Dems Hits Trump For 'Massive, Unprecedented' Criminal Obstruction | The Beat With Ari Melber

We begin with the President of United States announcing his opposition to lawful subpoenas from congress.

WHY is he doing that? Do Trump actually think that he is above the LAW?

or

Do he thinks, that if he fights the subpoenas and takes is to The Supreme Court that the judges that Trump put there will safe him?

Interesting...

It means Trump will be judged by the American people in 2020, and no one else.

Trump's side of the argument is looking really bad now, just from the unredacted parts of the Mueller report and he is running about like a guilty man, running around, telling all kinds of LIES. Now, with that information that's already out there the people will finally see what Trump is all about and he won't be running for dog catcher in 2020.

Did you see that report Steve?

The conclusion that congress may apply the obstruction law to The President's corrupt exercise of the powers of office in accordance with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the LAW.

Steve, do you think that our system of checks and balances and the principles applies to Trump? If not, please explain.

Ron, I'm waiting for you to impeach Trump. Why are you dragging your feet?

My question to you was: Did you see that report Steve?

The conclusion that congress may apply the obstruction law to The President's corrupt exercise of the powers of office in accordance with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the LAW.

Steve, do you think that our system of checks and balances and the principles applies to Trump? If not, please explain, in your very next reply, can you do that Steve?

Relax Ron, I saw your report. Your so-called "system of checks and balances" is a myth.

I asked you about your throughs Steve, do you think that our system of checks and balances and the principles applies to Trump?

If not, please explain, in your very next reply, can you do that Steve?

Their is a two question that I asked you.

I don't acknowledge a system of checks and balances. A system of checks and balances is not what our federal government is about.

It's another one of those dumb lies they taught you in grade school, like "constitutional republic".

Steve, I didn’t ask you whether you acknowledge A system of checks and balances but that is the way our government has been set up. Now Steve, do you think that our system of checks and balances and the principles applies to Trump as well?

We have 3 branches of government Ron, not a system of checks and balances. The three branches of government apply to President Trump, yes.

"This ability of each branch to respond to the actions of the other branches is called the system of checks and balances."

Called by whom Ron? Not I. I would NEVER call our government a system of checks and balances.

Your mistaken, ignorant, doctrine, of checks and balances is why our government is a wreck Ron.

Did you finish reading that Government website link yet Steve?

I read it the rirst time you posted it Ron. They are wrong and I am right.

Then post your proof!!! That you are RIGHT, can you do that on your next reply.?

My proof is that the founders did not describe their government as a system of checks and balances. If I'm wong then show me in the Constitution or the founders writings where they describe their government as a system of checks and abalances.

You are really acting like a person, who is blind now. This request of yours is far, far to easy.

Let me point this out for YOU Steve.

Checks and balances is a system for making sure that one department does not exceed its bounds, or for guarding against fraud and errors. In the U.S. government, the system of checks and balances is set to be a sentry over the separation of powers, balancing the separate branches of government. In a system of checks and balances, the authority to take an action, or make a decision, rests with one department, while the responsibility to verify the decision or action rests with another. To explore this concept, consider the following checks and balances definition.

Let us take a look at this term checks and balances for your enlightenment Steve.

Definition of Checks and Balances

Noun

A system in which various divisions of an organization have powers that affect or control other divisions, so that no division becomes too powerful, or to minimize error.

Limits placed on all branches of government by giving each branch a right to void or amend the actions of another branch.

Steve, we have learned about this question that you asked in 8th grade in this country and as old as I am, I still remember this answer.

Checks and Balances in Government
The Founding Fathers had a great interest in preventing tyranny from gaining a foothold in the new nation. To that end, the first three articles of the Constitution created three separate branches of government, vesting certain specific powers with each. Dividing authority between each of these branches, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, was their way of balancing the power of the federal government, preventing any one division from gaining too much power over the people. In addition to division of powers, each branch of government is given power to check up on, and even veto or disapprove decisions or actions of, another branch of government.

You asked me the show you n the Constitution or the founders writings where they describe their government as a system of checks and balances. Steve, I want to direct you to The FIRST three articles of the Constitution.

MY PROOF:

Checks and Balances in Government

The Founding Fathers had a great interest in preventing tyranny from gaining a foothold in the new nation. To that end, the first three articles of the Constitution created three separate branches of government, vesting certain specific powers with each. Dividing authority between each of these branches, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, was their way of balancing the power of the federal government, preventing any one division from gaining too much power over the people. In addition to division of powers, each branch of government is given power to check up on, and even veto or disapprove decisions or actions of, another branch of government.

Keep trying Ron. Where did the founders write about checks and balances? The answer is easy.

Now Steve, you know damn well that you are running from this subject. You also know for a FACT that my link I put before you, is to, today’s U.S. Government website. You can see the truth in front of you and you refuse to see it.

Now did you understand my reply?

MY PROOF:

Checks and Balances in Government

The Founding Fathers had a great interest in preventing tyranny from gaining a foothold in the new nation. To that end, the first three articles of the Constitution created three separate branches of government, vesting certain specific powers with each. Dividing authority between each of these branches, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, was their way of balancing the power of the federal government, preventing any one division from gaining too much power over the people. In addition to division of powers, each branch of government is given power to check up on, and even veto or disapprove decisions or actions of, another branch of government.

Do you really think our government is "balanced" Ron? Let's see what Hamilton and Madison think.

Did you understand my answer Steve?

When you refer me to "today’s U.S. Government website", which branch operates this website Ron?

Did you understand my answer Steve?

If you been to the website, look around and you will find that answer Steve.

