Topic: Typhoid Trump: the not-smart, corrupt, coward, loser, thread

[davidlpool1982]

Why not increase it to 12-11 in the Democrats favour if they are increasing it?

Why would you break convention to increase it, yet still fall short of a Republican majority

I think the big problem becomes in opening Pandora's Box (although with the GOP,  pandora is usually the name of the dead hooker in the trunk and her box is...well...you get the idea)

It's all very well adding more SC justices to balance it out, especially after McConnell's absolute ratfucking of Obama's last pick and Trump's obvious deal with Kennedy to allow him another pick, but once you open the door to that convention, you can't close it again. Next time a GOP goon gets in, they can do the same to restore "natural justice" after Biden "artificially changed the make up of the court because it was conservative" or some such bullshit. Obama had to use lots of executive orders to do anything during his last term because of McConnell's zombie senate, bit that just meant Trump used even more to bypass oversight and felt it was fair to to do so by pointing at Obama's EOs, just leaving out the obvious context.

I'm not saying they don't have the moral or regal right to pack the court given the fuckery involved, but I think I'd concentrate more on closing every fucking loophole and good faith convention the GOP has used over the past decade. I'd absolutely put in law, not convention or anything, that Supreme Court picks last up until the end of term regardless of the Senate Majority. I'd strip some of the power from the senate and House majority leaders in being the sole arbitor of what comes up to vote. I'd place limits on time between bills going from house to senate (say 100 days) without being voted on. If the time limit passes, it's assumed that concensus is reached and the bill automatically becomes law. That sort of stuff isn't sexy, it isn't going to grab as many headlines as court balancing or what have you, but will be much more effective in the long run of restoring some balance of power between the various powers and make ratfuckery harder.

Edit: after reading JCs post below, I would absolutely put in law that the President is not immune to charges while in office. Dump that fucking DoJ memo Barr and Trump have hidden behind to the curb and clarify in black and white what the President can and can't be charged with whilst in office. At the very least, codify that the statute of limitations is paused while President if you can't get everyone to agree on actually having them accountable while in office.

[Jiminy Cricket]

I had a fucking frightening realization last night..

When/if he loses he is going to declare a run for 2024, continue his rallies and such, claim he was robbed and any attempt to prosecute will be mired with it being painted a political hit job.

I cannot see him giving up his rallies, they are essential to his ego now.

Just another reason to make sure that he faces charges for all his crimes.

[Jiminy Cricket]

In my opinion there is strong justification for 2, but a much harder argument for more (in fact I'd argue against more)

The argument I imagine you making would actually allow for Biden to appoint an additional four. Kavanaugh should have been a Democratic pick - as should be Coney-Barrett. If those two picks were flipped (Republican -2; Democrat +2), this is equivalent to Biden now appointing four new justices.

[Commie Bobbie]

I know this could ultimately drag on for weeks or months, but what sort of time in the UK are we going to be seeing some initial results coming in next Tuesday?

I was advised not to expect a clear cut result on Election night - but look at the battleground states to see what sort of lead Trump gets early doors before mail in ballots come into play.

[Ray K]

@Fahrenthold
NEW: Previously un-released documents show the government has paid $2.5 million to @realdonaldtrump 's businesses. Far more than we knew.

Trump Org charged $7,700 for a dinner, $6,000 for floral arrangements…and $3 for POTUS’s own glass of water.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ballrooms-candles-and-luxury-cottages-during-trumps-term-millions-of-government-and-gop-dollars-have-flowed-to-his-propertiesmar-a-lago-charged-the-government-3-apiece-for-glasses-of-water-for-trump-and-the-japanese-leader/2020/10/27/186f20a2-1469-11eb-bc10-40b25382f1be_story.html

Those payments from April 2018, revealed here for the first time, are part of a long-running pattern whose scope has become clear only in recent months.

Since his first month in office, Trump has used his power to direct millions from U.S. taxpayers — and from his political supporters — into his own businesses. The Washington Post has sought to compile examples of this spending through open records requests and a lawsuit.

