President Trump and US politics catchall

[fishfoodie]

Rudy has tested positive for the Coronavirus.

Twenty grand a day while he's isolating. Nice work if you can get it .... & assuming the shitgibbon pays the bill

[Ovals]

Rudy has tested positive for the Coronavirus.

Twenty grand a day while he's isolating. Nice work if you can get it .... & assuming the shitgibbon pays the bill

Won't do him much good if he kicks the bucket.

Rudy has become a victim of Trump's downplaying of the risks - constantly meeting with people not wearing masks and not observing strict social distancing.

[fishfoodie]

Rudy has tested positive for the Coronavirus.

Twenty grand a day while he's isolating. Nice work if you can get it .... & assuming the shitgibbon pays the bill

Won't do him much good if he kicks the bucket.

Rudy has become a victim of Trump's downplaying of the risks - constantly meeting with people not wearing masks and not observing strict social distancing.

He's hardly a victim.

He's an adult, & he made a conscious decision to ignore the Science & follow a fucking moron, who needed to cheat to get entrance to even a dogshit University.

If he dies; it's because he chose money & power over his own safety.

[Kiwias]

The Rona did not like this gesture from Rudi.

[Niegs]

I can barely imagine how the Covid deniers would spin it if Tooty Rudy croked from it.

[Sandstorm]

I can barely imagine how the Covid deniers would spin it if Tooty Rudy croked from it.

“It’s just a type of flu”

[fishfoodie]

I can barely imagine how the Covid deniers would spin it if Tooty Rudy croked from it.

None of them gave a shite about Herman Cain dying; for obvious reasons; & when Chris Christie ended up in hospital; again, there was no commentary.

[Hal Jordan]

Barr hinting that he might be jumping ship before Emperor Vitellius fires him. Presumably he will be replaced by someone in the vein of Judge Jeffreys.

[Sinkers]

I see Trumps looking to break more records:
- most federal executions in more than a century
- first federal executions during transition in 130 years

What the history books will say about this shitbag.

[Hal Jordan]

What anyone sane has been saying about him from day one.

[Rinkals]

One part of me wants the SCOTUS to overturn the election result and declare election invalid.

Yes, I know that's deranged and I know the damage it would do, not only to the US, but to the rest of the world.

But it would expose their democracy for the sham it is and their judiciary as flawed partisan hacks.

[Wignu]

One part of me wants the SCOTUS to overturn the election result and declare election invalid.

Yes, I know that's deranged and I know the damage it would do, not only to the US, but to the rest of the world.

But it would expose their democracy for the sham it is and their judiciary as flawed partisan hacks.

Be very very careful what you wish for.

[Torquemada 1420]

Trump will have overseen the most executions by a US president in more than a century

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55261224

And those are just the officially recognised ones....

[Rinkals]

One part of me wants the SCOTUS to overturn the election result and declare election invalid.

Yes, I know that's deranged and I know the damage it would do, not only to the US, but to the rest of the world.

But it would expose their democracy for the sham it is and their judiciary as flawed partisan hacks.

Be very very careful what you wish for.

Yeah.

I know.

[Biffer]

One part of me wants the SCOTUS to overturn the election result and declare election invalid.

Yes, I know that's deranged and I know the damage it would do, not only to the US, but to the rest of the world.

But it would expose their democracy for the sham it is and their judiciary as flawed partisan hacks.

Be very very careful what you wish for.

Yeah.

I know.

Yeah, a coup in the most powerful country in the world is not a good thing for any of us.

Even the attempted coup happening now is dangerous. If they were to succeed in the supreme court, it would, undoubtedly, lead to armed conflict in the US. Certain states would refuse to recognise the president and you might end up with threats to secede from the union.

[Fangle]

Be very very careful what you wish for.

Yeah.

I know.

Yeah, a coup in the most powerful country in the world is not a good thing for any of us.

Even the attempted coup happening now is dangerous. If they were to succeed in the supreme court, it would, undoubtedly, lead to armed conflict in the US. Certain states would refuse to recognise the president and you might end up with threats to secede from the union.

The president has no authority to declare an election invalid, and to hope that he would try for a coup is really nasty. He would get no support from any person of authority, including all state governors. I cannot imagine the mindset of someone who wishes civil war to happen for their own vicarious entertainment.

All American posters have said, all along, that it will be a peaceful transition whatever happens.

[Biffer]

Yeah.

I know.

Yeah, a coup in the most powerful country in the world is not a good thing for any of us.

Even the attempted coup happening now is dangerous. If they were to succeed in the supreme court, it would, undoubtedly, lead to armed conflict in the US. Certain states would refuse to recognise the president and you might end up with threats to secede from the union.

The president has no authority to declare an election invalid, and to hope that he would try for a coup is really nasty. He would get no support from any person of authority, including all state governors. I cannot imagine the mindset of someone who wishes civil war to happen for their own vicarious entertainment.

All American posters have said, all along, that it will be a peaceful transition whatever happens.

Haven't you seen the Texas application? One state AG trying to get another state's election results overturned? One state interfering with another's business like this is entirely unconstitutional but there are elected republican officials trying to do it. There are elected people of authority trying to overturn democratic elections right now, in the USA.

