Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    287 points ridruejo | 24 comments | | HN request time: 0.417s | source | bottom
    1. Hizonner ◴[] No.45893909[source]
    Bad news. Trump and Hegseth do not have the authority to rename the Department of Defense, no matter what they put on a Web site. That requires an act of Congress, which hasn't happened. And probably won't, because even if they could convince Congress to do it, that would require them to ask... and their whole modus operandi is based around pretending to have authority they don't have.

    Calling it the Department of War is accepting that Trump's the King.

    replies(3): >>45894273 #>>45895423 #>>45898927 #
    2. Loughla ◴[] No.45894273[source]
    The ada.gov website has a banner that reads, "Democrats have shut down the government. Department of Justice websites are not currently regularly updated."

    Trump is the king.

    Edit: To be clear, I think it's complete and utter garbage. I'm assuming people think I think it's a good thing? It's not a good thing. At all.

    replies(5): >>45894321 #>>45895504 #>>45896975 #>>45899839 #>>45900247 #
    3. tomrod ◴[] No.45894321[source]
    No, Trump has a minor fiefdom district and some authority for services the states and their representatives agreed to let the federal government execute.

    He is not king.

    replies(3): >>45894631 #>>45894814 #>>45899520 #
    4. jfengel ◴[] No.45894631{3}[source]
    He is routinely violating laws, so quickly that there isn't enough room in the courts for all of them.

    "King" is inaccurate, but correctly implies the degree to which the law does not apply to him.

    5. Loughla ◴[] No.45894814{3}[source]
    My point was that he is acting like a king. And if he's allowed to act like a king, checks and balances don't mean anything.

    Which makes him the king.

    Turns out, letting government operate on a system of agreements that require appropriate behavior instead of clear consequences for this type of behavior is a bad idea.

    6. johnnyanmac ◴[] No.45895423[source]
    I thought the executive had the power to rename existing departments and map landmarks. That's why we got "DOGE" disgused under the USDS and the "Gulf of America".

    If that's not legal, I'll do my best to act shocked.

    replies(2): >>45895573 #>>45896091 #
    7. johnnyanmac ◴[] No.45895504[source]
    It's garbage and also illegal. He probably won't get what he deserves since nature will likely get to him first at this rate. Hut there will be a reckoning one day when this alls shifts.

    I think that's the most likely scenario, but I'm open to two others:

    - this escalates and we enter Civil War. How things play out from there is unimaginable since there's so many other attack vectors in a civil war with a super power.

    - things shift and everyone accointable simply flees. Not the ideal outcome, but I'll take mass resignations at this point. The focus will need to be on rebuilding either way.

    replies(2): >>45896346 #>>45897235 #
    8. nickthegreek ◴[] No.45895573[source]
    In this case, the executive had the power to add a secondary title, Department of War. It does not override the primary name of Dept of Defense but it appears to be the proper amount of appeasement.
    9. metaphor ◴[] No.45896091[source]
    Stop thinking and RTFM[1]:

    > (a) The Secretary of Defense is authorized the use of this additional secondary title — the Secretary of War — and may be recognized by that title in official correspondence, public communications, ceremonial contexts, and non-statutory documents within the executive branch.

    > (b) The Department of Defense and the Office of the Secretary of Defense may be referred to as the Department of War and the Office of the Secretary of War, respectively, in the contexts described in subsection (a) of this section.

    [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/rest...

    replies(2): >>45897375 #>>45897931 #
    10. vjvjvjvjghv ◴[] No.45896346{3}[source]
    Something being illegal only has a meaning if somebody prosecutes it and has the power to stop it. With the DOJ head’s main qualification being loyal to the president there is nothing that will be done.

    My other concern is that Congress will spend the next few decades prosecuting, investigating and impeaching each other without doing anything useful for the country. I thought impeaching Trump while knowing that it would never succeed was a big distraction and basically show business. I would like to see much more focus on actual problems of citizens. Trump being in prison won’t improve my life.

    replies(2): >>45898193 #>>45899244 #
    11. degamad ◴[] No.45896975[source]
    Farmers.gov goes even further:

    > Due to the Radical Left Democrat shutdown...

