hear that information when we have the chance when we could consider okay so that it's Adam Schiff that's another one of those things they'll be as why did we do that we had the chance you could turn that around asked the same question of Adam Schiff and Paolo Sian Nadler on Laos you did those weeks and weeks and weeks of hearings you call seventeen witnesses Bolton and Mulvaney at home by why didn't you do them do that when you had the chance it's like earlier and then the show was talking about you Marie says that we have to understand what's the president going to do if he's acquitted if he gets his way here how can we conclude he'll he'll conduct himself moving forward and do the same thing again it turned around same thing they're gonna keep doing the same the same Sir to what S. anything's impeachable thing if this is allowed to stand and even have any kind of leftover foundation as some new standard for impeachment and if the Democrats get the house again I think after all this I really I think that may be in jeopardy we'll start to realize what happened what the waste of time and money when this is all done more of the fabrications coming out about shift and we still don't yeah there's a lot of things that on record if you did do witnesses you would put Adam Schiff under oath that he got a lot of explaining to do with the whistle blower whistle listener there were one one day in the weeks leading up to the impeachment articles being adopted he's saying what I don't know there was a war they find out that the I did it and rand Paul Republican Kentucky asked the question yesterday about mellow who's the whistleblower was listener everybody knows that and he didn't say whistleblower and what he had submitted in the question and then John Roberts the Chief Justice says not our not allow the question well that's not fair is it ships of what the American people know that you understand they deserve the truth says the guy who who has been proven ninety some percent of the time to be making up whoppers they're not even the meatless whoppers when they are figure voice speaking one eight hundred six sixty K. of would be eight hundred seven sixty five three six two back to Adam Schiff by the way your one or is this going to go on all day there for hours they started a little bit after ten our time so we're almost halfway through this and and it's some point though the Republicans gonna turn is but all Democrats but for hours said for arguments like I guess once we get to noon little afternoon a proper take a potty break and then do what the Republicans get to the the best clean up here how's it gonna work but last night Lamar Alexander Republican who might have gone over saying yeah I need more testimony he said listen I don't need to see or anything else I need to hear anymore he said the Democrats prove their case the trump abuse power an obstructed justice then that's weathered tweeting about not well Lamar Alexander is excusing abuse of power present you make the case that Barack Obama abuse power fast and furious comes to mind that'll caper and other things iris then stop all these different issues with rocky was sweetness and light no Lamar Alexander said okay they prove their case I need here anymore any here any witnesses and subpoenaed documents and all that bad they they made the case from abuse power and obstructed Congress but he said I don't think transactions rose to an impeachable level and then as they opened the center proceedings in the ten o'clock hour today G. O. P. centered usually GOP usually Lisa Murkowski of Alaska announced she too would oppose saying the proceedings had degraded the institution well amen to that choose that I've come to the conclusion there will be no fair trial in the Senate I don't believe the continuation of the process will change anything it's sad for me to admit that as an institution Congress has failed meanwhile just in the Nick of time what a surprise it was one of Korean students that suddenly the New York times gets a lead to peace another piece of the book manuscript from bold new book describes a may meeting last year were bolting claims trump ordered him to calls Lynskey the president the guy in the Ukraine to encourage him to meet with Rudy Giuliani boulder city never made the call you right to the account which adds detail to the prosecutors contention that trump pressured to let's get it and the aid was given and it was and and and that's really a moot point now because in fact that was down that was in the mail in the mix this morning before work house he said you know what I'm not gonna vote for witnesses so apparently that's got no traction Romney likes witnesses Susan Collins Republican in name only said sure we got that witnesses that's not gonna fly so they'll go through this for hours testimony then they're gonna have they done there's gonna be about their devotion they can't escape it and then when they don't get the vote to subpoena witnesses and docket and the document then it's high speed warp speed on to the finale are we gonna convict trump or not you know the answer based on how this is setting up and you know and and the senators now they're also looking at the clock and the calendar grown women super bowls on Sunday could I got a campaign I was a for the Democrats senators they're wasting time here the state of the union show on Tuesday wow I am seven sixty talk and breaking news you're listening to mark Larson on eighty M. seven sixty talking and breaking news seven sixty KFMB finally some good news coming from your camp Pendleton that earlier crash has been completely clear now five north bound near Los pool guys but still it's going to take some time for the yeah back up to empty out it is jammed up all the way into Carlsbad but the good news all lanes open from that earlier crash.

president
"institution congress" Discussed on KCRW

KCRW

07:07 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on KCRW

"It doesn't make sense to me that, that would be the sort of thing that you would that you should use this extraordinary power to of, of removal for it seems to me that, it's, it's more appropriate for the sort of things described in the mullahs report, where things that either are, you know, the, the congress things are crimes, or ought to be crimes, or similar to crimes that, you know that if if that rose to the level of misconduct that the congress, which to remove over that, that would be an appropriate. Use of the impeachment power. It's reasonable concern to to play devil's advocate for a minute. It seems to me that there's at least one example, than the Trump administration that ought to win you over and get around that concern, and it involves the war power. Now I grant that a bunch of. Presidents have abused. The war power, which is supposed to be vested in congress and have gone off and done things, and foreign policy that, you know, if you're really going to take a broad view, you could go after them for it. Now. How would congress go about taking back the war power, it might do things like hold a resolution and say, hey, stop fighting a war over there. Right. And in the case of the Trump administration the returns, when it didn't do that Trump, bombed Syria, without permission, and congress didn't really do anything. And so if they were to impeach him for that, that might fall into the area, you're talking about on the other hand congress passed a resolution and said, stop participating in this war in Yemen, and Trump has continued to participate. He vetoed the resolution it seems to me that that is navigation of the constitution that vest, the war power in congress, and that the congressional remedy of voting saying, stop this has been exercised. And so what remedy is left except impeachment. If the president wants to wage war, whenever they want, but I but the president vetoed that resume. Lucien. I mean, the remedy is that congress could have overridden, the veto. And then right by law override, it doesn't impose a two-thirds majority requirement on the War Powers. Imposes a majority legislative requirement until congress has no way to take back the war power if president behave this way, other than impeachment there is no other remedy. Can I just say that there's just a side step the argument on, on War Powers and just go general? There should be no congress was really a self respecting institution, there should be no garden variety trampling on congressional powers. That's just a norm because every president of each party does it. But the fact is, it's not a self respecting institution. It's pathetic institution. And, and the way it's handled reacted to the mall investigation. Just goes to that, it relied on the executive to in effect conduct the impeachment inquiry analysis waiting with baited breath for an executive fischel or now. Former executive facial Bob Mueller to tell it, whether it impeach or not, and less is absolutely right. It's up to it. It can decide, you know, it has all the. Evidence. It's all been thrown into his lap through this investigation. It's funny rich. I mean, if you want congress reasserted, self like that, just in a mosh who's been out talking about the, the, the reasons to impeach the president. He's also been flirting with a presidential run on the on the libertarian party line. And part of his view is that congress has given up too many of these powers and should take them back. Is that something people like you should welcome? If just emotions running making a third party bid for the presidency, he is a correct about that about congressional powers. He is. And I share that view. I do not share his reading of the evidence in the mall report, and whether it's a crime, and I don't share the, the dim view has of how Bill bar has handled this, but when he says, casually he's relied too much. He seemed to think we need the attorney general tell us, whether it's a crime or not as congress. But other times he's been of the correct view. It's up to congress to decide and again, it's just pathetic that you had this more more action generate. Rated by more coming out and making eight minute statement by just congress absorbing it. It's itself. So it's the decision is up to hit and the problem with the independent counsel statute among many of them is that it took from the politically accountable institution congress. The the there's ability for doing an impeachment inquiry or not, because he had this independent executive semi executive official doing it. And that's one of the reasons it was a constitutional deformity and the way this has been handled. I think is also constitutional distortion barrage. You didn't answer my question. Like would you vote for just a mosh if he runs for president? If you're out here, saying, congress needs to reassert itself, you need a more humble presidency. He'd be running promising that he'd also presumably be running on a more economically, conservative platform than Trump has implemented Trump has not tried to slash the entitlement state. It seems to me that a Masha views are in certain ways, closer to yours on policy than than Trump's in ways that are pretty clear and certain ways. But I'm also not not a libertarian and have never been a fan of just in a mush generally Connor, what do you what do you make of the presidential speculation around him? You know, just Josh is a much more consistent of purveyor of the kinds of ideas that the conservative intelligentsia has for years said, this is what we believe in and way, more than Donald Trump. And so just a Masha raises the uncomfortable question for them of, are you going to back the candidate that adheres most closely, those ideas or the candidate that the Republican base wants and that's Donald Trump, and it just kind of exposes what's really going on in a way that's uncomfortable. I think for conservative intellectuals. Yeah, I mean, Liz, it feels like this is a thing that people on the left have been hoping for throughout the Trump presidency of all this worry in the Democratic Party coalition about splits you have all this anger at Jill Stein for, for taking votes that people felt rightly belonged to Hillary Clinton. But then you also have the sense that Trump has has redirected the conservative movement in certain ways, and shouldn't there, be at least some resistance to that some people who want to try to reclaim certain ideas that he's moved away from. Right. And I mean, I think that they're always where people in the Republican party who were interested in pushing back against Trump. I think the narrative that the Republican establishment is overwhelmingly pro Trump and has sort of metaphysically changed in that regard is exaggerated. But I do think that voters Republican voters have come around at Trump in a pretty serious way. And so, for Democrats that's going to be the challenge, you, although I mean rich Trump likes to talk about ninety percent approval ninety plus percent approval in the Republican party. One thing we saw on the twenty sixteen election is in a close election. You know losing a few percentage points of what you thought was your base can be enough to make the difference between winning and losing. So even if even if your not drawn, do you think that in a mosh pit would be significant electoral threat to the president? Not obviously not to be elected president, but to take a few percentage points of the vote. It's unclear. I mean, I think in a mosh would be, you know two to three percent candidate in a close race that can make the the difference. Let's leave it there. Connor Fredersdorf his staff writer at the Atlantic Connor, thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me. I've been talking with Lisburn with the Washington Post and rich Lowry of national review. We'll be back with Tom Nichols. Talk about North Korea to listening to left, right. And center. Join the conversation on our Facebook page or tweet us at LLC, KCRW stream all episodes of left, right.

