[oxley]

> Not one of these things has the least to do with civic freedoms.

These things have to do with whether democracies follow the rule of law. Civic freedoms tend to go away when democracies become authoritarian regimes.

> USAid didn't even exist before 1961

It was created by Congress in 1961, but destroyed by the ire of one man in 2025, without any Congressional approval. Does it feel like democracy to you?

[CivBase]

> It was created by Congress in 1961, but destroyed by the ire of one man in 2025, without any Congressional approval. Does it feel like democracy to you?

Are you suggesting what he did was unconstitutional? If so, Congress can (and should) absolutely impeach him for it and make him defend his actions in court. The President is not above the law.

Or did Congress give the President the authority he needed to do exactly what he did? In which case, what is more democratic than a body of democratically elected represetitives voting democratically to pass a law which establishes something under the control (and disgression) of a democratically elected executive?

[EnergyAmy]

Have you not been paying attention? The president is above the law according to the current Supreme Court, and Congress is stuffed full of sycophants that will never impeach him.

[CivBase]

Apparently I'm not paying attention because I seem to have missed that Supreme Court ruling. Can you link it for me?

If our democratically elected representatives in Congress will not impeach the President, then they are evidently content with how he has performed his duties. Of course, the next Congress is free to have a different opinion and proceed with an impeachment. They can even impeach Supreme Court justices who have failed in their duties. If that is what you want, I suggest you vote in accordance with that in the 2026 election.

Also, impeachment is not the only mechanism which members of Congress can use to hold the President accountable. They are free to try and convict the President of criminal misconduct in court.

[EnergyAmy]

You should pay more attention: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40847963

Congress won't do any of those other actions either, because as mentioned, they're chock-full of sycophants.

[Acrobatic_Road]

>These things have to do with whether democracies follow the rule of law. Civic freedoms tend to go away when democracies become authoritarian regimes.

Nobody complained when Woodrow Wilson and FDR destroyed the rule of law to remake the federal government. Do you understand that what the progress movement stands for is fundamentally at odds with the constitution, which has for some time only been the de-jure rule of law?

>It was created by Congress in 1961, but destroyed by the ire of one man in 2025, without any Congressional approval. Does it feel like democracy to you?

Who won the election?