How ignoring the law not fascism? Mandates do not supercede law, nor allow the executive branch to operate outside branches of government that are not under it's control, and yet Congress does nothing, that's is actually how fascism really does start, when what "dear leader" says is acted upon even though it is clearly illegal
I do not have to wait 4 years, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it is most likely a duck.
The fact that he is "governing" through EOs, - many of those will be challenged in court, I guess, but in the meantime they still stand valid - is not being done in a respectful way. An example, regular citizens working for Trump having access to not only read but also write on the federal payment system https://www.crisesnotes.com/day-five-of-the-trump-musk-treas...
Another example - denying multiple times actual science, since the scientist are amongst one of the groups he blames
He's definitely on the way for being a good mussolini 2
One of the president's main jobs is to direct how the executive branch is run. That's an authority vested on him by the constitution. So writing EOs directing various executive branches in particular ways (and in ways that aren't contradicting federal law) is entirely within his mandate as the elected president.
What we're witnessing is the weakening (and potential removal) of an effective 4th branch of government (what some call the "deep state"). I don't see that as a bad thing, as structurally speaking, this 4th branch does not govern according to the will of the people, since they are not accountable to the people.
What boggles my mind is this -- Democrats complained for decades about how Congress was ceding its authority to these unelected officials. I grew up in a Democrat family and cheered as Bill Clinton was elected. And now Democrats, who call themselves the "party that defends democracy", are acting as the primary proponents of these unaccountable officials and agencies. Make it make sense.
Probably the other times they didn't appoint someone so connected with the dark enlightenment ideologies and that spews lies continuously on a media channel he owns. It is important the who, but it is important also the what (as in, what's he/she if appointed for).
Not being American, I can't really comment on what the democrats appointed before musk. However, I do not believe it has happened before to have someone access with write permission the payment system, to access personal sensitive data of federal workers[1], and so many other things I wouldn't even know where to start complaining about
1. Musk wasn't elected.
2. Musk's merry band of misfit incels wasn't elected.
3. Government offices are created by statute, and they're terminated by statute.
As I've said elsewhere, Musk and the Doge employees only have audit power - not executive. There's a very big difference between those types of powers.
Musk is not terminating any executive departments or agencies. Neither is Trump (except perhaps some that are not statutory).
USAID still exists. It clearly wasn't obeying its statutory mandate -- that's what gives Trump the authority to bring its current activities to an end and fire a lot of its employees. It will likely be ended by Congress after what's been revealed, but we'll have to wait and see.
> Musk and the Doge employees only have audit power - not executive.
You've said this, but it's obvious that's not what they're doing, and no one is attempting to stop them. Literally unchecked corruption. Musk should be in prison for this - it's very close to treason.
This doesn't appear to be strictly what is happening. Musk posted on Twitter yesterday that he "deleted" the group 18F. That is neither an examination, a report or a recommendation.
Any examples? Just based on what he and @DOGE have reported, they're basically doing a systematic financial audit. (And Trump is firing those who don't allow the audit to occur.)
LMAO. You clearly need to read more about Hitler's rise to power and how he was actually elected. You people really do not understand politics nor democracy.
Hitler and Mussolini weren't fascist dictators at first. They became that gradually (though in retrospect, biographers have identified such ambitions early on).
Comparing Trump to those guys 2 weeks in, when Congress and the Supreme Court are very much alive and able to pounce on him, is rather early, no?