It doesn't say Ron. All it says is :

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

WHICH BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT RUNS THIS WEBSITE RON???

Steve, did you read about the three Branches of government and understand their purpose?

It's run by the Executive branch Ron. Have you read Federalist No. 51 yet?

Checks and Balances in Government

The Founding Fathers had a great interest in preventing tyranny from gaining a foothold in the new nation. To that end, the first three articles of the Constitution created three separate branches of government, vesting certain specific powers with each. Dividing authority between each of these branches, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, was their way of balancing the power of the federal government, preventing any one division from gaining too much power over the people. In addition to division of powers, each branch of government is given power to check up on, and even veto or disapprove decisions or actions of, another branch of government.

I undersatnd perfectly what's being said here. It's wrong and misleading Ron and you should understand why.

Did you understand these words Steve?

Checks and Balances in Government

The Founding Fathers had a great interest in preventing tyranny from gaining a foothold in the new nation. To that end, the first three articles of the Constitution created three separate branches of government, vesting certain specific powers with each. Dividing authority between each of these branches, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, was their way of balancing the power of the federal government, preventing any one division from gaining too much power over the people. In addition to division of powers, each branch of government is given power to check up on, and even veto or disapprove decisions or actions of, another branch of government.

What's wrong with you Ron? My answer was clear.

YOUR WORDS: I undersatnd perfectly what's being said here. It's wrong and misleading Ron and you should understand why.

Why is that paragraph is WRONG Steve?

The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments
From the New York Packet.
Friday, February 8, 1788.
Author: Alexander Hamilton or James Madison

Federalist No. 51 talks about countering political ambition. In 2019, political ambition is unrestrained, BECAUSE of the nonsense you've posted above. Read and comprehend Federalist No. 51 Ron.

You have not told us your reason why that paragraph is WRONG or misleading YET, Steve?

Let's take this mistaken thought:

"Dividing authority between each of these branches, Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, was their way of balancing the power of the federal government, preventing any one division from gaining too much power over the people."

This thought is not present in our founders' words. Show me where this thought is expressed in Federalist No. 51 Ron.

I see that you made no effort to go to The U.S. Constitution to read Constitutional Checks and Balances found in, Articles 1, 2, and 3 now have you?

Steve, The American constitutional system includes a notion known as the Separation of Powers. In this system, several branches of government are created and power is shared between them. At the same time, the powers of one branch can be challenged by another branch. This is what the system of checks and balances is all about.

Now what I have proved to you is from the LAWS of The Constitution that govern this country, Steve. I also know that the Federalist papers was the blue print for The U.S. Constitution and made way for the finished document of LAWS that we Americans are govern under to this very day.

So, let us direct our attention back to The LAW of the land, The U.S. Constitution and don't get sidetracked no where else, understood?

TO WHAT expedient, then, shall we finally resort, for maintaining in practice the necessary partition of power among the several departments, as laid down in the Constitution? The only answer that can be given is, that as all these exterior provisions are found to be inadequate, the defect must be supplied, by so contriving the interior structure of the government as that its several constituent parts may, by their mutual relations, be the means of keeping each other in their proper places. Without presuming to undertake a full development of this important idea, I will hazard a few general observations, which may perhaps place it in a clearer light, and enable us to form a more correct judgment of the principles and structure of the government planned by the convention. In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others.

Ron, do you understand how this applies to Comey? Your side has violated, persists in violating this most important principle of our government. If you believe in check and balances then ACT ACCORDINGLY.

Sorry Steve, but Comey is not the issue here but The U.S. Constitution, Constitutional Checks and Balances found in, Articles 1, 2, and 3 that you have not read is.

Let me point this out for YOU again Steve.

Checks and balances is a system for making sure that one department does not exceed its bounds, or for guarding against fraud and errors. In the U.S. government, the system of checks and balances is set to be a sentry over the separation of powers, balancing the separate branches of government. In a system of checks and balances, the authority to take an action, or make a decision, rests with one department, while the responsibility to verify the decision or action rests with another. To explore this concept, consider the following checks and balances definition.

Let us take a look at this term checks and balances for your enlightenment Steve.

Definition of Checks and Balances

Noun

A system in which various divisions of an organization have powers that affect or control other divisions, so that no division becomes too powerful, or to minimize error.

Limits placed on all branches of government by giving each branch a right to void or amend the actions of another branch.

Steve, we have learned about this question that you asked in 8th grade in this country and as old as I am, I still remember this answer.

So you're a good drone since 8th grade at the latest. Good for you Ron. Why don't you care what the founders wrote about checks and balances, since they were the authors of the concept?

I 'am interested in the finished concept witch is The U.S. Constitution, the law of this land.

Now, it their anything wrong with that?

That's up to you Ron.

Now, it their anything wrong with following the LAW?

Following the law is fine but it's not the point. You need to understand checks and balances but you don't Ron. Look around in 2019 and point out where are the checks and BALANCES.

Now that is the RUB, now isn't it!!! The Republicans have power in the Senate, Judicial—Evaluates laws (Supreme Court and other courts) and the Executive—Carries out laws (president, vice president, Cabinet, most federal agencies) Where are those voices?

So what is the check when the Article One power abuses its power Ron?

It is the other two breaches Steve, give it time, we are still in the first stages of Discovery.

James Madison correctly noted that the Executive branch is the weakest and must be protected.

You can see what’s happening with the executive branch of the government, now don’t you????

I see the executive branch is getting a whole lot done in spite of the legislature abusing its power. But they have not been able to obstruct the lowest unemployment since 1969. Think about that Ron.