politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
If Joe Biden were as ruthless about his immunity as Donald Trump is, the union might actually stand a chance.
As it stands, he is refusing to consider any sort of action or regulation against the SC in any way, shape, or form. He is neither checking nor balancing a blatant power grab by the Judicial Branch (as currently co-opted by the Republican Party and Nationalist Christians).
I agree that the column presents a rather extreme scenario, but holy fuck, it’d be great if Biden was willing to go even a bit in the direction of malicious compliance instead of doing literally fucking nothing.
And more broadly: his outright refusal to take any action whatsoever in the face of clear, present, and existential danger to not only his campaign, but the Democratic Party, the Constitution, democracy in the US in general, and anyone who’s not a white evangelical, is an inexcusable abrogation of duty to his oath to protect and defend the Constitution. It’s dereliction of duty, plain and simple. That is why I now think Biden shouldn’t be the nominee any longer: he demonstrably does not have the proper temperament to respond effectively to a situation that has existed and gotten worse for the entirety of his first term. He’s done NOTHING to halt the judicial overreaches and legislatural ratfucking. I don’t expect that to change. After all, despite how much ink has been spilled about how his comments were “taken out of context”, he told us so himself.
Isn't it congress that holds the balance of power for the sc now. They are the ones with the power to remove justices.
SCOTUS just gave the POTUS the power to remove judges as well
Previously I jokingly mentioned offhand the possibility that he might have been poisoned, but thinking about it more deeply given everything that is going on right now... now I am not so sure that it is outside the realms of possibility. We might (!?) be watching a coup right now, which if it happens slowly enough seems to have greater chance to succeed?
I would instruct my intelligence apparatus to investigate and report all activities of SCOTUS members, and publish real time reports on the Web. Time Roberts got a taste of what he enabled for the rest of us.
This seems like a fanfic, but the shocking part is that it is definitely possible : as long as 34 Senators agree with it. The only check on abuse of Presidential power now is impeachment. A President who gives this speech can act with impunity as long as 34 Senators agree to vote "no" on impeachment.
Impeachment isn't a check, it's a gesture
When you eliminate all but those who would consent to it....