In all, he has received at least $8.1 million from these two sources since he took office, those documents and publicly available records show.

In addition, Trump’s campaign and fundraising committee paid $5.6 million to his companies since his inauguration in January 2017. Those payments — turning campaign donations into private revenue — continued even this year, as Trump fell behind in polls and his campaign ran short of money.

[Caligula?]

I was advised not to expect a clear cut result on Election night - but look at the battleground states to see what sort of lead Trump gets early doors before mail in ballots come into play.

Some of those battleground states have laws which require mail in ballots to be counted no later than election day. If they arrive after that, they won't count. So counting the votes will be no different than if everyone had voted on election day itself. There will just be more votes to count. So in other words, a lot of states will be seeing the full results on November 3rd.

Arizona, Florida, Michigan and Wisconsin must receive their mail in ballots by November 3rd.

Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania must have their ballots postmarked by November 3rd.

[telekon]

Not only that but he's also got the backup option of running again in 2024. If he loses, and if he runs again, I don't see how his name wont be on the ballot. So he could be hedging his bets a bit. In some ways, if he loses it suits him better because it gives him more time in the spotlight. It means that if/when he does leave office, he's basically got 4 years to campaign again. And make no bones about it, he'll still get a tonne of airtime and he'll be on every news channel and he'll be even more deranged on Twitter etc. He wont just go away, and that suits him. And soon enough, a couple of years out from the 2024 election, he'll be right where he wants to be.


I really think that he's not bothered about the outcome because he's got plans either way.

He'd need the Republican party to back him eventually though. Don't see that. They'll go for the safe Romney type of dude for 2024.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I think the big problem becomes in opening Pandora's Box (although with the GOP,  pandora is usually the name of the dead hooker in the trunk and her box is...well...you get the idea)

It's all very well adding more SC justices to balance it out, especially after McConnell's absolute ratfucking of Obama's last pick and Trump's obvious deal with Kennedy to allow him another pick, but once you open the door to that convention, you can't close it again.
...

The Supreme Court has varied in number widely through the centuries. It's only been kept at nine since 1869. FDR aimed to increase the size of the court in 1937 to better reflect America's population, but was defeated in Congress.

And that's the rub. SCOTUS is created and defined by Congress, and Congress has the power to use their mandate to influence the unelected court composition and responsibilities. I've seen it plausibly argued that Article 3 of the Constitution (which establishes SCOTUS and infers lesser courts) allows Congress to redeploy justices - ie they might have a lifetime appointment, but not necessity to just the Supreme Court - they could be sent to another appellate court by Congress.

The point is, the people's will, expressed through providing Congress with a mandate, is actually the supreme decision maker, and the Founders cleary intended the Constitution to be a living document subject to Amendment (heck, it was amended before it came off the printing press) not a sacred tablet.

[newterp]

Justice need term limits too.

[ericthered10]

Some of those battleground states have laws which require mail in ballots to be counted no later than election day. If they arrive after that, they won't count. So counting the votes will be no different than if everyone had voted on election day itself. There will just be more votes to count. So in other words, a lot of states will be seeing the full results on November 3rd.

Arizona, Florida, Michigan and Wisconsin must receive their mail in ballots by November 3rd.

Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, and Pennsylvania must have their ballots postmarked by November 3rd.

Arrival/receipt and being counted/tallied are two different things. As you note there are states which require the ballots to be received by election day, and others that will count those received after election day so long as they're postmarked before election day. But I don't think there are rules about them being counted/tallied on election day, so the scenario is different. In person votes are tallied at the polling place, then all the precincts submit them up the chain on election night. For mail in ballots received on or after election day, of which undoubtedly there will be many, they need to be individually shorn of their two envelopes and then run through machines to be tallied, then added to the total, all of which will not be complete on election day or even for days after. Don't expect to know a whole lot on election night because record turnout + record mail in voting means it will take longer than usual.

[Machae]

Fucking kippers


A poll from YouGov finds that about 80% of people in the UK say they would vote for Joe Biden if given the chance, while the remaining 20% say they would support Donald Trump.

The poll, conducted for online gambling company Betfair, was taken one week before election day.