congress Donald Trump Trump president Republican party executive Connor Fredersdorf Lisburn Facebook North Korea Bob Mueller Atlantic Connor rich Lowry Lucien Masha Tom Nichols Bill bar Washington Post Yemen
"institution congress" Discussed on KLBJ 590AM

KLBJ 590AM

11:55 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on KLBJ 590AM

"This, of course, a committee, led by who Maxine Waters. We reached out to Representative waters for comment about obtaining. President Trump's financial records Putin. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, ma'am. I didn't I didn't quite catch that Putin. Yes. But but what does that have to do with the financial records you now have is your plan to leak any of these financial records or share them with the American people? Putin. Yes. Yes. Yes, ma'am. Vladimir Putin president of Russia, bad guy. But what are you going to do with the financial records as, as part of an investigation where you think crime was committed, and you're investigating the crime or you just investigating the man? Chairwoman waters tin, ma'am. Is there anything else you can tell me besides Putin Putin he has? Manton meme Putin. Putin. Okay. It was good to talk to you. Thank you so very much Representative Maxine Waters. So they have now the finances we heard you. And what they're gonna do with them. Well, that's the interesting part Tony cats cats today. Eight three three gut Tony eight three three four six eight six six nine. Wells Fargo handing over a few thousand documents to the committee. There are nine financial institutions congress wants. Klopp ration- from which I say Democrats want cooperation from President Trump tried to not have this happen. But a federal judge ruled that Deutsche Bank Capital, One, we're required to comply with congressional subpoenas seeking access to the president's financial records. Not the people in your life, were okay with this. And then find a way to have less to do with them now might be difficult because you could be married to somebody who's. Okay with this. I did say it was easy. This is ugly as can be House Financial Services house until. Their investigations of quote possible foreign influence in the US political process. You're telling me that Robert Muller had nothing absolutely nothing. On this. Thirty five million dollars wasn't in the scope of investigation. Okay. See they're not looking, they don't have a crime. Searching for one, which is why this is so incredibly ugly. Why this is so problematic and should bother you. You want to argue that the original investigation was a witch hunt. You're more than welcome to I don't stop you from doing it. I've used the term myself before this. This right here. This is the witch hunt. What we're looking at right now. Is just ugly as sin. This is one of the reasons by the way that the president said, you know what? Are we going to declassify the documents regarding the origins of the mother report? I'm going to tell the attorney general that you've got the. Authority to completely declassify information pertaining to investigation and coordi- with the long established standards for handling classified information. This actual help ensure that all Americans are in the truth about the events that occurred and the actions that were taken during the last presidential election, will restore competence. In our public institutions. So now what Trump saying is slow you get my financial records, you can do this New York's state changes their laws changes the law to allow my tax returns to be given a congress and what I can't do anything. Okay. We know this was a witch hunt from the beginning. You've proven it here right now. So K using the president's whereas hunt. Let's go. Let's find out how this began. Let's, let's look into the origin story. The best is Adam Schiff, chairman of the house intelligence committee, took the Twitter, while Trump stonewalls. The public learning the truth about his structure of Justice Trump and bar conspire to weaponize, law enforcement and classified information against political enemies. The cover of his engine a new dangerous phase. This is unamerican. It is the Democratic Party that wants classified information they want an unredacted version of the mother report. It is redacted because there's grand jury testimony in there, which is to remain secret, Adam Schiff doesn't care Jerrold, Nadler, doesn't care. They wanted unredacted. They wanna know everything that went underlying documents and everything else that is about Justice knowing how the investigation started knowing how the text messages of struck in page come together with commentaries or maybe commands from Komi and, and McCabe, how Brennan and Clapper play into this already. Komi Brennan and Clapper pointing fingers at each other as to who said what and how to steal dossier got involved in this to begin with did, they lie to the FIS court in order to be able to get information and be able to take a look at and the spy on Carter page, George popadopoulos or who knows who else. Let's find out. Oh, you can argue it's all dirty. It's a matter of fact, I will sit with a bourbon and agree with you. But you're going to hear me get into this. And I've already been into it a little bit. Donald Trump and freight fight. Democrats prized by this. You also notice Adam Schiff use the word cover up. I'm gonna need some kind of cover up jingle right there because it's going to be the new catchphrase. We said the other day cover up. It took twenty four hours now. Everybody's on it. Everybody's agreed to the term everybody. By the way, there is a hill. Harris survey that was conducted last week. Sixty two percent of registered voters agree with the attorney general and his decision to investigate the probes. Origins. I mean shifts commentary is remarkable. Trump in bar conspire to weaponize, law enforcement and classified information against political enemies. But what the hell do you think they're doing what the financial stuff Trump? Come on. You hate Trump fine. We see you, you're like the kid who plays hide and seek who just stands there behind their finger and somehow things we won't notice. We'll pretend we don't notice because your little darling. Boo. Boo bear. And we love you. Yes. We do. We see you. Schmuck. We see you. You're right they're standing behind your finger. You like the guy who gets drunk and claims I'm invisible. I stripped down naked and run down the street. What are you doing? Don't you get it where I on the joke now. Adam Schiff is a joke. Adam Schiff is a joke. Somebody else Chuck Ross from Delhi caller. Good question. If these things are being the classified, and Adam Schiff is claiming that this is going to be used as against political enemies, and it's gonna be weaponized. How could the information be weaponized of the FBI CIA did everything by the book? Fun point. I get let me just say for the record, I don't like any of it, of course, not. I like it. When classified information is classified. I like members of congress actually act like members of congress and don't act like a death squad, revenge squad. Yet. Here we are so don't ask me to get worked up because the president fights back. I won't do it. I won't do demand better. You'll get better. Right. One day it'll get there as just one day. I assume the Democrats are going to learn that you and just sit there and punch people in the throat and expect to get away with it. Those days are over. If there is something that Republicans have learned from Donald Trump. Fightback fightback, the days of George H W Bush, the days, I should say of George W Bush are over, you have to be willing to fight back. My kingdom to rise above it. All my kingdom to only have a slender. Sliver. Of, of indecent people to it's you can look at with a little bit aside. I and. Remain maintain. I'm not discussing ending standards. I never discussed ending standards. But as someone who's in favor of the origins conversation, I have no problem with this happening. I have no problem. With the idea that we're going to find out how the investigation got started because there's a question about the dirty -ness of the CIA and the FBI at the top levels. Komi Brennan that. Clapper. Right. Knowing what it is. They did McCabe and stroke and page all very important. Nellie in Bruce or all of it very important. Who else was involved, maybe another departments? What is it that President Obama, new and went indeed? Did he know it? So question how did this all get started? And we have reason to look at it because we know we have a dossier, that's completely unverified paid for by the Democratic Party paid for by those people who worked on behalf of the Democratic Party. And that's what you've got the line. I don't like the idea of releasing classified information because somebody else got accessed information. That's the part, I don't like, but then again they never should've gotten access to the Bank records. Absolutely not. That congress thinks this is oversight. This is a confused and gross congress. So we talked about standards. Yes. Absolutely. And the standard is you don't investigate the manual investigate crimes. And the standard is you don't hate people who politically, this agree with you to the point that you want to kill them. You disagree with them. You win in the in the battlefield of ideas you win elections. And then you implement policy. You don't want to do that. You're on play by the, the, the basic rules of decency. Okay. But don't expect other people to some people might be more decent than others. I agree. And not everybody would have gone down the road that Donald Trump has gone down. I don't think that the classification is indecent. I just wish it hadn't happened. But he fights. And here we are trying to cats. It's the Memorial Day weekend special.

