[News] Post a Political News Story

Ongoing discussion of the political news of the day. This thread is for 'smaller' stories that don't call for their own thread. If a story blows up, please start a new thread for it.

Docjoe wrote:

I don't think they'll repeat the mistake of Kavanaugh. Trump is saying the nominee will be a woman so likelihood of skeletons in the closet to hold up approval will be vanishingly small.

He’s totes going to put Ivanka on the Supreme Court.

TheGameguru wrote:
Docjoe wrote:

I don't think they'll repeat the mistake of Kavanaugh. Trump is saying the nominee will be a woman so likelihood of skeletons in the closet to hold up approval will be vanishingly small.

He’s totes going to put Ivanka on the Supreme Court.

He has yet to give Barron a position. Can’t leave him out.

He said a woman would be his pick at a rally tonight, but he also said Nars, so who really knows?

“Barron’s done more for women in this country than anyone in the whole world. Except me. Maybe. We’ll see.”

Mixolyde wrote:
Stele wrote:

Edit- Chuck Grassley said again this summer that you can't have different rules for election year based on president. So in theory there's 4. But sh*t is real now and it's hard to trust any Republican.

I mean, you can trust them to be horrible people.

Don't forget there are Republicans against Trump group. Interestingly enough Pence former aid join the group and has a attack ad against trump up.

I'd say Neomi Rao, but he needs that hack stinking up the DC circuit court of appeals to delay all of his lawsuits and write bull sh*t opinions that fail the sniff test so bad I can smell them from the other side of the Potomac. Her opinions could knock a buzzard off a sh*t-wagon.

It's going to be some baby lawyer right out of school so they can hack it up for 50 years. I have Metallica t-shirts older than whatever trash he nominates.

From what I'm seeing, the Dems can scream and yell, but looking at the numbers right now, it's a done deal.

Prederick wrote:

From what I'm seeing, the Dems can scream and yell, but looking at the numbers right now, it's a done deal.

Yup. And it becomes clear that the next step is to fight like hell to control the senate, then pack the court. The republicans have no shame in driving our country into the ground. Dems should have none in trying to correct the un-democratic imbalances. Court packing, DC+PR statehood should all be on the table. Destroy the filibuster when Republicans are in the minority, as they’ve already shown they’re willing to abuse it.

The thing that’s bothered me most about the Democratic establishment is their adherence to this idea of “when they go low, we go high.” It’s just such a brutality stupid tactic in light of how the Republicans operate. When they go low we need to knee them in the junk and burn down their house. Everyone in the administration who’s ignored a subpoena in the last four years or blatantly lied in sworn testimony should be dragged into the courts in chains.

ruhk wrote:

The thing that’s bothered me most about the Democratic establishment is their adherence to this idea of “when they go low, we go high.” It’s just such a brutality stupid tactic in light of how the Republicans operate. When they go low we need to knee them in the junk and burn down their house. Everyone in the administration who’s ignored a subpoena in the last four years or blatantly lied in sworn testimony should be dragged into the courts in chains.

And before our Republican readers get their pearl necklaces in a twist. That goes for Democrats, too. Crimes should mean jail for any politician.

Mixolyde wrote:

And before our Republican readers get their pearl necklaces in a twist. That goes for Democrats, too. Crimes should mean jail for any politician.

Yep. That's what I don't get. All these Republicans are like "what if Bill Clinton is involved with Epstein too?" and I'm like, good, he and Trump can share a damn jail cell.

They don't seem to comprehend the GOP is party and power over everything... truth, law, country, anything.

Like. Subscribe. Underline. Shout from the rooftops. In flaming letters on the side of a mountain. Burn it into the surface of the moon.

Equity in Justice must happen from all sides. Politician, white collar, blue collar. Give these damaged people the supports they need to become assets to our nation and not just themselves.
And if the politicians in control of the levers and gears of things haven't helped reform our justice system before they face a jury then the horror of their consequences should be as real to them as the poor man that jaywalked in front of a squad-car of bored thugs.

That's my hot take.

Rezzy wrote:

Like. Subscribe. Underline. Shout from the rooftops. In flaming letters on the side of a mountain. Burn it into the surface of the moon.

Equity in Justice must happen from all sides. Politician, white collar, blue collar. Give these damaged people the supports they need to become assets to our nation and not just themselves.
And if the politicians in control of the levers and gears of things haven't helped reform our justice system before they face a jury then the horror of their consequences should be as real to them as the poor man that jaywalked in front of a squad-car of bored thugs.

That's my hot take.

That’s not a hot take. It’s not idealism either. It’s dignity for the human race. Equality means equality for everyone. Equality under the law means that you should not be able to buy your way out of prison, nor should anyone be allowed to call in favors from powerful friends.

No justice, no peace! It’s not a threat, it’s a fact of life.

We are losing the war between the rule of law and the court of public opinion. Social media may as well be the non tactical nukes in this.

