This is aggressively wrong. Congress can and does override executive orders with legislation, which takes precedence over EOs, which are strictly just there to provide guidance to executive agencies on how to enforce the law (though it's been abused for decades, especially by King Nigger). The courts are also superior to EOs, which must pass (((Constitutional muster))) to be valid. States can also act to bar the implementation of EOs, or to modify their effects, within their borders, and though this hasn't really been tested in court it would probably hold up for any issue the Jews aren't too serious about, like Nigger Rights or antisemitism.
Ironically, past presidents have actually been blocked from overturning the EOs of their predecessors. I don't understand how, but both Bush and Obama have been cockblocked for trying to flip or repeal Clinton-era orders. Probably typical Jewish tricks, but EOs are not what you think they are.
[–] 19045735? ago
<what is checks and balances
Congress can cut funding but as you pointed out yourself executive orders aren't fucking laws so they can't be overridden by laws. They're above the law and carried out as such.
This is technically true but only if a court is wants to challenge the order. No court wanted to challenge the bump-stock ban so it went into effect, but they did challenge his EO to ban muslims.
You are the one denying that they have any power at all. Look up the bump-stock ban, talk to a local gunstore owner and tell him all this shit and he will laugh at you. The ban is in effect. I would hope the courts would challenge EO gun control but they haven't so far, so why would they now? Hmmm?