Putin Putin Donald Trump president President Trump Adam Schiff congress Maxine Waters Vladimir Putin Komi Brennan Democratic Party Representative Trump attorney CIA FBI Tony McCabe House Financial Services Wells Fargo
"institution congress" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM

WIBC 93.1FM

02:25 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on WIBC 93.1FM

"This, of course, a committee, led by who Maxine Waters. We reached out to Representative waters for comment about obtaining. President Trump's financial records Poten I'm sorry. I'm sorry, ma'am. I didn't I didn't quite catch that Putin. Yes. But but what does that have to do with the financial records you now have is your plan to leak any of these financial records or share them with the American people? Putin. Yes. Yes. Yes, ma'am. Vladimir Putin president of Russia, bad guy. But what are you going to do with the financial records as, as part of an investigation where you think crime was committed near investigating the crime or you just investigating the man? Chairwoman waters. Ma'am. Is there anything else you can tell me besides Putin Putin? Yes. Mountain meme Putin, but as quote him, okay? It was good to talk to you. Thank you so very much Representative Maxine Waters. So they have now the finances we heard you. And what they're gonna do with them. Well, that's the interesting part Tony cats cats today, eight three three got Tony eight three three four six eight eight six six nine. Wells Fargo handing over a few thousand documents to the committee. There are nine financial institutions congress wants. Corporation from which, I should say, Democrats want cooperation from President Trump tried to not have this happen. But a federal judge ruled that bag in Capital, One where required to comply with congressional subpoenas seeking access to the president's financial records. Not the people in your life. We're okay with this, and then find a way to have less to do with them, now, maybe difficult because you could be married to somebody who's okay with this. I did say it was easy. This is as ugly as can be House Financial Services house Intel. Their investigations of quote possible foreign influence in the US political process. You're telling me that Robert Muller had nothing absolutely nothing. On this. Thirty five million.

Putin Putin Vladimir Putin Maxine Waters President Trump president Representative House Financial Services Robert Muller Tony Wells Fargo US congress Russia Intel
"institution congress" Discussed on Talk Radio WPHT 1210

Talk Radio WPHT 1210

08:06 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on Talk Radio WPHT 1210

"So the Democrats ramping up investigations again yesterday. The Senate committee came out and said, yeah, there's no evidence of collusion. But don't let that stop Adam Schiff from doing his thing or Jerrold Nadler or any of these other people because they are going to try to bring this president down one way or another. There's no Russian collusion. We knew this obviously, this is not a big surprise. You knew it. I knew it. We all knew it. And yet the House Democrats are reportedly considering subpoena of the Trump Putin interpreter. And meeting notes why not they keep it going and ready Adam Schiff over the weekend has been laying the groundwork for the mother report to be. Dismissed dismissed. We'll put it that way. I made this comment in the past couple of months ago, and I'm gonna make it again. So write this down five thirty seven pm f- because you know, how Robert Muller's perceive right now. Robert Muller is a hero is an American hero. He's a man whose integrity should not be questioned. If the mother report comes back with nothing, which it's going to come back with then he will go from being a revered American hero to being a political hack in a matter of seconds. By the way, you'll hear every time you hear Robert Muller. You're here. Republican appointee, Robert Muller and talking heads. We'll sit around you know, he was a Republican, right? I mean, he was obviously, I mean, he wasn't a Republican appointees. So what are we really expect one of them over the weekend? May comment like well. We're not gonna find collusion written in blood and signed by Vlad so the standard now for Democrats is. Well, yeah, I mean, the mother report we never expected to really find anything. It'd be impossible to really find any evidence of collusion. Which I have to ask the obvious question. Then how the hell is it? We've wasted all this time and money when you never expected to find anything. And as a quick gear up for their showdown over the mother report Jerrold Nadler who is the chairman of the House Judiciary committee did not mention impeachment. In the statement announcing the hires, but he noted that Trump faces numerous allegations of corruption in an obstruction as they are stepping up their efforts to investigate President, Donald Trump and his associates hiring new lawyers staff as they take on oversight responsibilities and prepare for a showdown over access to special counsel, Robert Mueller's final Russia report Nadler said on Tuesday, he is hired to veteran, lawyers and Trump critics as this panel gears up to investigate the Justice department and review mother's final conclusions whenever they are released. The judiciary committee is determined to ask critical questions. Gather all the information judiciously assess the evidence and make sure that the facts are not hidden from the American people. Now. Now, would you not mentioned impeachment? He said his conduct in crude statements threatened, the basic legal ethical and constitutional norms that maintain our democratic institutions. Congress has a constitutional duty to be a check and balance against abuses of power when necessary the house intelligence committee is preparing a broad investigation into Trump's finances and foreign connections and has added new staff with experience at the national Security Council. One of them Abigail grace worked for both Trump and former President Barack Obama. I mean national Security Council. Now, Adam Schiff who is the head of the foreign intelligence committee in the house shifty shifty, Adam Schiff now is also looking at new investigations. And he doesn't think the Muller reports going to kill much fruit. But don't worry about it. Because we'll do our own thing. We're doing our own thing. It's okay. They're not gonna stop. I'm telling you right now. They're not gonna stop. That's why I'm not really celebrating this whole notion of no collusion. I know some people are they're excited about this. Look, he's vindicated. Yeah. But I knew he was always going to be vindicated. But that's not the point the point is that the investigations don't stop as you're going to cost us more time and money, but there's nothing to celebrate here. Don't be confused for a moment in thinking that this is over. I saw a friend of mine today. He said to me goes. Wow. Breaking news. No collusion. Look at that. The Senate cleared him. Yeah. So what? I mean to us it matters, obviously. But it doesn't matter to them. You really think honestly, do you think that for a second? They're gonna let Muller's little report slow them down. They've moved on they've moved on from Russian collusion. They've moved on now to finances the Trump organization his company his kids. That's what they're focusing on. Now. And it's all about trying to remove the president one way or another because they know they can't beat him at twenty twenty who are they going to beat them with which coop. Are they gonna nominate to beat them may can't they can't? And they know that. Now, the Gallup poll on economic confidence is amazing. It's huge. It's like seventy percent or something of American people feel like they're going to be in a better financial position this time next year. Well, this time next year is the election. And that means then by this time next year, we're going to be looking at a lot of people who don't really want somebody who's going to be elected and give them a seventy percent tax rate or go after airplanes or beef or any other kooky ideas that you've heard from the left. So the only chance they have is to get Trump to not run again. That's it. So they have see I think what they're really up to here. Here's what I think they're up to I think in the behind the scenes rooms of the of the house of representatives when they all collude together to try to stop this president from being the president. They duly elected president. I think what they're about is. Let's put enormous pressure on him and his kids, and maybe we can get him to back out of running again in twenty twenty. Maybe if we indict Don, jR, maybe that'll keep him from running for reelection. Now, there's an old saying, which is you can indict a ham sandwich. Obviously it's true because it's a sad. I mean things are true for a reason. Right. If these things become true for reason. The Russia collusion hoax. I had Greg Jarrett who will be here with us tomorrow. Greg Jarrett wrote a book about this? We did an event with him the Russia hoax. He wrote an entire book about it. Now in paperback, and we talked about how the Russia collusion was absolutely about making Hillary Clinton president covering up for her crimes. It's just all something that's been documented and talked about two years of investigations, the Senate committee having access to way more secretive information and Greg Jarrett did and they find no evidence of collusion. Which means mother won't either. Which is why the Democrats are already laying the seed. Well, what did you expect to find that? We're not really concerned and Adam Schiff already trashing the mother report before it's even out letting people know right now that don't expect much we're not concerned, and we're not going to stop doing our thing. Don't you worry about it? We are not going to slow down. There promising their base that they will go app is a hundred miles an hour and will not let off the gas for a moment. Their base demands impeachment. You heard it from that nutty member of congress earlier in the show who said that we're going to have impeachment. It's what the base demand the reason why Nadler's not saying it right out is because Jerrold Nadler knows he smart enough to know is he's been a politician for a long time either. It'd be a giant dope. But he's smart enough to know politically speaking that if the Democrats look like they are just about impeachment. They're going to lose. But deep down inside. That's all they're going for and they'll try every single level they possibly can. And they won't relent and soon Robert Muller is going to be just another Republican appointee. And what did you expect? Mark my words. Mark my words on this. I'm never wrong about this stuff. I'm not wrong about this either. I know this for tomorrow is Valentine's Day. Yes. It is. Guys, you're out of time here..