[Fangle]

Yeah, a coup in the most powerful country in the world is not a good thing for any of us.

Even the attempted coup happening now is dangerous. If they were to succeed in the supreme court, it would, undoubtedly, lead to armed conflict in the US. Certain states would refuse to recognise the president and you might end up with threats to secede from the union.

The president has no authority to declare an election invalid, and to hope that he would try for a coup is really nasty. He would get no support from any person of authority, including all state governors. I cannot imagine the mindset of someone who wishes civil war to happen for their own vicarious entertainment.

All American posters have said, all along, that it will be a peaceful transition whatever happens.

Haven't you seen the Texas application? One state AG trying to get another state's election results overturned? One state interfering with another's business like this is entirely unconstitutional but there are elected republican officials trying to do it. There are elected people of authority trying to overturn democratic elections right now, in the USA.

That won’t have any legs.

[Biffer]

The president has no authority to declare an election invalid, and to hope that he would try for a coup is really nasty. He would get no support from any person of authority, including all state governors. I cannot imagine the mindset of someone who wishes civil war to happen for their own vicarious entertainment.

All American posters have said, all along, that it will be a peaceful transition whatever happens.

Haven't you seen the Texas application? One state AG trying to get another state's election results overturned? One state interfering with another's business like this is entirely unconstitutional but there are elected republican officials trying to do it. There are elected people of authority trying to overturn democratic elections right now, in the USA.

That won’t have any legs.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure of that too, but the point is there are senior people in positions of power within individual states who are trying to do this.

[Rinkals]

Haven't you seen the Texas application? One state AG trying to get another state's election results overturned? One state interfering with another's business like this is entirely unconstitutional but there are elected republican officials trying to do it. There are elected people of authority trying to overturn democratic elections right now, in the USA.

That won’t have any legs.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure of that too, but the point is there are senior people in positions of power within individual states who are trying to do this.

It's all very well saying that the case does not have merit, but the SCOTUS has been appointed on the basis of partisan affiliation and not judicial integrity.

According to CNN , these are the States with GOP attorneys general backing Texas: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia.

[Niegs]

It's funny how a nation that's so widely noted for ousting a King through revolution currently has a mad wannabe king and a lot of little ego maniacs acting similarly, maybe not unlike robber barons.

All the disenfranchisement, corruption, cronyism, etc. continually mocks the 'values' they forever preach and criticise other countries for not having. But it also feels like they're brushing off every attack that comes their way. I wonder if there'd be more people in the streets if it wasn't for Covid?

[Biffer]

That won’t have any legs.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure of that too, but the point is there are senior people in positions of power within individual states who are trying to do this.

It's all very well saying that the case does not have merit, but the SCOTUS has been appointed on the basis of partisan affiliation and not judicial integrity.

According to CNN , these are the States with GOP attorneys general backing Texas: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia.

The thing to remember about SCOTUS though is that Trump has absolutely no pull over them. They're appointed now and can't be removed. Trump has played fast and loose with appointments and patronage, but in particular the three conservative judges who were appointed by Bushes Snr and Jnr are more likely to side with the constitution. The main effect of the conservative nature of SCOTU is the increasing number of religious freedom cases they're choosing to judge and this doesn't really fit into that category.

[Rinkals]

It depends who you ask.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

The Texas AG efforts will surely fail as neither the facts nor the law are on the side of Paxton and all those who've piled on. But even with the expected outcome it's a worrying number who've piled on, this just shouldn't be happening. It is an attempted coup, and seemingly no action will be taken around that.

[Saint]

The Texas AG efforts will surely fail as neither the facts nor the law are on the side of Paxton and all those who've piled on. But even with the expected outcome it's a worrying number who've piled on, this just shouldn't be happening. It is an attempted coup, and seemingly no action will be taken around that.

It's a Trump loyalty test. Paxton is fishing for a federal pardon (he's in quite a lot if trouble) and everyone else signing on is looking fir MAGA endorsements and funding.

SCOTUS actually needs to hear argument on this so that they can disembowel it for the political junk that it is.

[Fangle]

The Texas AG efforts will surely fail as neither the facts nor the law are on the side of Paxton and all those who've piled on. But even with the expected outcome it's a worrying number who've piled on, this just shouldn't be happening. It is an attempted coup, and seemingly no action will be taken around that.

It's a Trump loyalty test. Paxton is fishing for a federal pardon (he's in quite a lot if trouble) and everyone else signing on is looking fir MAGA endorsements and funding.

SCOTUS actually needs to hear argument on this so that they can disembowel it for the political junk that it is.

I’m pretty sure they won’t touch it with a bargepole, in exactly the same way they have avoided all others.

[Carter's Choice]

Has Trump now set a precedent for how a losing GOP Presidential candidate will behave after every federal election? Spend months contesting the election result in court? Why do conservatives hate democracy so much?

[Saint]

The Texas AG efforts will surely fail as neither the facts nor the law are on the side of Paxton and all those who've piled on. But even with the expected outcome it's a worrying number who've piled on, this just shouldn't be happening. It is an attempted coup, and seemingly no action will be taken around that.

