-
Executive Branch:
NEVER talk to enemy fake news. NEVER allow them into pressroom. IGNORE the federal judges who say you must let them in.
Upon entering office, fire everyone who can be fired, isolate the rest. Hire no insiders.
Don't require lawyers be appointed to the bench. We've seen a 200-plue year string of failures from these JDs that specialize in linguistic gymnastics. Constitution and Bill of Rights are simple common sense to ordinary folk.
-
Legislative Branch:
Run on impeaching ALL federal judges. Term limits for judicial branch.
REQUIRE bills have only one topic. (any argument about efficiency is bullshit--we want the legislative branch to move slowly).
Term Limits.
-
Derelict and Corrupt Judicial Branch:
GFY
Please add yours.
I think setting up an intelligence agency that is dedicated to investigating wasteful government spending and using the government for money-laundering would be good.
I believe that talking to the press is good, but you should have a higher level of anti-trust on press companies. Make some legislation and call it the Press Cartel Act.
Term limits for the judicial branch is kind of weak, term limits on congress would be great though, same thing with the one topic bills, riders and so on.
Ability for the legislative branch to vote on overriding legal precedent.
Removal of standing as a legitimate legal argument, if you believe you are aggrieved, you should have the ability to get your case in court. Opposing parties though should have the counter-file it as a monetary damage lawsuit. (A lawsuit where everyone knows the other side is just filing to have the opposing side waste money and/or force a settlement.)
Your points have merit.
I would agree with higher anti-trust, except that I have ZERO faith in the judicial process. That is why I would just shut out the obvious enemies in media--faith in your own actions as a remedy rather than relying on (Supreme Court, Mike Pence, etc).
I agree with finding some remedy for lawfare (drain your opponents capital), once a trustworthy judicial branch is established.
Term limits on Judicial Branch is intended to retard corruption. Why is that weak?
The Judicial branch is supposed to be the most unchanging branch of the three. Justice based on the law should not change, while the law stays still. Term limits impose changes, while the law stays still.
That is to say that term limits are not my solution of first choice. What I would rather have it be is the branch with the most checks on it's power. With both congress and the executive branch being able to disrupt it.
I would rather have legislatures be able to have powers to deal with corrupt judges and being able to vote on whether something can be regarded as "precedent".
The biggest issue of the judicial system is that judges with a political motivation can fuck up your case and force themselves to make certain rulings.
Executive:
Being "commander in chief" means you participate in the battles.
Legislative:
Any laws made affect everyone equally with no loopholes for politicians, military, and law enforcement.
Judicial:
Judges in violation of laws are removed from any level of judicial seating.
We don't have real elections anymore, none of this matters