Okay, I get the push for DC and Puerto Rico statehood. But if Democrats pack the court, what's to stop Republicans from doing the same thing the next time they control the Presidency and Senate? Genuinely curious, not trying to start anything.

trichy wrote:

Okay, I get the push for DC and Puerto Rico statehood. But if Democrats pack the court, what's to stop Republicans from doing the same thing the next time they control the Presidency and Senate? Genuinely curious, not trying to start anything.

Not a thing, but if your strategy requires a group of people to remain ideologically pure while ignoring the actual text and intent of the law, a larger group still works against your goals even if you manage to have a momentary majority. The liberal side doesn't need 'their' judges to remain ideologically committed for 20 or 30 years without an ability to pressure them the way the conservative side does, just just need them to be able to skillfully and rationally interpret laws, and (IMO) that is much easier to sustain than requiring 'your' judges to publically and openly misinterpret laws to achieve a particular outcome and that disparity only widens with a larger more diverse group

Nothing is stopping them _now_. Precedent has been set; it’s not like if Democrats play “by the rules” Republicans will change their behavior.

Chumpy_McChump wrote:

Nothing is stopping them _now_. Precedent has been set; it’s not like if Democrats play “by the rules” Republicans will change their behavior.

So why didn't the Republicans add ten seats and pack them with Trump family members?

trichy wrote:

Okay, I get the push for DC and Puerto Rico statehood. But if Democrats pack the court, what's to stop Republicans from doing the same thing the next time they control the Presidency and Senate? Genuinely curious, not trying to start anything.

They'd also need the House to pass the law, and if Republicans ever wind up in control of both the Presidency and the House in addition to the Senate, I feel like something will have gone so wrong already that packing the Supreme Court will be the *least* of our problems.

trichy wrote:
Chumpy_McChump wrote:

Nothing is stopping them _now_. Precedent has been set; it’s not like if Democrats play “by the rules” Republicans will change their behavior.

So why didn't the Republicans add ten seats and pack them with Trump family members?

Need something to do in Trump's second term.

JLS wrote:
trichy wrote:
Chumpy_McChump wrote:

Nothing is stopping them _now_. Precedent has been set; it’s not like if Democrats play “by the rules” Republicans will change their behavior.

So why didn't the Republicans add ten seats and pack them with Trump family members?

Need something to do in Trump's second term.

Basically.

The non-joke answer is that politics is still currently semi-operational. The attempt to repeal the ACA failed because enough Republicans senators were afraid of losing their jobs. So they have to care a slight amount about not completely obliterating norms.

That won’t last forever, though, which is why Democrats should work to lock in the ability for the will of the people to be plausible.

edit: moved to right thread

It's been mostly court talks with few news articles linked for the last few pages, gentle reminder a thread has been purposed for this talk if folks wish to continue here.

JLS wrote:
trichy wrote:
Chumpy_McChump wrote:

Nothing is stopping them _now_. Precedent has been set; it’s not like if Democrats play “by the rules” Republicans will change their behavior.

So why didn't the Republicans add ten seats and pack them with Trump family members?

Need something to do in Trump's second term.

Heh, yeah--I think it is very much is that they did not envision the backlash Trump's victory would trigger. I don't think they saw the '18 mid-terms coming at all.

If they knew their electoral goose was going to be cooked so fast, I think we would have seen a *lot* more shenanigans from them while they still had the House and more statehouses.

trichy wrote:
Chumpy_McChump wrote:

Nothing is stopping them _now_. Precedent has been set; it’s not like if Democrats play “by the rules” Republicans will change their behavior.

So why didn't the Republicans add ten seats and pack them with Trump family members?

With respect, what’s your point? That they didn’t do worse? You said that if Dems gain control and pack the courts, what would stop the GOP from doing the same, but _they actively are_. Right now. In progress.

The GOP SOP (GSOP?) is “if Dems are in a spot where I’d punch somebody, punch first because I’d hate to get punched”. If Dems never punch back, let alone punch first, they’re just gonna get punched a lot.

It would be great if it wasn’t a fistfight at all, but here we are. Pretending like it’s not a fistfight is like hoping the bully gets bored of hitting you and wanders off.

If the Dems pack the court, can the GOP "unpack" it, assuming they regain a majority in Congress?

Nevin73 wrote:

If the Dems pack the court, can the GOP "unpack" it, assuming they regain a majority in Congress?

Many appointments are for life so it would be hard for them to do that effectively.

Can we just skip ahead to the end state where the supreme court consists of every adult American.

Jonman wrote:

Can we just skip ahead to the end state where the supreme court consists of every adult American.

At least then everybody's opinion would actually count in the same way!

Chumpy_McChump wrote:
Jonman wrote:

Can we just skip ahead to the end state where the supreme court consists of every adult American.

At least then everybody's opinion would actually count in the same way!

It would represent about the same legal expertise as Justin Walker .