US Politics, November 2019: These people are truly sick.

triggering / pwning libs

being racist

caging children

I really can't wrap my head all the way around this Eddie Gallagher thing. It made sense when the Navy Secretary was threatening to resign rather than reinstate Gallagher's credentials, but then yesterday apparently he gets terminated by the acting Defense Secretary for trying to strike a secret bargain with the White House that would enable Gallagher to...keep his credentials? And apparently the acting Defense Secretary is now saying they're no longer going to pursue pulling Gallagher's credentials? So was the Navy Secretary just a patsy or a way for Defense to launder doing what they wanted to do all along?

i think he was fired because he didn't want the us military to openly condone indiscriminate, wanton murder

as a sniper, gallagher allegedly picked off random people, including children

and this is the guy trump goes to bat for. it's very ominous. did gallagher have much support within the military?

I really can't wrap my head all the way around this Eddie Gallagher thing. It made sense when the Navy Secretary was threatening to resign rather than reinstate Gallagher's credentials, but then yesterday apparently he gets terminated by the acting Defense Secretary for trying to strike a secret bargain with the White House that would enable Gallagher to...keep his credentials? And apparently the acting Defense Secretary is now saying they're no longer going to pursue pulling Gallagher's credentials? So was the Navy Secretary just a patsy or a way for Defense to launder doing what they wanted to do all along?

1. Reportedly, Navy Secretary Spencer's offer was to let Gallagher retire with his credentials (instead of having them stripped) BUT that was if the White House agreed not to insert itself further into the Navy's internal disciplinary process.

2. Spencer reportedly made this offer directly to the White House (rather than through the Secretary of Defense). Apparently an unforgivable lapse in protocol.

Interesting how people who LoVe 2 sEe NoRmS shRedded (because chaos in government is good) are now all like hOw DaRe U circumvent proper channels / working sequentially through the chain of command.

And of course the process of Gallagher being charged in the first place is strangely NOT included in the sacred norms one is not allowed to shred, Because Freedom. Because Warfighter.

i think they're trying to smear him honestly

and make it seem like his letter wasn't sincere

either way

the president is pro-murder

Correct, their whole story is BS

I think the white house supreme court is still pursuing the bannon agenda of “dismantling” the administrative state by kneecapping regulatory agencies and seeking to undermine the legitimacy of congress and the press.

― treeship., Monday, November 25, 2019 4:45 PM (twenty-eight minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

this tweet held up: Kavanaugh is on board with the non-delegation doctrine, which will cripple the ability for congress to legislate in the way they have for decades https://t.co/H9fFCxocVs https://t.co/94xuvqWIgZ

— Sigh Hersh, Persuasive Authority (@Ugarles) November 25, 2019

yeah, well he is a trump apointee

I really don't think Trump can do more than one scheme at the time.

There is no dispute within the military that it's kinda supposed to kill people in lands of sand. At issue is whether you should pose in a selfie with your dead brown person, or whether that's a trifle, you know, gauche.

Trumpworld, of course, is unsurprisingly gonna come down on the side of "let our Warfighters let off steam however they like." Again, Because Freedom, I guess. War is hell and cannot be refined. Trump may not have served in the military, but he instinctively knows about this because of his valiant struggle against the horror of bone spurs.

xp just reading about this decision

seems EXTREMELY ominous

It means SCOTUS may decide that executive agencies can't, like, make their own rules. Congress has to make them all. So, Medicare can't make new rules, EPA can't add new pollutants, DEA can't add new drugs to enforcement, etc, it all has to come from Congress.

— Geoff Smith (@HappyFunNorm) November 25, 2019

If we had a functional Legislative branch this might be reasonable, but what it will effectively result in is a crippled Federal Government

— Geoff Smith (@HappyFunNorm) November 25, 2019

There is no dispute within the military that it's kinda supposed to kill people in lands of sand. At issue is whether you should pose in a selfie with your dead brown person, or whether that's a trifle, you know, gauche.

he was also mass murdering civilians for no reason

Two Navy SEALs testified Friday that their platoon chief gunned down a young girl and an old man in Iraq in 2017 from his sniper’s perch, though neither witnessed him pulling the trigger.

The SEALs said shots came from the tower where Special Warfare Operator Chief Edward “Eddie” Gallagher was posted and they watched through their scopes as the civilians fell to the ground.