It found that 38% of Brits who voted leave during the 2016 Brexit referendum would vote for Trump if they could.

Among Labour and Liberal Democrat supporters, a whopping 99% said they would vote Biden. About 39% of Conservative voters said they support Trump.

In Scotland, the birthplace of Trump's mother, only 12% of people say they would re-elect him. In London, 19% of the city said they support Trump.

There is also an interesting gender disparity - nearly one in five men said would vote for Trump, but fewer than one in four women said the same.

[stevensr123]

Justice need term limits too.

” The Supreme Court acts as a check against the power of Congress and the president. The lifetime appointment is designed to ensure that the justices are insulated from political pressure and that the court can serve as a truly independent branch of government.“

Which actually makes a lot of sense, given how America is run. A lot of people are scaremongering at the moment, they said the system would collapse and abortion would be made illegal when Gorsuch was appointed, then they said the same thing when Kavanaugh was appointed. In reality those two have actually went against the government numerous times.

[Brissyred]

There is also an interesting gender disparity - nearly one in five men said would vote for Trump, but fewer than one in four women said the same.

Isn't 'nearly one in five' and 'fewer than one in four' pretty close to the same thing?

[newterp]

” The Supreme Court acts as a check against the power of Congress and the president. The lifetime appointment is designed to ensure that the justices are insulated from political pressure and that the court can serve as a truly independent branch of government.“

Which actually makes a lot of sense, given how America is run. A lot of people are scaremongering at the moment, they said the system would collapse and abortion would be made illegal when Gorsuch was appointed, then they said the same thing when Kavanaugh was appointed. In reality those two have actually went against the government numerous times.

The last 3 nominees have been completely political. The tough rulings are yet to come - but they have already started with the voter suppression rulings.

[Jiminy Cricket]

There is also an interesting gender disparity - nearly one in five men said would vote for Trump, but fewer than one in four women said the same.

Isn't 'nearly one in five' and 'fewer than one in four' pretty close to the same thing?

And the 'but fewer than' clause is suggestive that those figures should be in in reverse, since in one-in-four is a larger number than one-in-five.

[Mimi]

In reality those two have actually went against the government numerous times.

What specific examples did Kavanaugh and Gorsuch rule against the government?

What do you think of Kavanaugh's error-filled reasoning behind his decision to discard 80,000 votes in Wisconsin? How does that fit in with the idea of checks and balances?

[Riquende]

What do you think of Kavanaugh's error-filled reasoning behind his decision to discard 80,000 votes in Wisconsin? How does that fit in with the idea of checks and balances?

You can't just let legitimate votes 'flip' an election though, can you?

[1892tillforever]

Fucking kippers


A poll from YouGov finds that about 80% of people in the UK say they would vote for Joe Biden if given the chance, while the remaining 20% say they would support Donald Trump.

The poll, conducted for online gambling company Betfair, was taken one week before election day.

It found that 38% of Brits who voted leave during the 2016 Brexit referendum would vote for Trump if they could.

Among Labour and Liberal Democrat supporters, a whopping 99% said they would vote Biden. About 39% of Conservative voters said they support Trump.

In Scotland, the birthplace of Trump's mother, only 12% of people say they would re-elect him. In London, 19% of the city said they support Trump.

There is also an interesting gender disparity - nearly one in five men said would vote for Trump, but fewer than one in four women said the same.

Trump's support in the US is about 43-45% I think. So I guess we can continue to call Tories a gang of c*nts then? (Not that we wouldn't anyway).

[Buggy Eyes Alfredo]

[Black Bull Nova]

There is also an interesting gender disparity - nearly one in five men said would vote for Trump, but fewer than one in four women said the same.

Hold on, nearly 20% of men would vote for Trump but fewer than 25% of women would vote for him. That's about the same thing surely?

[feynman]

Hold on, nearly 20% of men would vote for Trump but fewer than 25% of women would vote for him. That's about the same thing surely?

