The president has some leeway, but our support for Ukraine was because we passed laws to support them.
The Trump admin cant pass any laws. Its why they are trying to go all in on executive power, even when its illegal. They lack legislative power due to a fractured congress, even in their own party.
They barely control the house, and many republicans actually want to support Ukraine. and will not be able to sanction Ukraine or materially support russia.
The Trump admin cant pass any laws. Its why they are trying to go all in on executive power, even when its illegal. They lack legislative power due to a fractured congress, even in their own party.
Regarding the mass layoffs? I don’t think that that’s actually the primary reason, though the House is a pretty narrow Republican majority. I think that it’s more that one aspect or another of the layoffs are potentially unpopular. Congressional representatives may need to be around for a while, and I would guess that even for Republican legislators who have constituencies that overall support layoffs, they’d rather not be directly involved, because some people are going to be upset, and some people are going to find that a government service that they liked isn’t there any more. Trump is out in a bit under four years, and Elon’s not elected or going to be in government and IIRC – though his role is certainly fuzzy – at least for a while was under some classification that was supposed to be for people who are only expected to be present for 180 days or less, so he may not be around for too long. A senator or representative may hope to be around Congress for a long time. Easier to just let the President act and then not take any action to stop what he’s doing.
Same sort of reason that Congress hasn’t declared war in ages, just done variations on “authorizing the President to make use of military force”. Declaring war is potentially-politically-costly if a war becomes unpopular. Politically-safer for Congressional representatives to authorize the President to act and then letting him mostly be exposed to any political risks.
The Kremlin dictates U.S. policy. If Ukraine doesn’t go along, the U.S. will sanction Ukraine and start sending supplies to Russia.
The president has some leeway, but our support for Ukraine was because we passed laws to support them.
The Trump admin cant pass any laws. Its why they are trying to go all in on executive power, even when its illegal. They lack legislative power due to a fractured congress, even in their own party.
They barely control the house, and many republicans actually want to support Ukraine. and will not be able to sanction Ukraine or materially support russia.
I hear you, but as we’re seeing everyday, laws don’t matter anymore.
I have my doubts that Trump will have enough pushback to make a difference but I’m not an American so I could be wrong.
They are going to have sham midterms and then magically have way more support
Regarding the mass layoffs? I don’t think that that’s actually the primary reason, though the House is a pretty narrow Republican majority. I think that it’s more that one aspect or another of the layoffs are potentially unpopular. Congressional representatives may need to be around for a while, and I would guess that even for Republican legislators who have constituencies that overall support layoffs, they’d rather not be directly involved, because some people are going to be upset, and some people are going to find that a government service that they liked isn’t there any more. Trump is out in a bit under four years, and Elon’s not elected or going to be in government and IIRC – though his role is certainly fuzzy – at least for a while was under some classification that was supposed to be for people who are only expected to be present for 180 days or less, so he may not be around for too long. A senator or representative may hope to be around Congress for a long time. Easier to just let the President act and then not take any action to stop what he’s doing.
Same sort of reason that Congress hasn’t declared war in ages, just done variations on “authorizing the President to make use of military force”. Declaring war is potentially-politically-costly if a war becomes unpopular. Politically-safer for Congressional representatives to authorize the President to act and then letting him mostly be exposed to any political risks.