Robert Muller president Adam Schiff Jerrold Nadler Donald Trump Senate Russia Trump Putin Greg Jarrett House Democrats Congress Trump judiciary committee House Judiciary committee Robert Mueller house intelligence committee Mark national Security Council Barack Obama
"institution congress" Discussed on WCPT 820

WCPT 820

06:55 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on WCPT 820

"No one time to run out on us. Thanks for calling the Norman Goldman show. Thanks norman. Always good to talk to you. Quick question and a comment the question regarding the this judge in Texas, and the ACA if it was a piece an individual piece of legislation that had to be passing or to make that change the ACA that particular piece of legislation have been ruled unconstitutional. Instead of using that as an excuse to make the whole thing. You mean, the judge should have ruled that the law knocking out the penalty was unconstitutional. Okay. On what basis with the judge be doing that? Because here's the problem. I have with because congress and let let's use the term congress as an institution. Congress can always change. It's mind the congress that actually created ObamaCare and twenty ten that congress. No longer exists. They've been repealed and replaced by whoever's there now, many of them are still there. Of course, they're holdovers is a lot of people stay there a long time. But the point is is that as a as an incident of sovereignty as a matter of government being a government. They're allowed to change their mind. A congress in twenty ten can say, here's ObamaCare and is going to work. And then a congressman 2017 say we're going to change this one part. And then it's up to the courts to say what that means. And I think what this judge did missed was the judge has said look if they were going to repeal ObamaCare that would have repealed ObamaCare. It's this one piece, and that means they wanted to leave the rest there. I mean, that's that's a court bowing to congressional intent. This judge was so hell bent on being. Judicial activists and getting to the conclusion of declaring it unconstitutional be violated a whole lot of judicial principles ethics Chan I mean, it was a joke and was kind of a joke decision. A lot of people laughing at it. Oh, yeah. No doubt about that. I'm just saying that it's the unconstitutionality his three salt of this one small change, then it should be ruled against a change not the entire saying. Well, the what a normal court would do in this circumstance, right? And I think what the ultimate outcome would be a court would say aren't this big sprawling law with lots and lots of pieces, and the the latest congress took out this one part they took out the tax penalty. So there's still a mandate to buy insurance, but it's just not being enforced because there's no enforcement mechanism. Why is that unconstitutional? Congress is regulating interstate commerce health plans. I mean, I don't what what the supreme court was upset with him with Republicans were upset with back in the days, the ObamaCare law tried to force people to buy health insurance. That's what the supreme court said, you you congress don't have the constitutional authority to force people to buy health insurance. However. You do have the power to penalize them financially if they don't buy it. So I don't understand how taking away the penalty if they don't buy. It makes the whole thing on constitutional now that ObamaCare is up and running. They're regulating premiums. They're making again money making payments to to drug companies. I mean, if this if this isn't this they commerce, there ain't no such thing as an estate commerce. This is the ultimate example of interstate commerce giant health insurance market in any event. I think I think the judge should have said there's a several ability clause here, which means if one part is declared unconstitutional, that's the only part discipline constitutional. And that's what he should have done at which is I think what you're suggesting which is the penalty is out. So that's it. And would I mean, the several ability clauses there in every law, and it's there for this reason if one piece of this laws declared unconstitutional, then it can beat the court will sever it off. That's why it's called the several ability clause. The legislature writes it into congress or state legislature city council, they write it in its towards the end, it's always a standard clause in there. If a court of competent jurisdiction making almost recited from memory, if any court of competent jurisdiction declares any portion of this law unconstitutional for any reason that portion of the law and only that portion of law shall be unconstitutional. All other portions of this law shall remain in effect or words, very close to that. And judges this routine stuff. So I think this decision has like almost no chance of surviving. None. Right. And my my quick comment. If I may regarding the whole talk about impeachment and the the fantasy about Trump and Pence being simultaneously teaching putting Pelosi in a much more likely scenario, particularly because pencils up to his final eyebrows. In this whole thing is like to say on. And Trump would resign and put Ryan in the presidency before the democratic house can take over time running out on that one. It is. But it wouldn't surprise me. I think it's much more likely. I don't see Benedict. Don resigning anytime soon Bill, I just don't see. He's he's drunk on power. He's doing his business deals with you. And I aren't seeing and we're not gonna find out until the investigations. From Democrats announcing later is how much business he's done directly himself while in the White House, and how many billions of dollars he is gorge themselves with bell on the prediction business. But my suspicion is he's made a lot of money. I'll lot of money. I can already tell you the Z T E Chinese phone deal. He got a billion dollars to rescue Z T with the sanctions us about Chinese companies e TANF business Z T is spying for the Chinese government. Our own military wallet Z T phones on the base because the chips can be turned into spying chips. Our military doesn't trust Z T Benedict. Donald had him by the throat because they were. A violation of sanctions, and he was about to put them out of business. He had become put him out of business instead of the Chinese government put half a billion dollars to an Indonesian outside Jakarta golf resort. Trump branded resort Cheney's government half a billion directly and a Chinese Bank another half billion. And you know, they're not putting five hundred million dollars project without Chinese government say so at Benedict, I'll put out a tweet you can go look it up saying too, many Chinese jobs lost if we've put out DT, so he took his billion dollars. That's one deal deal that we know we know is good for nothing. Son was in India scamming the Griffin of this administration. I'm waiting to see all the investigations on that if you're on hold you're next right here. Where Justice is. Hey, thanks Bill in Las Vegas. I'm.

congress Chinese government Norman Goldman Benedict Texas ACA Bill India congressman Trump Chinese Bank White House Jakarta Las Vegas Cheney legislature Donald Z T
"institution congress" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

06:55 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"I don't want time to run out on us. Thanks for calling the Norman Goldman show. Thanks Norman, always good to talk to you. Quick question and a comment the question regarding the this judge in Texas, and the if it was a piece an individual piece of legislation that had to be passed in order to make that change to the ACA that particular piece of legislation have been ruled unconstitutional. Instead of using that as an excuse to make the whole thing. You mean, the judge should have ruled that the law knocking out the penalty was unconstitutional. Right. Okay. On what basis with the judge be doing? Because here's the problem that I have with because congress and let let's use the term congress as an institution. Congress can always change. It's mind the congress that actually created ObamaCare and twenty ten that congress. No longer exists. They've been repealed and replaced by whoever's there now, many of them are still there. Of course, they're holdovers is a lot of people stay there a long time. But the point is is that as a as an incident of sovereignty as a matter of government being a government. They're allowed to change their mind, a congress in two thousand ten can say, here's ObamaCare, and here's how it's going to work. And then a congressman 2017 could say we're going to change this one part. And then it's up to the courts to say what that means. And I think what this judge did missed was the judge said, look if they were going to repeal ObamaCare, they would have repeal ObamaCare, they took out this one piece, and that means they wanted to leave the rest there. Mean that's that's a court bowing to congressional intent. This judge was so hell bent on being a judicial activist and getting to the conclusion of declaring it unconstitutional me violated a whole lot of judicial principles ethics. Can I mean, it was a joke? Kind of a joke decision. A lot of people laughing at. Oh, yeah. No doubt about that. I'm just saying that it's the unconstitutionality is the result of this one small change, then it should be ruled against that change not the entire thing. Well, the what a normal court would do in this circumstance, right? And I think what the ultimate outcome would be a court would say aren't this big sprawling law with lots and lots of pieces, and the the latest congress took out this one part they took out the tax penalty. So there's still a mandate to buy insurance, but it's just not being enforced because there's no enforcement mechanism. Why is that unconstitutional? Congress is regulating interstate commerce health plans. I mean, I don't what what the supreme court was upset with what the Republicans were upset with back in the days, the ObamaCare law tried to force people to buy health insurance. That's what the supreme court said, you you congress don't have the constitutional authority to force people to buy health insurance. However. You do have the power to penalize them financially if they don't buy it. So I don't understand how taking away the penalty if they don't buy it makes the whole thing on constitutional now that ObamaCare is up and running. They're regulating premiums. They're make they're getting money and making payments to to drug companies mean if this if this isn't this they commerce three no since this is the the ultimate example of interstate commerce giant health insurance market in any event. I think I think the judge should have said there's a several ability clause here, which means if one part is declared unconstitutional, that's the only part that's constitutional. And that's what he should have done. Which is I think what you're suggesting which is the penalty is out. So that's it. And we're done. The several ability clauses there in every law. And it's there for this reason if one piece of this laws declared unconstitutional, then it can beat the court will sever it off. That's why it's called the several ability close the legislature writes it into the congress or state legislature city council, they write it in its towards the end, it's always a standard clause in there. If a court of competent jurisdiction making almost recited from memory, if any court of competent jurisdiction declares any portion of this law unconstitutional for any reason that portion of the law and only that portion of law shall be unconstitutional. All other portions of this law shall remain in effect or words, very close to that. And judges this routine stuff. So I think this decision has like almost no chance of surviving. None. Right. And my my other quick comment. If I may regarding the whole talk about impeachment and the fantasy about Trump and Pence being. Impeach inputting Pelosi in I think a much more likely scenario, particularly because pencils up to his eyebrows. In this whole thing is like to say on any Miller show Penn. And Trump would resign put Ryan in the presidency before the democratic house can take over time running out on that one. It is. But it wouldn't surprise me. I think it's much more likely. I don't see Benedict. Donald resigning anytime soon Bill. I just don't see. He's he's drunk on power. He's doing his business deals with you. And I aren't seeing and we're not gonna find out till the investigation's. From Democrats announcing later is how much business he's done directly himself while in the White House, and how many billions of dollars he has gorged himself with Bill on the prediction business. But my suspicion is he's made a lot of money. I'll lot of money. I can already tell you the Z T E Chinese phone deal. He got a billion dollars to rescue Z T E with the sanctions us about Chinese companies out of business. Z T is spying for the Chinese government. Our own military wallet Z T phones on the base because they the chips can be turned into spine chips. Our military doesn't trust Z T Benedict. Donald had him by the throat because they were. A violation of sanctions, and he was about to put them out of business yet to be could put him out of business. Instead, the Chinese government put half a billion dollars to an Indonesian outside Jakarta golf resort. Trump branded resort the Chinese government half a billion directly and a Chinese Bank another half billion. And you know, they're not putting five hundred million dollars project without Chinese government say so and Benedict. I'll put out a tweet you can go look it up saying too, many Chinese jobs lost if we put out DT, so he took his billion dollars. That's one deal deal that we know we know is good for nothing. Son was in India scamming, the gripping of this administration. I'm waiting to see all the investigations on that if you're on hold you're next right here. Where Justice is. Hey, thanks Bill in Las Vegas. I'm big.

