Obviously without control of the Senate, Trump would probably have been impeached. And if he hadn't lost control of Congress, then the impeachment then it would never have got that far in the first place. Congress also controls the purse strings.Mr Mike wrote:Which checks and balances do you think are most under threat under a Trump second term? Rinks assumed control of both houses in his scenario, are you working off the same assumption or talking with just the Presidency and the Senate?Anonymous. wrote:The worst thing about the last three years is they show just how much Trump could rip through the "checks and balances" if he gets another 4 years.Mr Mike wrote:Little heavy on the eggs there, but one of the good things about the last three years is a more robust (and very overdue) discussion about the extent and nature of Article 2 powers and reassessing things like the 2001 AUMF.Rinkals wrote:My point is that Trump has shown that the checks-and-balances are completely ineffectual and the President can basically do what he likes.
I see Putins constitutional reform to let him basically be president for as long as the fuck he wants has gone swimmingly
The judiciary is just a trip down the steps for Justice Ginsberg from being sorted, too.