    12. kakacik ◴[] No.45897235{3}[source]
    ... and the most probable scenario - this is new normal, US slides mildly into fascist dictatorship ruled by elite who doesn't even try to hide its status and control, but maintains enough momentum of the past to keep it afloat at/around the top with China as a cca peer. Less actual military power but better overall economy shape. Its not like US is a champion of real democracy for decades, not if you compare it to places like Switzerland.

    Lets not forget half of US population knew pretty well what they voted for and went on ahead full speed, in 'fuck it' or 'fuck'em' mentality.

    13. probably_wrong ◴[] No.45897375{3}[source]
    I think you should also quote this part:

    > Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of War shall submit to the President (...) a recommendation on the actions required to permanently change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War. This recommendation shall include the proposed legislative and executive actions necessary to accomplish this renaming.

    It may currently be a second name, but the explicit intention is for it to become the only one. In HN terms I'd argue that saying "there is no Department of War" is akin to arguing that a piece of software doesn't have feature X because it's only available in the beta release.

    14. fnordpiglet ◴[] No.45897931{3}[source]
    AKA - it’s the department of defense in the same way Robert Kennedy was named Robert but went by Bobby sometimes. Trump doesn’t get to change the name, just assign an unofficial nickname that he thinks sounds more tough. Sort of like his pretend tough guy Secretary of defense that dresses up as a Secretary of war for TV moments. The fact they drag along the entire military and its leadership in their charade is embarrassing, and the asinine nickname is expensive and likely causes operational confusion.
    15. donkeybeer ◴[] No.45898193{4}[source]
    Trump being hanged would improve your life immensely. It sends a message to future criminals snd traitors.
    16. ap99 ◴[] No.45898927[source]
    They can add a secondary title. And they're drafting legislation to change the primary title.

    Seems pretty simple.

    replies(1): >>45901424 #
    17. watwut ◴[] No.45899244{4}[source]
    The high level corruption is core reason why nothing can be done for actual problems of citizens. And the more corruption, the less will be done. Impeaching Trump would be first step toward word where lives of citizens can be improved.

    What happened was the opposite and lives of citizens will be worst off.

    replies(1): >>45901127 #
    18. jcattle ◴[] No.45899520{3}[source]
    If Congress tells the Executive: "Here's some money, spend it on USAID to stabilize regions in which the US Army operates and are of strategic importance". And the Executive says, "thanks for the money! I will spend it on whatever the hell I choose." And congress just belly flops over the next time they pass a budget, without checking that overreach of power, the Executive looks more and more like a king.

    You voted for congress, but apparently congress doesn't matter anymore.

    19. hereme888 ◴[] No.45899839[source]
    It is a fact the democrats shut down government because they wanted to hide irrelevant provisions in the funding bill. Enough shady business from democrats!
    replies(2): >>45900258 #>>45900499 #
    20. immibis ◴[] No.45900247[source]
    And, this page exists: https://www.whitehouse.gov/mysafespace
    21. immibis ◴[] No.45900258{3}[source]
    If by "irrelevant provisions" you mean... funding. For things that were already being funded. Yes, hiding continuing funding in the continuing funding bill. Very devious.
    22. array_key_first ◴[] No.45900499{3}[source]
    > Enough shady business from democrats!

    Okay what is with this style of writing? I see it in Trump tweets, on Fox news, and in other conservative circles.

    Are you guys made in a fucking lab or something?

    23. vjvjvjvjghv ◴[] No.45901127{5}[source]
    It was known from the start that the impeachment wouldn't work. It was purely symbolic.

    Instead of impeachment it would be much better to work on winning elections and then do what's good for the country. A good start would be to run decent candidates.

    24. jghn ◴[] No.45901424[source]
    Drafting legislation isn't the same thing as that legislation having passed. It's the Department of Defense until Congress says otherwise.