congress Chinese government Bill Norman Goldman Benedict Trump Texas Donald India congressman ACA Chinese Bank Z T White House Pelosi Jakarta Miller Las Vegas
"institution congress" Discussed on KNSS

KNSS

13:09 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on KNSS

"Then the workers made in nineteen sixty eight and he refused McConnell. Senator McConnell speaker Ryan and others are sitting while they take cash campaign cash from various corporations and corporate executives impact. So that's why on the back of this book, George I have ten crisp indictments of congress based on a lot of information. And when you send this book to your Senate Representative, and you say, you look at those ten indictments, and you tell me in the letter Senator, my Senator, my Representative, you tell me what you. Your reaction is to this. I want you to see if you can rebut this. And you can't believe the power you will start having when you connect with your congress, and you build that citizens summons like sheriff citizen summons back to town meetings and to your own agenda, and then you'll find in that town meeting. We'll be liberals and conservatives they will be pushing for the kind of America that almost everybody wants and can get I I gotta tell you if I were running for political office. I'd use the back cover of this book is my agenda for the campaign. Yeah. I mean, it's a. When one of them is as a captive institution. Congress is a clear and present danger to our country feast on rock global corporate power is oblivious to various fateful degradations of life on the planet. I mean here we're having climate disruption climate devastation and the majority. Congress says what? Yeah, that's just the cycle every ten thousand years. I mean, it's like, you know, it's a level of recklessness. And ignorance that insults. The intelligence the American people we are not being led by people that represent the best in us. It's the worst that often goes to the congress. I mean, I see ignorance in the congress staggering ignorance, they even got rid of the technology assessment office because they didn't want to be told that a lot of the technologies are pushing like this missile ballistic missile defense system, which is a complete boondoggle. Even this society. Physicist said it's not gonna work and it hasn't worked. They spent about a hundred and eighty billion dollars on that. Oh my God. They spend fourteen billion dollars on this last year and the centers for disease control, which is designed to detect and head off global pandemics. It could destroy tens of millions of people. They get seven and a half billion dollars. We gotta get you behind something that we're pushing on this program Ralph, and that's trying to protect the power grid from either an x flare a solar flare from the sun or an EMP attack. That's the detonation of a nuke by a nation up in the atmosphere that would wipe out the power system to the United States. Yeah. Ted Koppel wrote a book on sure did too. Yep. We had him on the show. All they do shovel more tens of billions at the Pentagon got more money even asked for and they're retired generals and admirals that can tell us the incredible waste that's going on and the whole huge subsidies bailouts all that stuff could be squeezed out and the money coming back to help America and alert America and that grid thing. That's frightening. We China and Russia are embedded in our systems. We're embedded in their systems. If there's ever a war. They wouldn't have to have aircraft carriers are missiles, they could just push the button push the ball, the electrical grid and everything is involved with it would collapse. They say that if it is out for a year, which is conceivable three hundred million Americans die. That's that's almost everybody. Yeah. It's crazy. Let's go to our congress. It can turn this around the beauty of our system is that the smallest. Branch of government is the most powerful, and and we know their names five hundred and thirty five senators representatives, you know, when when I sent this book how the rats reform the congress to people on Capitol Hill, this disgusting book, it's a revolting book because it starts out with the rats in the toilet bowl. And I say, really. The the congress. The congressional majorities are disgusting, and they're revolting, and they better shape up, and we're going to get the people back home to do it. And who better than the midnight riders the midnight. You got it. We'll do it. And we'll help you first time caller west of the Mississippi we go let us go to not west of the Mississippi. It's east of the Mississippi. Let's go to S anonymously high s screenings. Yes, my communists. My question and comment. If people were to take that. My question is if people were to take your money the money out of the banking system, the car thinking system, not put it back in to congress listens. And keep it on the local level. What it how fast would America be fixed? You mean like take all the cash out? Take all your cash out take it all out. Well, you know, what I don't know if you've ever been to a Bank, but try to get your cash, they don't have enough money in the Bank. They don't have it Ralph. I think you know, the state governments in the city government's George. They have hundreds of billions of dollars of tax money. They let Wall Street control and run into fees are staggering. So there's an effort now called the public banking effort. It doesn't compete with the commercial banks. It just says look if California or New York have tens of billions of dollars pension money working money have their own banks. They'll save the taxpayer enormous amount of money, and it'd be much more accountable, and you won't have to be bailed out and one of the models is the Bank of North Dakota. Here you have Republican North Dakota. It's had for a hundred years the Bank of North Dakota. And when the banks collapsed in two thousand eight nine on Wall Street the Bank in North Dakota didn't feel anything they were running prudently safely. They give student loans. They give loans to small business. And to farmers. There's never been a scandal. So it's a public banking movement in this country. So that your tax dollars that are already in the custody of cities states counties can be run by public banks. That are accountable to you not by Wall Street banks with their staggering fees. Do you have a report card for any of the congressional folks on the rats were formed, congress dot org website? No. But we did an easy link to the various citizen groups have. And that's another thing, by the way, most members of congress websites. They don't put their voting record on tell can you imagine that. And I don't even think right. I don't even think they read anything they vote on. I think they have some congressional staff person. Who said, yeah, I saw it. I read it and do the I don't think the congresspeople read it they walk into the Senate floor, and they got some guy putting the thumb down or some up. Yes, right. No. Yes. The lobbyists swarming. So the citizens pour into congress in this book, and it's just a wonderful sight. I think I think there's some interest in Hollywood in this book that would be a great movie Willard, the raptors the lead yet get Willard the rat as the lead in the movie. Yeah. Well, there's a very mysterious ending to this book. It's only a hundred and seventy pages very readable, very mysterious ending to this book. And it's it's just right for a nice movie that could really excite people because I don't think people like to go through life, powerless, having to swallow their grievances. They're paying their anguish when there's no need for them to have this grievance pain and anguish. I mean, look at congress is is ignoring three and a half billion dollars. Excuse me. This is an amazing thing Congress's acknowledging three hundred fifty billion dollars of computerized billing fraud and healthcare industry who says so the government accountability office, a congress and the leading expert the applied mathematician, Malcolm Sparrow at Harvard University. He says that's the most conservative, but that's half the military budget three hundred fifty billion dollars down the drain, and congress doesn't even have a hearing on it. Because they're taking money from the health insurance companies from the drug companies, right various chains. And then they're not even looking at this one of the major preventable causes of death Johns. Hopkins University school of medicine study five thousand Americans die every week due to preventable problems in hospitals. Yup. It's outrageous hospital induced infections malpractice. I mean, that's quarter million people in nine eleven quarter million people a year for crying out loud. How many advocacy groups have you started or help start since you've been doing this? Oh, well, over one hundred example, the student public interest groups like California Burg mass per Michigan. Perc we started that we started. Consumer upstart consumer watchdog, we started at center for auto safety pension rights center, Public Citizen, fair tests, you know, expose the racket of the standardized tests that students have to take we we've started groups all over the country and most of them are thriving. And we would have star started thousands of them, George, but the supreme court and the six three decision ruled in favor Pacific Gas and electric did didn't want to carry an insert at no cost to itself and its monthly Bill in. Inviting people to band together, a nonprofit consumer action groups, so they have a seat at the table, and that would have been one for Bank customers insurance customers motor vehicle department people. And so that was a big blow in nineteen eighty six. I think that came down, and it basically said the requirement the Pacific Gas electric put an insert inviting people to join their own utility consumer group. Listen to this violated the first amendment right of this corporate monopoly to stay silent. And not be pressured to rebut what's on the insert. How about that? I love these corporations are getting constitutional rights larger than the rights of real human beings. And that's why the corporate person had movement is exciting. And that's part of the book. That's part of the changes that are made in congress that only human beings should have these constitutional rights and corporation. Should be our servants, not our masters their artificial entities. I'm not talking about people in corporations the corporation itself. Remember, the corporate the constitution starts with we the people. The preemptive doesn't start we the congress doesn't start we the corporation. So we have the sovereign party power. Which is a pretty good start right to take back our country, train, sovereign power and the greatest wealth in our country. George is owned by the people, but controlled by corporations, for example, the public lands. The public airwaves trillions of dollars a pension funds owned by the people all kinds of government research and development tax money owned by the people, but we've let the corporations take control of what we own and this. I think it's a very conservative movement to say if we own these assets, we darn sure should have some control over how they're used and to prevent their abuse. And being turned against us. We're often the sixties you had a lot of young people behind you. Do you still have that today? Yeah. If they don't they're not called Nader's raiders. But the reason why you even have to ask that question is because the mass media excludes the progressive citizen groups in Washington and around the country right helped improve this country so wonderfully in the last seventy years, we are we used to get on the NBC CBS ABC. We used to get into New York Times. Washington Post doesn't happen anymore. They all wanna white right features and get Hewlett surprises. And then drop the subject after they write to feature in the newspaper magazine. So we do have a lot of young people. They always say we want to improve our country and world. How do we do it? That's what this book is about you start with controlling the congress. That's what that's what the book how the rats reformed. The congress is about you. Go to rats reform, congress dot org. You'll see how you can build your power.