Dalton Tolbert said he and another sniper were in a neighboring tower in Mosul on June 18, 2017, and had fired warnings shots to scatter civilians by the Tigris River because the Islamic State was operating in the area.

An old man in a white tunic began running and then Tolbert heard a third shot come from the neighboring tower where Gallagher was positioned and saw the man fall.

Over the radio, he heard Gallagher say: "You guys missed him, but I got him."

tbf, drone strikes also kill civilians. but openly condoning murder for sport -- where else can you go after that? what's worse?

what it will effectively result in is a crippled Federal Government

Well yes, by design.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

what's especially gross is that the only real receptive audience for something like this is suburban troop-humping fuckbois who didn't bother to actually serve. I imagine most vets see something like this, at best, as thoroughly unwarranted and at worst utterly vile.

it doesn't demonstrate respect for the military. he subverted the chain of command! it's more like, when trump said that we have "killers" that one time. he is pro-killing.

the seals who risked their careers (and lives, as he reportedly threatened to kill them) by turning him in will not be happy

yeah. honestly, i think i might vomit if i think about this any more. there is something extremely evil about this man being paraded around fox news as a respectable veteran.

tbf, drone strikes also kill civilians. but openly condoning murder for sport -- where else can you go after that? what's worse?

If public executions of undocumented immigrants are what it takes to drive up Republican voter turnout come September/October 2020, then Fox News will just have to clear a Sunday evening timeslot.

not a proponent of vigilante justice but I sure wouldn’t lose any sleep if Gallagher were to get a taste of his own medicine

i'd be interested to see what would happen if trump pardoned someone like the charlottesville killer or like dylan roof or someone like that.

would they be invited onto fox news to inveigh against the system while the pretty hosts smile and nod along?

He already pardoned Sheriff Joe, and he's about as shitty a person as you can find short of an outright murderer.

the non-delegation doctrine

and just where do these "strict constructionists" find this written in the US constitution?

I'm still not discounting the possibility of a Shkreli cabinet appointment before Prez Doughblob gets the boot.

and just where do these "strict constructionists" find this written in the US constitution?

An emanation from the 10th Amendment reservation of powers maybe

the president is pro-murder

very trad

The Congress must delegate some level of decision making power to the Executive, otherwise legislation would rapidly reach a reduction ad absurdum.

i thought that was the point of an executive branch

execute the law

Well Republicans like executing, that's for sure

the non-delegation doctrine

and just where do these "strict constructionists" find this written in the US constitution?

― A is for (Aimless), Monday, November 25, 2019 6:12 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

next to the section about judicial review =D

^_^

Just after the parts about abortion and teh gayz

the idea of a regulatory state has been one of the lodestars of conservative ire since FDR. That's what SkyNet designed Roberts, Thomas, and Alito to dismantle.

When they get rid of the SEC all hell will break loose.

feel like if the dems arent gonna court pack, their only real option is to make laws/executive orders and ignore the courts

Couldn't this gaggle of fuckos go start their own proto-nation on a decommissioned oil drilling platform or something? Like if you're so goddamn deadset against things working the way they're supposed to, maybe the problem is you and you should fuck off. It's a good rule of thumb for life, I find.

This nation is called The South iirc

this is the year i finally learn that winning elections is about quickly getting what you want before the crowd turns on you. dems think it's about winning offices and holding them for years to slowly get things you want. then they lose and blame their modest policy demands, so they come back with a weaker hand the next time around. gop meanwhile knows they're unpopular and dont give a shit.

that's what really bummed me out about Obama's presidency - the most fertile time for accomplishing big things legislatively is within the first two years of a first term, and he was handicapped by/had to expend a significant amount of his political capital on the economic crash

The situation in the federal courts is getting dire and soon there will be no good solutions available at all. Court packing would be legal, but politically too hot to handle right now. Impeachments of judges would be another legal avenue, but impeachments could only be pursued on the grounds of corruption or incompetence, not a judge's reactionary politics. Ignoring the courts would be a total political disaster.

gop courts with political disaster as a matter of course. like i get that ppl would be mad and it would require the dems to cede the "moral high ground" but also fuck it, do power grabs constantly and then you will have power to do the things???

like what good is a constitutional crisis if it's only one side testing its limits in pursuit of its goals???