Yes, they have the same small brains.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[rodderzzz]

A lot of people are scaremongering at the moment, they said the system would collapse and abortion would be made illegal when Gorsuch was appointed, then they said the same thing when Kavanaugh was appointed. In reality those two have actually went against the government numerous times.

Could you give some specific examples of that, because while I'll admit to have not followed all supreme court decisions since Gorsuch, I cant think of any off the top of my head that went against the Trumps needs. Same with Kavanaugh?

Willing to be proved wrong though

[Sammy5IsAlive]

Could you give some specific examples of that, because while I'll admit to have not followed all supreme court decisions since Gorsuch, I cant think of any off the top of my head that went against the Trumps needs. Same with Kavanaugh?

Willing to be proved wrong though

If you go off this article he's not had a great time of it in front of the SC

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/20/trump-has-worst-record-supreme-court-any-modern-president/

It's a bit late to be trawling round the internet but wasn't he posting ranty tweets a few months back because 'his picks' weren't voting his way? I think it was their ruling about LBGT discrimination?

[rodderzzz]

As far as I was aware they’ve both gone hard right on all the major rights issues. The one trump raged about was the subpoena of his taxes in NY state as far as I remember, which was a cut and dry 7-2 ruling

[rafathegaffa83]

In further, he doesn't give a shit about his supporters. He held a rally at an airport in Omaha. Supporters were bused in from the airport parking facilities. There were no buses for the return trip leaving them stranded and having to walk to get back to their vehicles in freezing temperatures, while local authorities scrambled to get  buses

[12C]

In further, he doesn't give a shit about his supporters. He held a rally at an airport in Omaha. Supporters were bused in from the airport parking facilities. There were no buses for the return trip leaving them stranded and having to walk to get back to their vehicles in freezing temperatures, while local authorities scrambled to get  buses

But those morons won’t care, they’ve seen the show

[exiledintheUSA]

Imagine being that bad a President that you actually pushed Georgia and Arizona towards blue and made Texas an off-purple color.

Fingers crossed for a landslide.

[Red Beret]

Imagine being that bad a President that you actually pushed Georgia and Arizona towards blue and made Texas an off-purple color.

Fingers crossed for a landslide.

Really hoping the Democrats win the senate.  It has to be within touching distance now, surely?

[Gods_Left_Boot]

Really hoping the Democrats win the senate.  It has to be within touching distance now, surely?

If the polls turn out to be accurate, they would have a 51-49 advantage. That said, they would have to win all four relatively close (all within 5% advantage) races to get there.

[Red Beret]

If the polls turn out to be accurate, they would have a 51-49 advantage. That said, they would have to win all four relatively close (all within 5% advantage) races to get there.

They need to find a way to either nix the supermajority or expand the senate to become more representative.  There's no way the senate in its current form could ever convict a president in the future; it would be impossible to secure 67 votes.

[TepidT2O]

Fucking hell... goes in two footed with studs up here...