congress America George North Dakota Bank Senate Senator McConnell Pacific Gas Mississippi Ted Koppel Public Citizen United States California Washington Post New York Times Representative Ralph
"institution congress" Discussed on News Radio 920 AM

News Radio 920 AM

04:53 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on News Radio 920 AM

"Senator McConnell speaker Ryan and others are sitting while they take cash campaign cash from various corporations and corporate executives impact. So that's why on the back of this book, George I have ten crisp indictments of congress based on a lot of information. And when you send this book to your Senate Representative, and you say, you look at those ten indictments, and you tell me in the letter Senator, my Senator, my Representative, you tell me what you. Your reaction is to this. I want you to see if you can rebut this. And you can't believe the power you will start having when you connect with your congress, and you build that says citizens summons like sheriff citizen summons back to town meetings and to your own agenda, and then you'll find the in that town meeting, we'll be liberals and conservatives they will be pushing for the kind of America that almost everybody wants and can get I I gotta tell you if I were running for political office. I'd use the back cover of this book is my agenda for the campaign. Yeah. I mean, it's a. When one of them is as a captive institution. Congress is a clear and present danger to our country it feasts on rock global corporate power, oblivious to various fateful degradations of life on the planet. I mean here we're having climate disruption climate devastation and the majority. Congress says what? Yeah, that's just the cycle. You know, every ten thousand years. I mean, it's like, you know, it's a level of recklessness in ignorance that insults. The intelligence the American people we are not being led by people that represent the best in us. It's the worst often goes to the congress. I mean, I see ignorance in the congress staggering ignorance, they even got rid of the technology assessment office because they didn't want to be told that a lot of the technologies are pushing like dismiss a ballistic missile defense system, which is a complete boondoggle. Even this. Society of physicists said it's not gonna work and it hasn't worked. They spent about one hundred and eighty billion dollars on that. Oh my God. They spend fourteen billion dollars on this last year and the centers for disease control, which is designed to detect and head off global pandemics could destroy tens of millions of people. They get seven and a half billion dollars. We gotta get you behind something that we're pushing on this program Ralph, and that's trying to protect the power grid from either an x flare a solar flare from the sun or an EMP attack. That's the detonation of a nuke by a nation up in the atmosphere that would wipe out the power system to the United States. Yeah. Ted Koppel wrote a book on did too. Yep. We had him on the show for all. They do shovel more tens of billions. They Pentagon got more money even asked for and you're retired generals. Nat Rosa can tell us the incredible waste that's going on. And the huge subsidies bailouts all that stuff could be squeezed out and the money coming back to help America and alert America in that grid thing. That's frightening, China and Russia are embedded in our systems. We're embedded in their systems. If there's ever a war. They wouldn't have to have aircraft carriers are missiles, they could just push the button push the ball of the electrical grid in everything is involved with it would collapse they say that if it is out for a year, which is conceivable three hundred million Americans die. That's almost everybody. Yeah. It's crazy. Let's go to our congress. It can turn this around the beauty of our system is that the smallest. Branch of government is the most powerful. And and we know their names five hundred and thirty five senators and representatives, you know, when when I sent this book, how the rats reform the congress to people on Capitol Hill, this disgusting book, it's a revolting book because it starts out with the rats in the toilet bowl. And I say really think the the congress. The congressional majorities are disgusting, and they're revolting, and they better shape up, and we're going to get the people back home to do it. And who better than the midnight writers, the midnight. You've got it. We'll do it. And we'll help you first time caller west of the Mississippi we go let us go to west of the Mississippi. It's east of the Mississippi. Let's go to S anonymously high s readings. Yes, my question and comment. People are to take them questions. If people were to take your money the money out of.

congress Ted Koppel Mississippi America Senator McConnell George Senator Representative Senate United States Nat Rosa Ryan Pentagon Ralph China Russia fourteen billion dollars eighty billion dollars
"institution congress" Discussed on Newsradio 970 WFLA

