Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » If President Hillary Clinton were running the country by EXECUTIVE ORDER the GOP would be impeaching/investigating. Where are the Dems?
RosieG

If President Hillary Clinton were running the country by EXECUTIVE ORDER the GOP would be impeaching/investigating. Where are the Dems?

The GOP is thrilled as he** to let The Donald run the table. Ignore the Constitution. LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE. Take us  back to the bad old days. They don't give a rat's  a** because horrible as he is he is THEIR GUY and my oh my they will do whatever they hafta to do to keep him afloat. Even if it kills us. Which it will.

Posted - January 25, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • 2500
    And why do you think that impeachment proceedings would have started in the House if Hil-LIAR-y had won the election? They didn't take any action like that against Obama. And unlike with Trump (who has not yet violated his oath) there was probably plenty of opportunity.
      January 25, 2017 1:27 PM MST
    5

  • I wouldn't be knocking Trump on executive orders. Obama ran much of his agenda into law through executive orders.
      January 25, 2017 1:29 PM MST
    6

  • 372
    BECAUSE THE REPUBS REFUSED TO DO A SINGLE THING TO WORK WITH OBAMA. IT WAS THEIR OFT-STATED STRATEGY TO PUT THE WELFARE OF THE COUNTRY SECOND TO NON-COOPERATION WITH THE PRESIDENT. 

    TRUMP HAS BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS BEHIND HIM !!!!!!!!!I hope you casn see the difference.
      January 25, 2017 1:48 PM MST
    3

  • 2500
    Obama had both the House and the Senate behind him too during his first term. That's how the PPACA was forced down our collective throats. 
      January 25, 2017 2:16 PM MST
    3

  • 17736

    Those facts you got there are of the alternative  type. 
      January 25, 2017 7:11 PM MST
    2

  • 19937
    Obama did not sign the most executive orders by far.  Reagan signed 381, GW Bush signed 291, Obama signed 275.  FDR signed the absolute most - 3,522, but he was a war president and had longer than 8 years in office. 
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_executive_orders
      January 26, 2017 2:17 PM MST
    1

  • 113301
    Because Obama was being STONEWALLED by a Republican Senate and Republican congress. As you very well know. The Donald has it made. His Senate/House both have Republican Majorities. He can steamroll all legislation through them. C'mon Corey. Wake up and smell the stink of The Donald and his minions. Thank you for your reply and Happy Friday.
      January 27, 2017 4:10 AM MST
    0

  • 6988
    You know that loud buzzer they use on 'The Price is Right' when a contestant fails?  I gotta use that now for your question ------- sorry Rosie.
      January 25, 2017 1:37 PM MST
    8

  • 113301
    No worries sweetie. As you know bh I ask questions for me not thee or anyone else. If you like them fine. If you don't that's just as fine with me. No problemo!  As long as you remain civil which you always are we're good! Thank you for your reply and Happy Friday! :)
      January 27, 2017 4:11 AM MST
    1

  • 7831
    The Democrats don't have the majority anywhere. So, they are the Republicans b**ches.
      January 25, 2017 1:39 PM MST
    4

  • 113301
     Ya know I just laughed out loud and I feel lousy about it. I can't argue with you Zack. I also can't lie to you. Thank you for your reply and Happy Friday! :)
      January 27, 2017 4:12 AM MST
    1

  • Yeah right, Obama never used executive orders.  According to by years I saw it was 249 he issued during his terms and amazingly enough no impeachment proceedings took place.  So this question just does not wash at all. .
      January 25, 2017 1:46 PM MST
    1

  • 2500
    ALL Presidents use Executive Orders. And that included Obama. That's one of the tools that they need to do the job, to enforce the laws that Congress has passed. It's when those Orders are used to Legislate instead of Execute existing laws that it becomes a problem. And just take a look at how many of Obama's "EO's" were stopped buy The Supremes because he did not have the force of law behind the orders that he issued. 
      January 25, 2017 2:22 PM MST
    1

  • 113301
    Obama was STONEWALLED by a Republican Majority Senate and a Republican Majority House of Representatives. The Donald has a majority rule in both.  Now you KNOW that. Why are you playing dumb?  I know you aren't dumb. I don't get it. You know full well the situations are not remotely analogous or comparable. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.You can do better than this. Thank you for your reply Swoop and Happy Friday.
      January 27, 2017 4:15 AM MST
    0

  • 2327
    "If" is the most important part of your question, Rosie. I doubt she's be doing much of anything "if" she were in office. 
      January 25, 2017 2:43 PM MST
    0

  • A quick question from a non American... executive orders i gather from the above that they can be used to make laws that both houses have rejected? ... is that right?
      January 25, 2017 2:49 PM MST
    0

  • 3191
    They do carry the force of law.  They must cite under what authority the president is using the order, such as the Constitution or a specific law.  Though it is not likely, it is possible for them to be struck down if it is deemed the president overstepped the boundary of their powers.

    Edit:  Spelling This post was edited by Bozette at January 26, 2017 2:08 PM MST
      January 25, 2017 3:02 PM MST
    1

  • Thanks Bozette :)
      January 25, 2017 3:07 PM MST
    0

  • 3191
    Most welcome.  :)
      January 25, 2017 3:10 PM MST
    0

  • 3191
    All presidents have used Executive Orders and all recent ones have issued some their first day in office.  Presidential directives are not limited to Executive Orders and may be know under a wide variety of titles and any president many add to that list.  Some, such as EOs are numbered and required to be published, others do not, while yet others (Military and National Security, for example) may be classified.  
      January 25, 2017 2:58 PM MST
    2

  • Nice clearing up on its use and how.
      January 25, 2017 3:01 PM MST
    1

  • 3191
    Thank you.
      January 25, 2017 3:03 PM MST
    0

  • 17736
    Bozette, only an Executive Order carries the legal weight of an Executive Order.  It is not known by any other name.  There are directives, recommendations, and published opinions but they are not Executive Orders and not considered law.  

      January 25, 2017 7:16 PM MST
    0

  • 3191
    I do not believe I specified that all carried the force of law, Thrifty.  The only place I specifically addressed the force of law was in my response to Ozgirl which was specifically about "Executive Orders".  

    My post that you responded to does not address it at all, and was in response to Rosie's post about "running the country" by Executive Order.  EOs and other presidential directives is precisely how presidents do so, which is what we elect them to do.

    As far as which carry the force of law, other than that it must be published, I can find no statute that specifies a published directive be called an "Executive Order" to be considered law.  I know you are a lawyer, so perhaps you can enlighten me as to what statute does so?
      January 25, 2017 8:50 PM MST
    2