Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Donald Trump being president is making very clear who is principled and who is just partisan

  1. #1

    Donald Trump being president is making very clear who is principled and who is just partisan

    Donald Trump being president is making very clear who is principled and who is just partisan

    As I write this, Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) is getting into a Twitter war.

    On Friday, he voted against the waiver proposed for Gen. James Mattis to be secretary of defense. Because Mattis retired from the military fewer than seven years ago, he is legally barred from running the Department of Defense until those years run out.

    Most congressional Republicans and a few Democrats were willing to vote in favor of giving Mattis a waiver that would allow him to take the position anyway. His nomination to President-elect Donald Trump’s Cabinet is now a done deal.

    But Amash had other ideas.

    As it turns out, the seven-year law doesn’t include any provisions for a waiver. It’s just a prohibition. Here’s the relevant text from the U.S. Code:

    There is a Secretary of Defense, who is the head of the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force.
    That’s it. You can see it in context, and there’s no mention of a waiver. Congress has made such a waiver just once before (specifically, for Gen. George Marshall in 1950), so there is precedent for the Mattis waiver—but still no legal authority.

    This was Amash’s reason for voting no. “It violates the Rule of Law,” he wrote on Twitter in response to a question about his vote. “Laws must apply equally. If Congress doesn’t like a law, then that law should be changed, not waived.”

    “Many people incorrectly think the underlying law provides for waivers,” Amash added. (I know I did before seeing his tweets.) “It doesn’t…Congress can waive laws, but such waivers, by definition, violate the Rule of Law.”

    As it turns out, Amash was the only Republican who voted no. This has been confusing for some people—and thus the Twitter war.

    Because Amash has an R after his name and so does the President-elect, many people undoubtedly assumed he would vote for the waiver along with everyone else. After all, that’s how this works, right? If you’re a Republican in Congress, you’re supposed to vote for what a Republican president wants. If you’re a Democrat, same deal for a Democratic president.

    If partisanship is a representative’s guiding value, that makes a lot of sense. But if a member of Congress, like Amash, is voting based not on party but principle—well then it’s crazy talk. What Amash realizes and too many of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle are eager to ignore is the fact that rule of law is so much more important than making life easy for a president who happens to be in the same party as you.

    Maintaining (or, at this point, regaining) “a government of laws and not of men,” as Founding Father John Adams famously put it, is a much bigger deal than making sure Donald Trump gets exactly the defense secretary he prefers.

    Amash’s vote might be dismissed as nit-picky, and it is certainly true that it is inconsequential in terms of the fate of the Mattis waiver, which easily passed both houses of Congress. But it is emblematic of the sort of winnowing I expect we’ll see in coming days as divisions emerge between politicians who operate out of partisanship and true public servants who are motivated by principle.

    (To be clear, when I say “principle,” I don’t simply mean principles I happen to like, such as the rule of law, or elected officials I happen to support, like Amash. Honest principle is always an improvement over shallow partisanship.)

    Already we can see this separation occurring on a much larger scale where the Republican budget proposal is concerned. This bill grows the national debt, already sitting disturbingly close to $20 trillion, by a shocking $9 trillion over the next ten years.
    http://rare.us/story/donald-trump-be...just-partisan/
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    I don't agree with this assessment. Amash can do what he wants as he represents his people, but choosing this appointment to talk about violating the rule of law is absurd.
    #NashvilleStrong

    “I’m a doctor. That’s a baby.”~~~Dr. Manny Sethi

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by euphemia View Post
    I don't agree with this assessment. Amash can do what he wants as he represents his people, but choosing this appointment to talk about violating the rule of law is absurd.
    Disagree. Amash is in the "A" list of those who follow the Constitution. Of which very few are and then the list drops heavily straight down to "F." The is no inopportune time to follow the rule of law. In particular making government follow it.

  5. #4
    I'm not holding anything against Amash. I just don't think this particular vote is any kind of indicator who is principled and who isn't.

    According to people who understand the military, Mattis is a military genius. Some of the things he said in the hearing is that he will probably bring an end to the social experimentation and some of the other things weakening the military these days. Some of those things rubbed Dems the wrong way who want to keep their social agenda moving forward. I think he really is a good man for this job.
    #NashvilleStrong

    “I’m a doctor. That’s a baby.”~~~Dr. Manny Sethi

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by euphemia View Post
    I'm not holding anything against Amash. I just don't think this particular vote is any kind of indicator who is principled and who isn't.

    According to people who understand the military, Mattis is a military genius. Some of the things he said in the hearing is that he will probably bring an end to the social experimentation and some of the other things weakening the military these days. Some of those things rubbed Dems the wrong way who want to keep their social agenda moving forward. I think he really is a good man for this job.
    Can't say one way or the other WRT whether he would make a good man for the job. I can say that his appointment is violating the laws/allowances/restrictions we have placed on government. And ignoring even the slightest will..well, it will lead us to where we are now.

  7. #6
    A government of laws and not of men.
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018

  8. #7
    Ericson and Frum most principled. Oh and ahead of them CPUd.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cowlesy View Post
    Americans in general are jedi masters of blaming every other person.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Can't say one way or the other WRT whether he would make a good man for the job. I can say that his appointment is violating the laws/allowances/restrictions we have placed on government. And ignoring even the slightest will..well, it will lead us to where we are now.
    On the face, this sounds good, but then when there isn't vigorous scrutiny, you get people like Tim Geithner who didn't file his own taxes. It's not like Mattis stands to gain anything by confirmation. None of the Trump nominees do. They are all successful on their own, and don't really need to come work for government.
    #NashvilleStrong

    “I’m a doctor. That’s a baby.”~~~Dr. Manny Sethi



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by euphemia View Post
    On the face, this sounds good, but then when there isn't vigorous scrutiny, you get people like Tim Geithner who didn't file his own taxes. It's not like Mattis stands to gain anything by confirmation. None of the Trump nominees do. They are all successful on their own, and don't really need to come work for government.
    Seems we are talking past each other. I'm merely referring to the fact that he is not eligible by law. And by law he is not eligible. And that makes Amash right to question his nomination.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by euphemia View Post
    It's not like Mattis stands to gain anything by confirmation.
    So why was this law put in place? What was the reason for it? Seems like there had to be one...
    Amash is spot-on. If they want to put him in that position, then the law needs to be changed. Otherwise, we just have anarchy where laws are ignored. -- oh wait, we already do.
    Last edited by specsaregood; 01-18-2017 at 10:17 PM.

  13. #11
    wouldn't it just be better to repeal the 7 year law?

  14. #12
    Yes, it would. And that is Amash's point. I agree with him.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by specsaregood View Post
    So why was this law put in place? What was the reason for it? Seems like there had to be one...
    Amash is spot-on. If they want to put him in that position, then the law needs to be changed. Otherwise, we just have anarchy where laws are ignored. -- oh wait, we already do.
    Well, no need for me to type all that in too.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-11-2017, 11:45 AM
  2. *** New York Times *** Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia!
    By openfire in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-01-2016, 07:09 AM
  3. 300: Making America Great Again [Donald Trump Parody]
    By kahless in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-03-2016, 07:39 AM
  4. WaPo: The one reason Donald Trump was the clear winner of the first GOP debate
    By David Sadler in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-08-2015, 10:50 PM
  5. Donald Trump making a lot of sense on Iraq...
    By bcmiller in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-09-2007, 05:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •