[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

As for "a unitary president", we do have, per the Constitution, one President at a time. And he has limited constitutional powers.

You better tell Barr, because he believes in the unitary executive and the man he works for using that theory in his administration.

Yes, well Madison and Hamilton believed it was better to have a "unitary President" (one executive rather than multiple executives) so that is what was decided and we have one President not two or more. It is you that seems to have the Progressive viewpoint that the President has tremendous powers outside of constitutional limitations.

We do have these Progressive regulatory agencies which have unconstitutional plenary legislative, executive, and judicial powers.

SCOTUS disagrees Wiener v. United States, 357 U.S. 349 (1958); Humphrey’s Executor
v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935).

I don't see the disagreement. I didn't say that their powers could not be challenged by Congress or the Court. Generally, the Court defers to agency expertise. So it is difficult to overrule an agency decision. It has occasionally been done. But in Humphrey the President's power of removal from the agency was struck down.

I may be wrong, but you seem to favor them. In which case, I would think that you would want them to continuously carry out their missions without constant supervision and command.

Unless prohibited by Congress in their authorization, the President has the power to act with regards to Federal Agencies

That is a huge "Unless". Even so, the agencies pretty much act on their own. Most of their work is ongoing and too much for a President to minutely oversee and command. And even when there is a Presidential order that is unpopular or deemed wrong or politically opposed by those in the agency, there is often, pushback and even quiet sabotage.

Perhaps I misunderstood and you are claiming that agencies used some other method to remove a duly elected President in this statement? "They even undermine our own democracy, for instance, by attempting to remove a duly elected President."

The elaborate creation of a narrative to frame Trump is what I referred to as an example of undermining our "democracy."
The CIA and FBI don't have the power to impeach--granted that impeachment could be one of the ways the President would be removed.

But currently the Covita campaign is looking at what's happening and trying to decide who's fault this is:

What does that matter at this point?