https://milestaylor.medium.com/a-statement-a13bc5173ee9

Why I’m no longer “Anonymous”
More than two years ago, I published an anonymous opinion piece in The New York Times about Donald Trump’s perilous presidency, while I was serving under him. He responded with a short but telling tweet: “TREASON?”
Trump sees personal criticism as subversive.
I take a different view. As Theodore Roosevelt wrote, “To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or anyone else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about anyone else.”
We do not owe the President our silence. We owe him and the American people the truth.
Make no mistake: I am a Republican, and I wanted this President to succeed. That’s why I came into the Administration with John Kelly, and it’s why I stayed on as Chief of Staff at the Department of Homeland Security. But too often in times of crisis, I saw Donald Trump prove he is a man without character, and his personal defects have resulted in leadership failures so significant that they can be measured in lost American lives. I witnessed Trump’s inability to do his job over the course of two-and-a-half years. Everyone saw it, though most were hesitant to speak up for fear of reprisals.
So when I left the Administration I wrote A Warning, a character study of the current Commander in Chief and a caution to voters that it wasn’t as bad as it looked inside the Trump Administration — it was worse. While I claim sole authorship of the work, the sentiments expressed within it were widely held among officials at the highest levels of the federal government. In other words, Trump’s own lieutenants were alarmed by his instability.
Much has been made of the fact that these writings were published anonymously. The decision wasn’t easy, I wrestled with it, and I understand why some people consider it questionable to levy such serious charges against a sitting President under the cover of anonymity. But my reasoning was straightforward, and I stand by it. Issuing my critiques without attribution forced the President to answer them directly on their merits or not at all, rather than creating distractions through petty insults and name-calling. I wanted the attention to be on the arguments themselves. At the time I asked, “What will he do when there is no person to attack, only an idea?” We got the answer. He became unhinged. And the ideas stood on their own two feet.
To be clear, writing those works was not about eminence (they were published without attribution), not about money (I declined a hefty monetary advance and pledged to donate the bulk of the proceeds), and not about crafting a score-settling “tell all” (my focus was on the President himself and his character, not denigrating former colleagues).
Nevertheless, I made clear I wasn’t afraid to criticize the President under my name. In fact, I pledged to do so. That is why I’ve already been vocal throughout the general election. I’ve tried to convey as best I can — based on my own experience — how Donald Trump has made America less safe, less certain of its identity and destiny, and less united. He has responded predictably, with personal attacks meant to obscure the underlying message that he is unfit for the office he holds.
Yet Trump has failed to bury the truth.
Why? Because since the op-ed was published, I’ve been joined by an unprecedented number of former colleagues who’ve chosen to speak out against the man they once served. Donald Trump’s character and record have now been challenged in myriad ways by his own former Chief of Staff, National Security Advisor, Communications Director, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and others he personally appointed.
History will also record the names of those souls who had everything to lose but stood up anyway, including Trump officials Fiona Hill, Michael McKinley, John Mitnick, Elizabeth Neumann, Bob Shanks, Olivia Troye, Josh Venable, Alexander Vindman, and many more. I applaud their courage. These are not “Deep Staters” who conspired to thwart their boss. Many of them were Trump supporters, and all of them are patriots who accepted great personal risks to speak candidly about a man they’ve seen retaliate and even incite violence against his opponents. (I’ve likewise experienced the cost of condemning the President, as doing so has taken a considerable toll on my job, daily life, marriage, finances, and personal safety.)
These public servants were not intimidated. And you shouldn’t be either. As descendants of revolutionaries, honest dissent is part of our American character, and we must reject the culture of political intimidation that’s been cultivated by this President. That’s why I’m writing this note — to urge you to speak out if you haven’t. While I hope a few more Trump officials will quickly find their consciences, your words are now more important than theirs. It’s time to come forward and shine a light on the discord that’s infected our public discourse. You can speak loudest with your vote and persuade others with your voice. Don’t be afraid of open debate. As I’ve said before, there is no better screen test for truth than to see it audition next to delusion.
This election is a two-part referendum: first, on the character of a man, and second, on the character of our nation. That’s why I’m also urging fellow Republicans to put country over party, even if that means supporting Trump’s Democratic opponent. Although former Vice President Joe Biden is likely to pursue progressive reforms that conservatives oppose (and rest assured, we will challenge them in the loyal opposition), his policy agenda cannot equal the damage done by the current President to the fabric of our Republic. I believe Joe Biden’s decency will bring us back together where Donald Trump’s dishonesty has torn us apart.
Trump has been exactly what we conservatives always said government should NOT be: expansive, wasteful, arbitrary, unpredictable, and prone to abuses of power. Worse still, as I’ve noted previously, he’s waged an all-out assault on reason, preferring to enthrone emotion and impulse in the seat of government. The consequences have been calamitous, and if given four more years, he will push the limits of his power further than the “high crimes and misdemeanors” for which he was already impeached.
Trust me. We spent years trying to ameliorate Trump’s poor decisions (often unsuccessfully), many of which will be back with a vengeance in a second term. Recall, this is the man who told us, “When somebody’s president of the United States, the authority is total.” I believe more than ever that Trump unbound will mean a nation undone — a continued downward slide into social acrimony, with the United States fading into the background of a world stage it once commanded, to say nothing of the damage to our democratic institutions.
I was wrong, however, about one major assertion in my original op-ed. The country cannot rely on well-intentioned, unelected bureaucrats around the President to steer him toward what’s right. He has purged most of them anyway. Nor can they rely on Congress to deliver us from Trump’s wayward whims. The people themselves are the ultimate check on the nation’s chief executive. We alone must determine whether his behavior warrants continuance in office, and we face a momentous decision, as our choice about Trump’s future will affect our future for years to come. With that in mind, he doesn’t deserve a second term in office, and we don’t deserve to live through it.
Removing Trump will not be the end of our woes, unfortunately. While on the road visiting swing states for the past month, it’s become clear to me how far apart Americans have grown from one another. We’ve perpetuated the seemingly endless hostility stoked by this divisive President, so if we really want to restore vibrance to our civic life, the change must begin with each of us, not just with the occupant of the Oval Office. Fortunately, past generations have lit the way toward national reconciliation in even harder times.
On the brink of a civil war that literally split our nation in two, Abraham Lincoln called on the people not to lose sight of one other. He said in his Inaugural Address:
We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.
Heed Lincoln’s words. We must return to our founding principles. We must rediscover our better angels. And we must reconcile with each other, repairing the bonds of affection that make us fellow Americans.
Miles Taylor
October 2020

