Undoing a Unilateral “Presidency”

Lahnee Chen closed his Monday Wall Street Journal op-ed of a similar title with this:

By revoking Mr Obama’s executive actions, and beginning the arduous task of identifying and addressing his many other unilateral moves, the next president wouldn’t have to jettison the entire Obama legacy.

But our next President should.

On the next president’s first day in office, the president could simply issue an executive order revoking all of his predecessor’s executive actions, except those necessary for national security or the basic functioning of government. This includes Mr Obama’s executive orders, but also a flood of presidential memorandums and directives, as well as informal guidance and orders from federal agencies, that he has used to reshape federal policy.

Not “except for.” Every single one. Don’t waste time sorting through the mess to find the occasional nugget that might be useful. Rescind every single one. The next President should issue his own few Executive Orders regarding those narrow areas of national security and the basic functioning of government. That last, especially, doesn’t need many, since government can, and should be, shrunk drastically by the next President and the next two (at least) Congresses.

In the name of actual transparency, this item, too. Those Presidential Memoranda don’t need to be, and so they’re not, published in the Federal Register, and so the public has very limited access to them. The next President, on day two, should publish those memoranda. Every single one of them.

Keep in mind this, too. It’s not only Obama’s legacy. It’s our nation’s legacy, it’s the legacy of us citizens, it’s your and my legacy. It needs to jettisoned in its entirety, every single syllable. For our national honor.

Who’s In Charge?

…of our foreign policy—us, or foreign entities?

Here’s the latest, against the backdrop of Russian reestablishment of an archipelago of its Cold War military bases across the Arctic?

After invading Ukraine, Russia pulled out of the Arctic Council, a consortium of eight countries that includes the US.

In response, there’s this [emphasis added]:

Asked about Russia’s recent moves in the Arctic, State Department spokesman Mark Toner said: “And so do we have concerns specifically about Russia? I would say…we have concerns about how militaries conduct themselves in the Arctic, but that’s for all of the Arctic Council members to discuss.

Hmm….

John Kerry on the Law

Paul Mirengoff, over at Power Line, highlighted this exchange between the guy who sits in the Secretary of State’s chair and Congressman Brad Sherman (D, CA) while Kerry testified before the House Foreign Relations Committee regarding the Iranian nuclear weapons deal.

Sherman: You strongly do not want [Congress] to override a presidential veto, but if we do, that triggers certain American laws…. You don’t want us to do it. You think its terrible policy. You think the rest of the world would be against us.

But let’s say Congress doesn’t take your advice—we override a veto—and the law that’s triggered then imposes certain sanctions. Will you follow the law even though you think it violates this agreement, and even if you think it’s absolutely terrible policy?

Kerry: I can’t begin to answer that at this point without consulting with the President and determining what the circumstances are.

Sherman: So you’re not committed to following the law?

Kerry: I’m not going to deal with a hypothetical, that’s all.

But, Skipper, what’s hypothetical about whether you’ll follow the law? And why do you need to consult with President Barack Obama before you’ll say whether you’ll follow the law or break it?

A Corrupt IRS

Two Congressmen have some concerns, and they want IRS Commissioner John Koskinen removed. Ron DeSantis (R, FL), House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security Chairman, and Jim Jordan (R, OH), Subcommittee on Health Care, Benefits and Administrative Rules Chairman, laid out their case in Monday’s Wall Street Journal. RTWT, but here are the highlights.

  • Failure to inform Congress. Koskinen concealed—during repeated sworn testimony—from Congress for four months his knowledge that the IRS that it had “lost” vast amounts of Lois Lerner’s (of “I didn’t do it” infamy) emails.
  • False testimony before Congress. One example: of the more than 1,000 computer backup tapes discovered by the IRS Inspector General, approximately 700 were available with their contents intact. Koskinen testified he had “confirmed” that all of the tapes were unrecoverable. Worse, those 700 intact backup tapes were found within 15 days of Koskinen’s informing Congress that they were not recoverable.
  • Failure to correct the record. After his false statements to Congress under oath, Koskinen refused to amend them when given the opportunity at a public hearing earlier this year.
  • Failure to reform the IRS to protect First Amendment rights. Koskinen still hasn’t acted on President Barack Obama’s May 2013 promise to “put in place new safeguards to make sure this kind of behavior cannot happen again.”

It’s not just Koskinen who needs to be fired—not allowed to retire, not allowed to resign, fired—though. IRS personnel cannot be trusted down to the worker bee accountants who do the actual work of checking tax returns. The breadth of IRS crimes—worthy of a RICO case, were it a private enterprise—renders the entire agency worthless. And that’s to the detriment of those worker bees.

More Dishonesty Regarding the Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal

Fred Leitz at National Review has identified a couple of secret—as in deliberately attempted to be kept secret from Congress—side deals. Senator Tom Cotton (R, AR) and Congressmen Mike Pompeo (R, KS) have gotten wind of them, too, though, so….

One of these side deals concerns inspection of the Parchin military base, where Iran reportedly has conducted explosive testing related to nuclear-warhead development. The Iranian government has refused to allow the IAEA to visit this site. Over the last several years, Iran has taken steps to clean up evidence of weapons-related activity at Parchin.

The other secret side deal concerns how the IAEA and Iran will resolve outstanding issues on possible military dimensions (PMDs) of Iran’s nuclear program. In late 2013, Iran agreed to resolve IAEA questions about nuclear weapons-related work in twelve areas. Iran only answered questions in one of these areas and rejected the rest as based on forgeries and fabrications.

President Barack Obama and his motorboat skipper occupant of SecState’s chair have kept these secret (unsuccessfully, it seems) from Congress. Of course, the administration denies this. They wouldn’t be secrets, if they talked about them, though.

It’s one more reason to toss this deal and then to override Obama’s veto of the tossing.