Newsradio 970 WFLA

12:34 min | 1 year ago

"institution congress" Discussed on Newsradio 970 WFLA

"Noory with you here. Ralph back in nineteen sixty five if you had capabilities of Email, social networking and things like that. Would you have changed your approach at all? No, I think it was more effective person to person going up to the Senate and house connecting with good professional staff. Those days they had staff were very professional. Now, they have k street lobbyists who up there for a few years representing a nice conflict of interest. And then you go back for higher paying jobs with these corporate lobbies, so Mike percha growth. Great book when the Senate worked for us back in the nineteen sixties and seventies. And we got all this wonderful legislation that has saved so much prevented disease and better workplace safety auto, safety and cleaner air and water. So I I think that the Email the social media it tells you what's going on. You know, what meetings? They are. It's unparalleled in getting information. But there's nothing like person to person because you can't get people to turn out. We sent emails. Events to tens of thousands of people, and you're lucky if you get ten people just so overloaded, so we believe in telephone calls letters person to person meetings. That's what really gets things done. Good point. Let's take some calls with your off. Let's go to David truck. Driving in Arizona talked about our night people. Hi, david. Go ahead. I Don George listener. Thank you, sir. Ralph. As the reason I'm calling it study that you mentioned person to person connection. Not actually the solves for this. If we were to pay into our cap space. Everybody has a burden your income the amount of money you make the amount of your burden. Let you write off and what you exempt yourself from where you are. But if we take into our tax base liking 4._0._1._K plan where you would actually invest in America, you believe that now those who would be the sharks swimming in the water. Do our our money's would be on his next year. But in the process of making congress and the house works for us. L remand from a minimum wage worker to the top earners votes. There dollar not makes America change you want to vote for aids research, you can put your money in aids research, you wanna vote for elderly care you can vote for elderly care, but your tax burden is paid by your heart. Which is what the vote was really special to me. That's kind of novel. What do you think Ralph? Well, the computer age you can do it much easier. You know in terms of sending your tax dollars for different functions and changes in the old days. It would be an unbelievable costly saying, but it can be done. I mean, there are people who. Conscientious objectors, they don't want to send money to a bloated military budget with all the corruption of the defense contractors. They want to send money for health care or they want to send money to preserve the air and water or to rebuild our schools. So it's it's it's an interesting point that he's making, but he mentioned minimum wage. That's another bad thing. Congress stunned. They've sat on seven dollars and twenty five percent minimum. Seven dollars and a quarter. An hour is the minimum wage nobody can live on that. And they refuse to raise some some members of congress want to raise it. But the congressional majorities have been sitting on the members of congress make a hundred dollars an hour. That's if they work week, but they usually come in with a locked in pension two hundred dollars an hour. Terrific pension life insurance terrific health insurance. Even some red subsidy fuss off kinds of freebies. That's given them and they're sitting on thirty million Americans who work every day and are making less in inflation adjusted dollars. Then the workers made nineteen sixty eight and he refused McConnell. Senator McConnell speaker Ryan and others are sitting while they take cash campaign cash from various corporations and corporate executives impact. So that's why on the back of this book, George. I have ten crisp indictments of congress based on a lot of information. And when you send this book to your Senate Representative, and you say, you look at those ten indictments, and you tell me in the letter Senator my Senator my Representative, you tell me what your reaction is to this. I want you to see if you can rebut this. And you can't believe the power you will start having when you connect with your congress, and you build that citizens summons like a sheriff citizen summons back to town meetings and to your own agenda, and then you'll find the in that town meeting, we'll be liberals and conservatives they will be pushing for the kind of America that almost everybody wants and can get I I gotta tell you if I were running for political office. I'd use the back cover of this book is my agenda for the campaign. Yeah. I mean, it's a one one of them is as a captive institution. Congress is a clear and present. Danger to our country it feast on rock global corporate power, and is oblivious to various fateful degradations of life the planet. I mean here we're having climate disruption climate devastation and the majority. Congress says what? Yeah, that's just the cycle. You know, every ten thousand years. I mean, it's like, you know, it's it's a level of recklessness in ignorance that insults. The intelligence of the American people we are not being led by people that represent the best in us. It's the worst then often goes to the congress. I mean, I see ignorance in the congress staggering ignorance, they even got rid of the technology assessment office because they didn't want to be told that a lot of the technologies are pushing like missile ballistic missile defense system, which is a complete boondoggle. Even the society of physicists said it's not gonna work and it hasn't worked. They spent about one hundred and eighty. Billion dollars on that. Oh my God. They spend fourteen billion dollars on this last year and the centers for disease control, which is designed to detect and head off global pandemics. It could destroy tens of millions of people. They get seven and a half billion dollars. We gotta get you behind something that we're pushing on this program Ralph, and that's trying to protect the power grid from either an x flare a solar flare from the sun or an EMP attack. That's the detonation of a nuke by nation up in the atmosphere that would wipe out the power system to the United States. Yeah. Ted Koppel wrote a book on did too. Yep. We had him on the show. All they do shovel more tens of billions Pentagon got more money even asked for and they're retired generals and admirals. It can tell us the incredible waste that's going on. And the huge subsidies bailouts all that stuff could be squeezed out and the money coming back to help America and alert America and that grid thing. That's frightening. China and Russia are embedded in our systems. We're embedded in their systems. If there's ever a war. They wouldn't have to have aircraft carriers are missiles, they could just push the button push the button, the electric grid and everything is involved with it would collapse say say that if it is out for a year, which is conceivable three hundred million Americans die. That's that's almost everybody. Yeah. It's crazy. Let's go to our congress. It can turn this around the beauty of our system is that the smallest branch of government is the most powerful. And and we know their names five hundred and thirty five senators and representatives, you know, when when I sent this book, how the rats reform the congress to people on Capitol Hill, this disgusting book, it's a revolting book because it starts out with the rats in the toilet bowl. And I say, really. I think the congress. The congressional majorities are disgusting, and they're revolting, and they better shape up, and we're going to get the people back home to do it. And who better than the midnight writers, the midnight. You got it. We'll do it. And we'll help you first time caller west of the Mississippi we go let us go to not west of the Mississippi. It's east of the Mississippi. Let's go to S anonymously high s rinks. Yes. My I have a question and a comment. If people were to take my question is if people were to take your money the money out of the banking system, the car banking system, not put it back into congress listens. And keep it on the local level. What it how fast would America be fixed? You mean like take all the cash out? Take all your cash out take it all out. What do you think? Well, you know, what I don't know if you've ever been to a Bank, but try to get your cash, they don't have enough money in the Bank. They don't have it breath. I think you know, the the state governments in the city government's George. They have hundreds of billions of dollars of tax money that they let Wall Street control and run and the fees are staggering. So there's an effort now called the public banking effort. It doesn't compete with the commercial banks. It just says look if California or New York have tens of billions of dollars pension money working money have their own banks. They'll save the taxpayer enormous amount of money, and it'd be much more accountable, and you won't have to be bailed out and one of the models is the Bank of North Dakota. Here you have Republican North Dakota. It's had for a hundred years the Bank of North Dakota. And when the banks collapsed in two thousand eight nine on Wall Street the Bank in North Dakota didn't feel anything they were running prudently safely. They give student loans. They give loans to small business. And to farmers. There's never been a scandal. So it's a public banking movement in this country. So that your tax dollars that are already in the custody of cities states counties can be run by public banks. That are accountable to you not by Wall Street banks with their staggering fees. Do you have a report card for any of the congressional folks on the rats were formed, congress dot org website? No. But we an easy link to the various citizen groups that have it. That's another thing, by the way, most members of congress websites. They don't put their voting record on. Can you imagine that? And I don't even think right. I don't even think they read anything they vote on. I think they have some congressional staff person. Who said, yeah, I saw it. I read it and do the I don't think the congresspeople read it they walk into the Senate floor, and they got some guy putting the thumb down or some up. Yes. Right. No, yes. The lobbyists swarming. So the citizens pour into congress in this book, and it's just a wonderful sight. I think I think there's some interest in Hollywood in this book that would be a great movie Willard the rat yet get Willard the rat as the lead in the movie. Yeah. Well, there's a very mysterious ending to this book. It's only one hundred seventy pages very readable, very mysterious ending to this book. And it's just right for a nice movie that could really excite people because I don't think people like to go through life, powerless, having to swallow their grievances. They're paying their anguish when there's no need for them to have this grievance pain and anguish. I mean, look at congress is is is ignoring three and a half billion dollars. Excuse me. This is an.

congress America Ralph Senate Bank Don George Mike percha North Dakota Arizona Mississippi Senator McConnell David truck Ted Koppel congressional staff United States
"institution congress" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

04:20 min | 2 years ago

"institution congress" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Thousand nine one chris in albuquerque haya chris crispy norm what what how you doing i'm okay what's on your mind hey shantytown i'm in los angeles okay what kind of recourse do i don't i really don't understand how mcconnell able to stall out the the appointment of of miracle orland i don't allow me dance your question allow me to answer your question with a question which will answer the question who's gonna force them to do it question is your question is how can mitch mcconnell hold up a supreme court nomination from president obama and my question back which answers the question is who's going to make him the answer is nobody because the chris chris allow me did you just presented a wonderful teachable moment and please understand i'm just using it as a diving board to allow me to use you as a diamond diving board i think i think that a lot of the people who refused to support hillary and vote for hillary in november twenty sixteen did so because they did that they didn't see the connection between a vote and the various consequences that come from the vote and i think it's because they don't understand how our system works i'm trying to be charitable i'm not saying it's everybody there were a portion of people said oh i know exactly how awful donald trump's gonna be and i want that to happen i wanna inflict pain on people because i want them to come back to they'll they'll figure out how awful the republicans are me for those people okay great i don't want to hear any complaints about how bad things are that's what you wanted but i think there's a group of people a separate group of people they think each action is an independent discrete non connected to anything else action and they can simply vote a out of protest or rage or shortterm anger and not realize what that entails what the implications of that are so we our system does not have a king there is no third party referee there's no judge that has the power to compel people to obey what they're supposed to do our system was set up in such a way that each of the three branches of government executive headed by the president legislative split into two house and senate but that's legislative branch and then the courts which is the judicial branch is your three branches executive legislative judicial and each one of them has been given vast amounts of discretion and that's where we come in because we need to understand that the presidency as an institution holds tremendous power and that power comes from discretion the ability to do certain things and not do other things and if you think i'm kidding look at the contrast between obama and trump and you'll see how they have lots of discretion to do all kinds of things obama used his discretion to do dacca trump used his discretion babies out of their mother's arms same presidency same laws same everything that's the kind of wide latitude that's invested in these institutions congress the two houses it says right in the constitution they make up their own rules and so the senate made up a filibuster rule and there ain't no third party to say you can't do that the courts have their own jurisdiction to and and they're very jealous of and they say congress you stay away from us presidency you stay away from us and we'll try and respect you the idea is we are in a representative system we delegate great power and great discretion over that power to the various people we choose to represent us these are extraordinarily consequential decisions especially with regard to the courts because the supreme court all the federal judges beneath the supreme court are there for life and you can't reduce their pay you can only impeach him if you want to get rid of them just like with the president and good luck getting getting two thirds of the senate to do that and.