[Buggy Eyes Alfredo]

Trump may have bombed Yemen more than all previous US presidents combined, new report finds


"Since 2017, the US has admitted to killing at least 63 Yemeni civilians, although the real number could be as high as 154, according to a new report, "Eroding Transparency," from the monitoring group Airwars. A disproportionate number of those killed died as a result of on-the-ground raids ordered by the Trump administration, the group found: despite accounting for less than 3% of US actions documented by Airwars, such attacks accounted for some 40% of all civilian casualties."

...

"In 2019, the Department of Defense stopped even saying how many airstrikes it had carried out in Yemen, granted a lack of transparency usually reserved for the CIA."


more here:
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-have-bombed-yemen-more-than-bush-and-obama-combined-2020-10

[Riquende]

Trump may have bombed Yemen more than all previous US presidents combined, new report finds

ALL of them? Even including James K Polk?

[rafathegaffa83]

Daily Beast with this story that other outlets are picking up

Noah Shachtman@NoahShachtman
NEW: The White House publicly denies it. But Trump's own COVID advisers now privately admit that he's pursuing a 'herd immunity' strategy. And that gambit could result in the deaths of thousands and thousands and thousands of people.

[newterp]

https://www.alternet.org/2020/10/fox-news-tucker-carlson-inspires-mockery-as-he-claims/

PLEASE CLICK! And listen and have your day made.

Tucker Carlson knows he has the dumbest audience alive.

[Buggy Eyes Alfredo]

In further, he doesn't give a shit about his supporters. He held a rally at an airport in Omaha. Supporters were bused in from the airport parking facilities. There were no buses for the return trip leaving them stranded and having to walk to get back to their vehicles in freezing temperatures, while local authorities scrambled to get  buses

A comedic video response on this.

https://www.twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1321394578952495105

blaire erskine             @blaireerskine

"Woman stranded at MAGA rally in Omaha says Trump wanted to teach them a lesson"

[BarryCrocker]

A comedic video response on this.

https://www.twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1321394578952495105

blaire erskine             @blaireerskine

"Woman stranded at MAGA rally in Omaha says Trump wanted to teach them a lesson"

That seriously has to be staged.

[Yorkykopite]

That seriously has to be staged.

You'll have to wait for the theatres to reopen first.

[Alan_X]

That seriously has to be staged.

It's a comedy piece.

blaire erskine
@blaireerskine
I’m doing my little skits. Cameo: http://cameo.com/blaireerskine | mgmt: lillian@sweet180.com | black lives matter

[BarryCrocker]

It's a comedy piece.

blaire erskine
@blaireerskine
I’m doing my little skits. Cameo: http://cameo.com/blaireerskine | mgmt: lillian@sweet180.com | black lives matter

Thank God. I was losing even more faith in the USA.