Does this mean anything?

[msc545]

“When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty. … Again, there is no liberty, if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive.”

Charles de Montesquieu writing in The Spirit of the Laws, circa 1748

[MisterWack]

“When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty. … Again, there is no liberty, if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive.”

The Founding Fathers literally built the country on the ideals of ‘Checks and Balances’ where one branch is in check with the other branch and that is in check by the other and it works when all branches stay within their lane then call out the other once it does something against the will of the political bodies within.

House of Representatives introduces bills, discusses the bills, passes the bills -> Senate debates the bills, passes the bills -> President of The United States of America -> Now A Law.

When one branch overreaches into the business of the other branches and tries to gain more political influence then that goes against the founding principles established, we are no longer a nation of Liberty when we let this get out of hand.

”Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness” - George Washington

[OneViewpoint]

No I would not agree. Because a corrupt legislature and judiciary is just as bad as one dictator having no separation of powers and a dictator.

And that's where the USA finds itself now. Our House and Senate is either completely on board with a White Fascist dictatorship or completely spineless to stand against it. So they are complicit in this unconstitutional power grab.

Likewise our courts have been systematically corrupted over the last 4 decades in a carefully orchestrated plan to seize power. Our courts are also led by Reich Wing extremists completely on board with White Fascists seizing power or completely impotent losers who will not put their jobs on the line to protect the constitution.

So what's the difference between a dictator where there is no separation of powers and a complicit legislature and court system? None! There is effectively no difference.

[beefcakebradybatson]

The theft of the 2000 Presidential Election by the Supremes for Dummy Bush was a judicial coup d'etat. And you're ONE THOUSAND PERCENT RIGHT about unchecked power whether by a strongman or an illiberal leader with a quiescent legislature, courts and press, OneViewpoint !!!

[Sevenpointfive]

of course it does. we don't have any branch not connected to the other. it's a bad system

[msc545]

Why is it a bad system?

[Sevenpointfive]

because it is still a capitalist institution

[msc545]

Capitalism is an economic system, not inherently a political system, but it can be. Ours is, sadly. I have no objection to checks and balances if they actually worked, but the capitalists have corrupted our system to the point it no longer works properly. Somebody forgot to design in anti-corruption measures.

[Sevenpointfive]

i've never agreed with you more than this moment in time

[msc545]

Turns out we can agree! - nice.

[exitseven]

Yes, this is why the founders included a separation of powers in the Constitution.

[goaded]

And why, until McConnell, judges required 60% in the senate.

[Dargil]

Compared to the Constitution, not that I can think of.

[dustybiker2]

That is how dictators are born.

[beefcakebradybatson]

Chuckie, welcome to the 2025 USA !!!

[slatyb]

It means everything.