It's a Trump loyalty test. Paxton is fishing for a federal pardon (he's in quite a lot if trouble) and everyone else signing on is looking fir MAGA endorsements and funding.

SCOTUS actually needs to hear argument on this so that they can disembowel it for the political junk that it is.

I’m pretty sure they won’t touch it with a bargepole, in exactly the same way they have avoided all others.

And I understand why they're avoiding it. But in the long term that's the wrong decision. They have to destroy this in an unequivocal 9-0 decision. Avoiding it just encourages further, more extreme, nonsense in future

[Hal Jordan]

And now Devin Nunes has Covid, but he's fine. Not only does he have the evil gene to counter it, there isn't any evidence that it affects bovidae.

[Sinkers]

It's a Trump loyalty test. Paxton is fishing for a federal pardon (he's in quite a lot if trouble) and everyone else signing on is looking fir MAGA endorsements and funding.

SCOTUS actually needs to hear argument on this so that they can disembowel it for the political junk that it is.

I’m pretty sure they won’t touch it with a bargepole, in exactly the same way they have avoided all others.

And I understand why they're avoiding it. But in the long term that's the wrong decision. They have to destroy this in an unequivocal 9-0 decision. Avoiding it just encourages further, more extreme, nonsense in future

Case gone - rejected by SCOTUS - Texas does not have legal standing to bring the case.

[Biffer]

SCOTUS have thrown out the Texas case with a short none of your business kind of statement.

[Ata Rangi]

I’m pretty sure they won’t touch it with a bargepole, in exactly the same way they have avoided all others.

And I understand why they're avoiding it. But in the long term that's the wrong decision. They have to destroy this in an unequivocal 9-0 decision. Avoiding it just encourages further, more extreme, nonsense in future

Case gone - rejected by SCOTUS - Texas does not have legal standing to bring the case.

Justice Ronan Keating to the fore.

[Flockwitt]

This one is good enough to be shared cross-boreds.

https://twitter.com/PaulLeeTeeks/status ... 5464263681

[Gumboot]

This one is good enough to be shared cross-boreds.

https://twitter.com/PaulLeeTeeks/status ... 5464263681

[Rinkals]

I’m pretty sure they won’t touch it with a bargepole, in exactly the same way they have avoided all others.

And I understand why they're avoiding it. But in the long term that's the wrong decision. They have to destroy this in an unequivocal 9-0 decision. Avoiding it just encourages further, more extreme, nonsense in future

Case gone - rejected by SCOTUS - Texas does not have legal standing to bring the case.

So it's been dismissed on a technicality?

That's hardly an endorsement of democracy.

[Ted.]

And I understand why they're avoiding it. But in the long term that's the wrong decision. They have to destroy this in an unequivocal 9-0 decision. Avoiding it just encourages further, more extreme, nonsense in future

Case gone - rejected by SCOTUS - Texas does not have legal standing to bring the case.

So it's been dismissed on a technicality?

That's hardly an endorsement of democracy.

Repudiated rather than dismissed. i.e. it was not heard because of the law.

[Hal Jordan]

I wonder how much evidence is being destroyed behind the scenes as Trump's mob try and make the Administration as crippled as possible before the plums are dragged out.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

I’m pretty sure they won’t touch it with a bargepole, in exactly the same way they have avoided all others.

And I understand why they're avoiding it. But in the long term that's the wrong decision. They have to destroy this in an unequivocal 9-0 decision. Avoiding it just encourages further, more extreme, nonsense in future

Case gone - rejected by SCOTUS - Texas does not have legal standing to bring the case.

I don't think there was a good out for SCOTUS in this, they shouldn't allow people to throw mud at the court and be allowed to claim it's a case the court needs to consider, against which this was a case it would've been good to get some people on the record and eviscerate their claims.

It's all very through the looking glass with how many people, even if at no jeopardy to themselves, got behind the 'big one'. It says nothing good about democracy or sanity in the USA

[Rinkals]

And I understand why they're avoiding it. But in the long term that's the wrong decision. They have to destroy this in an unequivocal 9-0 decision. Avoiding it just encourages further, more extreme, nonsense in future

Case gone - rejected by SCOTUS - Texas does not have legal standing to bring the case.

I don't think there was a good out for SCOTUS in this, they shouldn't allow people to throw mud at the court and be allowed to claim it's a case the court needs to consider, against which this was a case it would've been good to get some people on the record and eviscerate their claims.

It's all very through the looking glass with how many people, even if at no jeopardy to themselves, got behind the 'big one'. It says nothing good about democracy or sanity in the USA

It gives the case a veneer of validity in the way that it has been rejected, not because of a lack of merit, but rather as a procedural misstep in the presentation.

Which, in turn allows those pushing to overturn the election to claim legitimacy.

I suppose it would be too much to expect for a panel appointed on the basis of their partisan backgrounds and allegiances would be likely to issue judgements based on jurisprudence rather than political affiliation.

How very banana Republic.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Not having standing to bring a case, and obviously not having having that, is more than a procedural misstep. There's a reason the only lawyer willing to sign it is a crazy old racist birther.