One of his key weapons has been the Congressional Review Act (CRA), a 1996 law that allows Congress to repeal recent regulations. Before Trump took office, this law had been used just once. Since taking office, however, President Trump has signed 11 of these CRAs into law, effectively reversing several last-minute Obama-era regulations.
The window for using this tactic is closing; the CRA can only be used within 60 days of Congress being informed of a new regulation. But here’s where things have the potential to get very interesting: Once a regulation is repealed, agencies are also banned from issuing new rules that are “substantially similar” to the one that was just vetoed.
Behind the scenes, some shrewd Republicans are quietly toying with the idea of anticipating liberal regulations and preemptively introducing them. It’s like the PreCrime unit in “Minority Report.” A Republican Congress and president would effectively sow the earth with salt to prevent any future regulation from being introduced. It would be a bold gambit, but this would transform the CRA from a purely defensive weapon into an offensive one.
President Trump is also targeting regulations that aren’t susceptible to the CRA. Last week, he signed an executive order to thwart the “Clean Power Plan,” which President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency unilaterally instituted to curb carbon dioxide emissions (or kill the coal industry—take your pick).
A grotesque love of propaganda. Unspeakable barbarity. The loathing of Jews - and a hunger for world domination. In this stunning intervention, literary colossus V.S. NAIPAUL says ISIS is now the Fourth Reich. (Guess he overlooked the alt-right.)
Still, after contradicting her own statements, that distinction will do little to placate Republicans gunning for her head. And she'll find little sympathy after failing to categorically deny that she was responsible for any of the unmasking. Already, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul has called for Rice to appear before Congress to testify.
After two ruinous interviews, one wonders whether it might be better for Rice to step out of the limelight unless summoned to Capitol Hill. Her public appearances about unmasking have only fanned the flames instead of putting out the fire. And honestly, Rice was doomed to do more harm than good the moment she went live on air.
In another edit depicting gloom and doom, the L.A. Times attacks President Trump for criticizing the press. Of course, they refuse to acknowledge the ethical problems of the mainstream media. The credibiity of the press has been dropping for decades long before Trump ran for the presidency. Damages to such instititions are almost always self-inflicted. ESPN is losings tens of millions of dollars and millions of viewers not because the American people stopped liking sports. A Marvel Comics official the company is losing sales because of managment mistakes not because their audience stopped reading comic books.
The MSM has lost crediblity because it is composed of (mostly) Democratic operatives with bylines. One brief example shows te bias. A few days ago every media outlet seemed o be quoting a Gallup poll noting President Trump had only 34 percent support. But every other poll had Trump showing higher numbers. Rasmussen had 44 percent support. The Real Clear Average had 41 or 42 percent support. The fact the media noted the poll showing the lowest numbers was clear biase and, frankly, unethical because they didn't mention the wide variety of polls. A small item on a particular day but it does show the bias. (Such stories in my old JM 301 class would have gotten an F.)
It’s worth noting here that one of biggest scandals in American journalism is the longtime failure of the New York Times to cover the corrupt nature of city politics in New York. The readers of the NYTdon’t know very much about political power in America’s largest city because the Times is too grand for such base concerns—and because, frankly, Democratic politicians are often subjected to less scrutiny by the mainstream media. If the NYT had been doing its job, very little in this Daily News piece would be news to New Yorkers.