Visitors Now:
Total Visits:
Total Stories:
Profile image
By The Pirate's Cove (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

Washington Post: Say, How Much Damage Could A President Trump Do?

Friday, October 7, 2016 4:11
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

I’m continuing to see a pattern here from the Washington Post Editorial Board. It’s another day, another crazy editorial from the WP editorial Board. Previously, we’ve learned that a Pres Trump could deport freely (hooray!), that he’d end the era of US global leadership (not much left to lose after 8 years of Obama) or something, that he could wreck progress on ‘climate change’, and that he could destroy the world economy.  Now we see that the WPEB should write disaster books

How much damage could a President Trump do? We can only begin to imagine.

A PRESIDENT TRUMP could alter the face of this country and its role in the world, in many cases with Congress and the courts having little power to check him. In a series of editorials over the past several days, we have described the vast reach of executive power in areas where Mr. Trump has made his intentions clear. He could, in fact, unilaterally order mass deportations, resume torturing detainees, undo the preservation of natural treasures and tear up long-standing trade agreements.

But we should be clear: The scope of the damage a President Trump could do cannot be fully predicted or imagined. His candidacy forces us to confront the extent to which democracy depends on leaders adhering to a set of norms and traditions — civic virtues, to be old-fashioned about it. Mr. Trump has made clear his contempt for those virtues, norms and traditions: He despises the press, threatens his enemies, bullies the judiciary, disparages entire religions and nations, makes no distinction between his personal interest and the public good, hides information that should be revealed and routinely trades in falsehoods. Handed the immense powers of the presidency, what could such a man do? The honest answer: No one can be sure.

That’s interesting, because it explicitly describes the Obama presidency, which the WPEB lauds. Actually, Obama does more than just threaten enemies: he acts on it. Hillary does the same. Both disparage large swaths of American citizenry. She certainly makes no distinction between her personal interests and the public good….well, really, she has appeared to use the public sector to enrich her and her family through mixing with her foundation.

She’s hidden vast amounts of information, just like Obama, and routinely lies to the extreme. Falsehoods is such a mild word.

In one of the more thoughtful examinations of the danger, the Brookings Institution’s Benjamin Wittes explained why checks and balances cannot be counted on to protect the nation from an elected leader with contempt for democracy. “Ultimately, the entire executive branch is corruptible by one person because constitutionally, the executive branch is one person,” Mr. Wittes wrote on the Lawfare blog. “Everyone else is just his arms, hands, and fingers. That means that over time, the executive branch under Donald Trump becomes Donald Trump.”

The irony of this all is amazing, after watching what has happened with Obama in office, and the heavy politicization of agencies such as the FBI, DOJ, EPA, and so many others. Reading that paragraph and thinking about the Executive Branch becoming Hillary Clinton is enough to make me want to vote against her and check the box for Trump. Hilariously, the editorial alludes to the problems that could occur within the National Security Council and federal law enforcement under Trump in exactly the way we’ve seen happen under Obama, without acknowledging the problems, before moving on to

If Mr. Trump wanted to wield the IRS against that Chicago family; if he tried to use U.S. diplomats to help his hotel business in Russia or Azerbaijan; if he barred disfavored reporters from the White House; if he ignored a judge who told him, say, that immigrants had to be given hearings before being deported — what recourse would Americans have?

Obama has wielded the IRS against numerous people and groups that oppose him. Hillary used US diplomats to help her Foundation, increasing her personal bank account. Obama has barred reporters from the White House and his campaign, and has even had them locked in sheds during events. Hillary has also barred reporters from her campaign, and even corrals them like they are cattle. Obama has ignored judicial rulings numerous times.

We have faith, ultimately, in the integrity of the federal workforce, the resilience of the U.S. system and the essential fairness of the American people. But all three could be tested as never before by a Trump presidency. The nation should not subject itself to such a risk.

Just imagine that this was written about Obama in 2008. Or2012. It could be written about Hillary quite easily.

Again, do not take this as an endorsement of Trump. I’m simply amused by the incoherence, apoplexy, and fear-mongering of the WPEB, which never seems to question Hillary Clinton and her ideas in the least. Or Obama.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.