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

^_^

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???

Naked power grabs don't bother the reactionary base of the GOP because they are convinced in the necessity for preemptive strikes against the evil that is progressivism, so all the Republicans need to do is find a fig leaf, so that their noise machine can confuse things just long enough for most of the other voters to tire of it and soon forget it ever happened.

Naked power grabs by the democrats will instantly stimulate the right wing noise machine into paroxysms of outrage, prompting liberals to have a crisis of conscience at the violation of their high ideals, which will stimulate revulsion against the power grabbers and be used as a battle cry by the GOP for decades, like "borking" or "Benghazi".

Sometimes you can't win for losing.

otm

but i wanna do criiiiiiiiiiimes

Naked power grabs by the democrats will instantly stimulate the right wing noise machine into paroxysms of outrage, prompting liberals to have a crisis of conscience at the violation of their high ideals, which will stimulate revulsion against the power grabbers and be used as a battle cry by the GOP for decades, like "borking" or "Benghazi".

so why not go ahead and do the thing they're gonna accuse you of doing anyway

one reason is that power grabs work a lot better when you have an entire media complex that is set up to lie to constituents and distort any opposing information. democrats have nothing that compares to fox news, let alone conservative talk radio/christian radio (which is essentially the same now)

and one reason they don't have their own fox news is because if democrats develop a comparable version of fox/rush limbaugh/focus on the family i will puke so hard over everything

otm

one reason is that power grabs work a lot better when you have an entire media complex that is set up to lie to constituents and distort any opposing information. democrats have nothing that compares to fox news, let alone conservative talk radio/christian radio (which is essentially the same now)

to which conservatives, without lying, will say, "You guys have the NYT, WaPost, social media, college professors, and the regulatory agencies." This has been their argument since Goldwater.

'you guys have dennis perrin'

good ol DP

New Deal and Great Society both required democrats to assertively wield political power. Flexing power isn't a function of fundamental differences between D and R voters, and it doesn't require a propaganda machine, it just requires majorities and willpower

also and lemme just make sure we're on the same page but also crimes

crimes goes without saying, naturally

aw, thanks m@tt

*rereads thread* wait, hold up

'you guys have dennis perrin'

uh he hates liberals (you know, like me)

Dem's hem and haw, wondering what the fictional independent strawman in some bumfuck suburb will think ("won't somebody think of the deficit"), while Rep's are "Let's just do it and be heroes."

The republican party is controlled by radicals and ideologues and the democratic party is not

This has been true for some timd

Some people who dont follow politics too closely fail to understand this. “Conservative” doesn’t capture the idea that we should take an axe to the entire federal government, knowing this will have massively destructive ripple effects for ordinary citizens.

"arsonists" might be a better term

the DC Circuit Court case decision from earlier this year came in, McGahn must comply with House Judiciary Committee subpoena

“The case involves a subpoena from the House Judiciary Committee to former White House counsel Don McGahn. It predates House Democrats’ formal announcement of an impeachment inquiry into Trump, but represents the first test in court since Trump took office of an argument the administration is pushing to stymie the impeachment inquiry: that current and former senior White House officials have “absolute immunity” from congressional subpoenas.”

on to the Supreme Court

Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh seem like locks to vote to reverse. Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor presumably will vote to uphold. Our boy Chief Justice John ('John-Boy Walton') Roberts seems likely to be The Decider.

But if Congress can never subpoena senior WH officials for any reason then, almost automatically, no court or prosecutor would ever be able to, either. That strikes me as an unhealthy amount of immunity. Y'know.

give the people a king

The people demand a king

http://d279m997dpfwgl.cloudfront.net/wp/2019/03/AP_18334546967309-1000x666.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Richard_Thomas_2015.jpg/1200px-Richard_Thomas_2015.jpg

Indeed, the current dispute is only about whether Mr. McGahn must show up to be asked questions. Even if the Supreme Court were to ultimately say he must, it would leave unanswered whether the questions that lawmakers want to ask him — primarily about conversations with Mr. Trump detailed in the Mueller report — are subject to executive privilege, so the litigation process might have to start all over again at that point.

I mean, if you're inclined to favor despotism, the best time to formalize your preference is when your country is being led by someone who has proven to have basically no loyalty to anyone that didn't have dirt on him. Someone who couldn't care less about the interests of those seeking to solidify his power.

another Congress vs. executive branch battle:

Supreme Court blocks House committee from immediately reviewing Trump’s financial records:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-blocks-house-committee-from-immediately-reviewing-trumps-financial-records/2019/11/25/b73a26ac-0d79-11ea-97ac-a7ccc8dd1ebc_story.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/25/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-tax-returns.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

fucking bastards

I remember reading Steve Vladeck’s comments on twitter mentioning that “there are plenty of reasons why a Justice who is otherwise inclined to vote against Trump on the merits might still want to freeze the status quo until the full Court can conduct plenary review.”

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1195044031321034753.html

not expecting anything good from this court though

Trump Tells Allies He Wants Absolved War Criminals to Campaign for Him

If Donald Trump gets his wish, he’ll soon take the three convicted or accused war criminals he spared from consequence on the road as special guests in his reelection campaign, according to two sources who have heard Trump discuss their potential roles for the 2020 effort.

Despite military and international backlash to Trump’s Nov. 15 clemency – fallout from which cost Navy Secretary Richard Spencer his job on Sunday – Trump believes he has rectified major injustices. Two people tell The Daily Beast they’ve heard Trump talk about how he’d like to have the now-cleared Clint Lorance, Matthew Golsteyn, or Edward Gallagher show up at his 2020 rallies, or even have a moment on stage at his renomination convention in Charlotte next year. Right-wing media has portrayed all three as martyrs brought down by “political correctness” within the military.

“He briefly discussed making it a big deal at the convention,” said one of these sources, who requested anonymity to talk about private conversations. “The president made a reference to the 2016 [convention] and where they brought on-stage heroes” like former Navy SEAL Marcus Luttrell, who refused to execute detained civilians ahead of a devastating Taliban attack.

these people are truly sick

jesus fucking christ

extremely in favour of him making this a major plank of his campaign, myself

former Navy SEAL Marcus Luttrell, who refused to execute detained civilians ahead of a devastating Taliban attack.

Presumably Trump is working to have Luttrell court-martialed for this.