The Constitution starts with a Preamble, or statement of purpose. Article I describes the Legislative branch, Article II the Presidency, and Article III the Judiciary. Those are the only branches of our federal government. Articles IV-VII are largely devoted to various processes. It would seem that this would be a pretty simple set of ideas for almost any sentient commentator to understand.
Yet we hear a constant drumbeat of “the Department of Justice has to operate independently from the President!” This comes from numerous legal commentators, mostly on the left, who think that presidential oversight of the DOJ is tantamount to Vito Corleone managing the New York Police Department.
Image created using AI.
The headline on the September 30 Dispatch email newsletter reads, “Trump’s Politicized DOJ.” This supposedly neutral outlet went on at length about how Trump fired the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia and installed his own former legal counsel, Lindsey Halligan (“and a former Miss Colorado USA semifinalist”), to the post. Pronto, right after a prod from the President on Truth Social, we get the Comey indictment, meaning that “justice” equals “retribution.” Not!
Horror of horrors! Another attractive woman is in a high government post! Who knows what moniker will be hung on her to join “DHS Barbie” (DHS Secretary Kristi Noem) and “Pam Blondie” (Attorney General Pam Bondi)? How sexist can one be?
Trump married a beautiful woman and has had a number of attractive high achievers on his (Yuge!) staff. Is that a crime? Or is it simply that the left is so overpopulated with women who would repel most self-respecting men that pleasant physical attributes have to be denigrated? Right. They’re just jealous of Sydney Sweeney.
In the world of legal analysis, the concern is something called “the unitary Executive theory.” Big government advocates and a lot of misinformed “good government” dupes actually believe that there are four branches of government. The Legislative, Executive, and Judicial are, by congressional fiat, overseen by the “Expert” branch. Supposedly, there are tasks that are just too technical for supervision by any elected official. These require “subject matter experts.”
Our experience with subject matter experts should inform us (we, the People, the ultimate subject matter experts on government) that everything the government does impairs us. COVID is a classic.
We were told by Anthony “I am science” Fauci that we didn’t need masks since it was spread by contact. It wasn’t, and we knew that, but we still wasted our hard-earned money on gallons of hand sanitizer, the only benefit of which was to pad the pockets of manufacturers and alcohol distillers. Then he decreed that we did, in fact, need masks, and double masking was even better. All the while, he attended baseball games without a mask.
And then we have his infamous “social distancing,” which in Florida was identified as “one gator length” between people in a line.
Image provided by the author.
Finally, Fauci was forced to admit that social distancing had been pulled from his dupa. There had never been any medical data to support it. And that is exactly what we should expect from “subject matter experts.” If they work for the government, they’re wrong. Full stop. Maybe there are some exceptions, but none readily come to mind.
The Supreme Court has even been willing to give the Federal Reserve leeway, but recent history should again show that even those “experts” are spitting in the wind when they make decisions. In short, “expert agencies” is an oxymoron. Which brings us back to the Constitution.
Article I, §8 has a long list of powers delegated to Congress beginning with “to borrow money.” The jobs that most expert agencies do aren’t on the list, either. When they are, Congress has been too busy meddling in our lives to properly direct those agencies.
Unfortunately, a New Deal-era case called Humphrey’s Executor allowed Congress to create bodies headed by people that the President could hire but couldn’t fire. But fortunately for freedom, the Court has begun peeling that protection back via Seila Law and a number of procedural rulings on the Rocket Docket.
It is increasingly clear that all personnel decisions in the Executive Branch are ultimately exercised by the President. Which brings us to our current situation.
In that immortal line from Western movies, it’s time to head them off at the impasse. Dems are demanding “unity,” which means that we surrender to them and spend a trillion and a half dollars we don’t have to “keep the government open.”
But since government is the problem, why should we? In the words of the prophet Amos (3:3), “Can two walk together unless they are in agreement?”
We don’t agree with all your leftist manure. We can have unity, but only if, for the first time in a century, you decide to come our direction. But after the most recent White House conference on the subject, Dems are doubling down, and that’s after Russ Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, announced that the shutdown would be accompanied by job cuts.
The dirty little secret that Dems don’t want you to remember is that, historically, the poor, helpless, unrepresented federal employees who didn’t get paid during a shutdown have actually gotten a paid vacation since every act to re-open the government gave them back pay. But there’s a different secret that Dems are forgetting.
If the government isn’t funded, no job in any unfunded agency technically exists. And if the agencies and programs don’t exist, even for one day, every employee in those agencies and programs can be terminated without any civil service protection or benefits. Your job was cut, and you were collateral damage. Do not pass GO. Do not collect $200.
Just think of how many homes in Northern Virginia would suddenly be for sale. What a way to turn Virginia Red! I’m sure that my astute reader will find details both pro and con, but ultimately, the absence of all those federal jobs would be a major benefit. But wait! There’s more!
We should expose the Dems for the hypocrites that they are at every chance, and the shutdown gives us a golden opportunity. Majority Leader Thune should bring the Continuing Resolution (which continues Biden’s last “budget”) to the floor for a vote.
Chucky Schumer will announce a filibuster, which requires seven Dem votes to break. Since the Dems have their feet in concrete, hand them the microphone and tell them to start talking. Every minute they blather is a minute that the public sees them for what they are. Get in front of the TV cameras and explain that they are opposing their own budget that they passed last year.
When they finally cave, bring single department “spaghetti appropriations” to the Senate, without the jobs the OMB already cut. Let them filibuster again. Explain on the Sunday shows that non-essential jobs are non-essential and don’t belong in the government.
Do all this and get ready for a real Red Tsunami.
Ted Noel is a retired physician who posts on social media as Doctor Ted. His occasional Doctor Ted’s Prescription podcast is available on multiple podcast channels.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/10/a_shutdown_could_restore_america_to_true_constitutional_governance.html