chris los angeles albuquerque
"institution congress" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

Progressive Talk 1350 AM

04:20 min | 2 years ago

"institution congress" Discussed on Progressive Talk 1350 AM

"Thousand one chris in albuquerque chris chris hey norm how you doing i'm okay what's on your mind hey comma sasayama in town i'm in los angeles oh okay what kind of recourse do i don't i really don't understand how is mcconnell able to stall out the the appointment of of miracle orland i don't i allow me to answer your question allow me to answer your question with a question which will answer the question who's going to force them to do it your question is your question is how can mitch mcconnell hold up a supreme court nomination from president obama and my question back which answers the question is who's gonna make him the answer is nobody because the chris chris allow me did you just presented a wonderful teachable moment and please understand i'm just using as a diving board to allow me to use you as a dime diving board i think i think that a lot of the people who refused to support hillary and vote for hillary in november twenty sixteen did so because they did that they didn't see the connection between a vote and the various consequences that come from the vote and i think it's because they don't understand how our system works i'm trying to be charitable i'm not saying it's everybody there were a portion of people said oh i know exactly how awful donald trump's going to be and i want that to happen i want to inflict pain on people because i want them to come back to they'll they'll figure out how awful the republicans are meat for those people okay great i don't want to hear any complaints about how bad things are that's what you wanted but i think there's a group of people a separate group of people they think each action is an independent discrete non connected to anything else action and they can simply vote a out of protest or rage or shortterm anger and not realize what that entails what the implications of that are so we our system does not have a king there is no third party referee there's no judge that has the power to compel people to obey what they're supposed to do our system was set up in such a way that each of the three branches of government executive headed by the president legislative split into two house and senate but that's the legislative branch and then the courts which is the judicial branch is your three branches executive legislative judicial and each one of them has been given vast amounts of discretion and that's where we come in because we need to understand that the presidency as an institution holds tremendous power and that power comes from discretion the ability to do certain things and not do other things and if you think i'm kidding look at the contrast between obama and trump and you'll see how they have lots of discretion to do all kinds of things obama used his discretion to do up trump used his discretion to rip babies out of their mother's arms same presidency same laws same everything that's the kind of wide latitude that's invested in these institutions congress the two houses it says right in the constitution they make up their own rules and so the senate made up a filibuster rule and there ain't no third party to say you can't do that the courts have their own jurisdiction to and and they're very jealous of and they say congress you stay away from us presidency you stay away from us and we'll try and respect you the idea is we are in a representative system we delegate great power and great discretion over that power to the various people we choose to represent us these are extraordinarily consequential decisions especially with regard to the courts because the supreme court at all the federal judges beneath the supreme court are there for life and you can't reduce their pay you can only impeach him if you want to get rid of just like with the president and good luck getting getting two thirds of the senate to do that and.

los angeles albuquerque chris chris
"institution congress" Discussed on News Talk 1130 WISN

News Talk 1130 WISN

02:28 min | 2 years ago

"institution congress" Discussed on News Talk 1130 WISN

"Kendall investigations are is an excuse by pharma justice not turn over to congress and i think that's completely backwards i think particularly in these political investigations the first priority is the public right to know and it is congressional investigations that is our highest priority is buying this information out so the public knows what's pulling off the government within these agencies so areas that we've been frustrated by the third one is whistle blowers do not believe they're going to be protected by congress because this is going to be some member of congress who who reveals information leaks and so what's as jelly more more prone to going to press because the press actually does pick their identity judith miller went to jail to protect your source so we had the last in the last organization last institution congress getting information the criminal investi skaters i as they got federal grand juries they can panel the press gets for us and so the organization that is primarily there to make this information public has the least access to get information and the and by the time the press it's pre spun you know i i read just a couple of days ago some some peop unnamed folks by the journalists who are writing the story i saw this at the daily caller who were in the fbi wanting explicit whistle blower protection they want to come and testify testify before committees like yours or have conversations but they're they're fearing exactly what you described that their careers you'll be ruined they will be exposed their families and their families careers could be potentially put at risk and so they're saying unless we clad protections we're keeping our mouths shut here that's a problem because when you when you actually fear telling the truth because the truth might result in in an entire apparatus of the government coming down on you that's not what america's supposed to be about well we we saw the same thing in benghazi i names i i knew who some of these people were but they were not come before congress because they signed nba's the obamas racial not relieved them of those m nda's and so they came forward and spoke they lose a security chris they lose their ability to do the job that could provide for their family with regard to frustrating from my standpoint regarding.

congress judith miller america benghazi nba Kendall fbi
"institution congress" Discussed on The Brookings Cafeteria

The Brookings Cafeteria

02:00 min | 2 years ago

"institution congress" Discussed on The Brookings Cafeteria

"My name is molly reynolds i am a fellow in the governance studies program at the brookings institution congresses and up too much in washington this week because both chambers are on recess and members are back in their states and districts when some cases on international junkets but even when they returned to the capital and a few weeks don't expect much legislation to be headed from congress to the president over the next several months before breaking for recess congress did complete work on a one point three trillion dollar spending bill that allocates funds for various discretionary programs including the department of defense scientific research cater twelve education and our mental programs and many others the overall amount of money available for these programs set when congress reached a two year budget deal in february and then congress spent six weeks working to fill in the details of where exactly that money would go the spending bill had to survive opposition from some house republicans with only about sixty percent of the republican conference in that chamber voting in favor of it also had to overcome a last minute surprise veto threat from president trump who was unhappy with the levels of funding provided in the bill for construction of a border wall and with restrictions placed on how that money is appropriated can be used the omnibus will deliver needed federal funding to programs which americans rely and in many cases at levels above those originally requested by president trump finishing the appropriations process five months past the start of the fiscal year isn't necessarily something to write home about but i'm gonna spending bill likely to be the most consequential piece of legislation congress gets done for the next several months in early march house majority leader kevin mccarthy laid out some of what he sees as the chamber's agenda for the next several months several of the items on it are what we consider messaging bills or measure supported by one party and opposed by the other party that aren't expected to become law these include a balanced budget amendment to the constitution and reforms the.

brookings institution washington congress president trump molly reynolds kevin mccarthy three trillion dollar sixty percent five months six weeks two year
"institution congress" Discussed on KQED Radio

KQED Radio

02:13 min | 2 years ago

"institution congress" Discussed on KQED Radio

"Challenges with us doing more is hit on the head by a tweet from bob who writes an important reason that democracy is increasingly perceived as relevant in this country is that are most important democratic institution congress is seen as a creature of powerful interests not the voice of the people i wonder yasser if this is kind of the core of the problem congress by all measures does not work and i can empathize with the idea that someone would look at congress and say you know what if that's the best of what's around burn it down hand it to somebody else who's just going to shake up the whole system well as in many things i think populist tend to be a riot in parts of analysis at but not as our investigations i'm so to look at absolutely the problem with the unresponsiveness of our system and particularly of congress to have us off most americans they real you see that new gun control debate right now but he but also in things like tax reform and we economic policies we pursue this far too much money in our politics the revolving door between lobbyists and legislators is a huge problem much of a political class has become an elite apart that speaks more to lobbyists and to to to to influential people then when to their constituents and i absolutely understand why people are angry about that there there are things that we can actually do we can pass campaign finance reform we can push to fan more money into the institution of congress of and actually pay staffers decently and retain people who have expertise rather than having to go to lobbyists to have laws written forum but but all of those things have done through congress and if you have to go through congress to improve congress did you see it's kind of a circular problem it's it's it seems like an easier way to go and i'm trying to think from the perspective of someone who is a populist it seems like an easier way to go to storm the gates and to scare congress into changing instead of to go through the process and say please mr congressman please madam senator make this better it just seems easier and frankly more satisfying to.

bob congress unresponsiveness senator congressman