Thanks for a clear explanation, as enraging as it is, at least to me, a not-attorney, about what legal tools average citizens have - and do not have - at their disposal to reign in this out of control, billionaire-enhancing, predatory federal government we are living through.
Why can't the President be sued for implementing & withdrawing tariffs which excede his authority, an action reserved for Congress or expending Treasury money on the Board of Peace...again an act reserved for Congress & exceeding his authority.
Why can't the President fir taking domestic (payments fir stays @ hus properties) or foreign emuments ( gold crown from Switzerland) which are prohibited acts & si exceeded his authority.
Why can't the defense department be sued for pillaging oil from Venezuela & Iran & sellingvit, placing revenues outside of the Treasury which exceeds their authority
Why can't ICE be sued for exceeding their authority, entering private property without warrants & assaulting citizens & others without due process or exigent circumstances
Why can't DOGE be sued for eliminating programs and stealing taxpayer personal data and identification before they had explicit authority.
Trump said Musk is not head of DOGE. Musk Said DOGE isn't a GOV dept. So acting as if it has authority, threatening staff with fake "marshalls" to get the to give access to computers is fraud. Locking computers is data theft.
Musk acted with ostensible authority searching privileged data & locking out actual authorities as the head of DOGE, an apparent agency but
which had not been given such
authority by Congress. If he & DOGE did not have explicit legal authority, they committed fraud in addition to data theft that allows possible extortion.
"If the President takes a pot of general operating money and decides on his own to fund a faith-based conference, no taxpayer standing." I feel there is something missing. General operating money may not be earmarked, but if the project it is to be used for (the confiscated money) isn't for general operations or otherwise requires Congressional approval, then it may be more like the president has misappropriated those funds. What Congress creates, only Congress can alter. A president can make minor renovations to the WH, but, like any temporary lease, such as the old Post Office building, the renovations must not alter the building so much that it cannot be used in its former capacity. Do you see my points here?
Well padiddle
Thank you for this. I've wondered this so many times!
Thanks for a clear explanation, as enraging as it is, at least to me, a not-attorney, about what legal tools average citizens have - and do not have - at their disposal to reign in this out of control, billionaire-enhancing, predatory federal government we are living through.
Vote > Sue
Why can't the President be sued for implementing & withdrawing tariffs which excede his authority, an action reserved for Congress or expending Treasury money on the Board of Peace...again an act reserved for Congress & exceeding his authority.
Why can't the President fir taking domestic (payments fir stays @ hus properties) or foreign emuments ( gold crown from Switzerland) which are prohibited acts & si exceeded his authority.
Why can't the defense department be sued for pillaging oil from Venezuela & Iran & sellingvit, placing revenues outside of the Treasury which exceeds their authority
Why can't ICE be sued for exceeding their authority, entering private property without warrants & assaulting citizens & others without due process or exigent circumstances
Why can't DOGE be sued for eliminating programs and stealing taxpayer personal data and identification before they had explicit authority.
Trump said Musk is not head of DOGE. Musk Said DOGE isn't a GOV dept. So acting as if it has authority, threatening staff with fake "marshalls" to get the to give access to computers is fraud. Locking computers is data theft.
Musk acted with ostensible authority searching privileged data & locking out actual authorities as the head of DOGE, an apparent agency but
which had not been given such
authority by Congress. If he & DOGE did not have explicit legal authority, they committed fraud in addition to data theft that allows possible extortion.
"If the President takes a pot of general operating money and decides on his own to fund a faith-based conference, no taxpayer standing." I feel there is something missing. General operating money may not be earmarked, but if the project it is to be used for (the confiscated money) isn't for general operations or otherwise requires Congressional approval, then it may be more like the president has misappropriated those funds. What Congress creates, only Congress can alter. A president can make minor renovations to the WH, but, like any temporary lease, such as the old Post Office building, the renovations must not alter the building so much that it cannot be used in its former capacity. Do you see my points here?