It's hilarious
the Trump administration is undermining the stated rules again LOL
-
-
-
The point is it's sad. The ridiculousness of this year would not be complete without something like this.
-
[Substantively, though, I don't think it's quite so clear as it has been in other circumstances as to whether what the Trump admin has done here is wrong. They've raised a much more colorable argument here than in other instances, by my reading.]
-
I feel like "in other instances" is doing a lot of work here. But agreed, it's plausible, which is a mostly new bar for them.
-
Honestly, not sure it is. When Obama had a plausible argument for executive actions that were key to his policy goals, he often took them as well. I guess I'm surprised people think the Trump admin *wouldn't* go this route.
-
Sorry I didn't explain myself well. I meant that the plausibility is newer. I think they've made, in aggregate, less plausible legal arguments than even prior executives. I definitely agree that all executives attempt to stretch the boundaries; it's a part of the job now.
-
In truth, I don't blame any of the executives for it either. Seems like co-equal branches should squabble about territory. I think the executive wins these squabbles too much, but I don't blame them for the attempt.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I wonder if he licked everything in the office so nobody else will want to use it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.