Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
"There is also the possibility that if Trump is kicked off the ballot, Republicans could take retaliatory action by doing the same to President Joe Biden. Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has already floated such a move."
I wonder that excuse they'll dream up to try to pull this off.
They're not expecting to actually pull it off, it's just posturing for their dumbfuck base.
Those far rights can't care less about reasons.
That’s one of the reasons they love religion. All you gotta do is claim that the other side is EVIL. No logic, proof, or accountability necessary.
The one I've heard floated is not securing the border to their satisfaction somehow constitutes insurrection and since a lot of people have argued there doesn't have to be any conviction or factual determination by a court it would stick just as well as the Jan 6th stuff against Trump.
That just means every member of congress is an insurrectionist because they have just as much or more power to change that.
It is not insurrection in either todays definition or the 14ths contemporary definition, and that would be slapped down.
A brand new congress? I could get behind that.
Republicans leafing through The Sovereign Citizen's Guide to Vexatious Litigation for ideas as we speak
Hunter's laptop, Hillary's emails and Obama's tan suit.
Grey poupon!
Buttery males with freeze peaches
If we enforce the law it might be enforced badly. Is a pretty bad argument.
It's a bad argument to consider not enforcing the law, but it's not an incorrect statement. Republicans responded to the impeachment of Trump by continously trying to impeach Biden. They're responding to the insurrection by pointing at things dems do and yelling insurrection.
It's dumb and incorrect, but it's pretty effective at diluting the seriousness of those particular actions to their own voter base. You could argue that that's the point.
And how is their trying going? Did they pull it off yet? They control the house and have such for nearly two years.
It’s dumb and incorrect, but it’s pretty effective at diluting the seriousness of those particular actions to their own voter base. You could argue that that’s the point.
Citation needed. I want you to show that polling has gone up for them as a result of their lackluster efforts.
I don't need to show you statistics to shed light on their intent. It's not hard to figure out what they're doing. It's also not hard to see that what they're doing is damage control. The result of that would be keeping their polls from going down, not making them go up. You can't prove a negative, so I don't know what you want me to do.
As far as diluting the seriousness of what they've done, go turn on fox news. They blast Biden's "insurrection" and impeachment "proceedings" 24/7. Do you need more proof than that?
Lastly, if you're trying to defend your original statement, you're preaching to the choir here. You don't have to be an asshole about it. It's a bit asinine to assert that they aren't doing it with intent.
Nobody wants Texassistan in the union, not even Texass. Heh.
The only thing I have heard is that anyone who supported the BLM movement during the rioting is essentially supporting anti american values thus insurrection. I have heard this from a few separate places.
Trump being disqualified from running in Colorado and Biden being disqualified from running in Texas are not equally important in the election.
Too bad Roberts spent the last 15 years systematically destroying the court's credibility, he could use some about now.
If democrats were split 4-3 on the ruling in Colorado, what outcome are people realistically expecting getting this from a group of mostly conservative judges?
If they don't let him through then democrats will stay in power and the threat to their billionaire ~~bribes~~ "donations" will be at risk. They might get some serious changes to how the judicial arm works that dilutes their nearly absolute power.
If they DO let him through then republicans will continue to rally for pro conservative policies that dismantle democracy in place of a single party system where the judges are still on top and get to do effectively whatever they want, so long as they keep letting their side win.
The Colorado case might be ruled to allow Trump's name to be there, but the Maine case might let the state court's decision stand if it were to come to the SCOTUS, the Secretary of State is doing things by the book following Maine election laws.
SCOTUS is irrelevant now for Colorado. Today was the deadline to certify primary ballots, and the state Supreme Court issued a stay to their ruling pending SCOTUS. Since they didn’t decline the case and haven’t made a ruling, his name is allowed on the ballot.
His name will be on the ballot, but if scotus finds that he's ineligible he can't win the nomination here, so vote for him would be wasted. Well, it's wasted no matter what but you know what I mean.
Review? Alito won't even read the thing, Roberts will make sure it is narrowly tailored to only get the result he wants, Thomas has already gotten a new boat and can't be bothered, and The Rapist will be too hung over to sign his own name. The only one "reviewing" is the clerical staff of Roberts.
Nobody want's Trump disqualified more than Republicans. Many of whom hate his guts but are too chickenshit to challenge him publicly. A SCOTUS ruling against him would be the perfect solution. He would be forced out as the de facto leader of the party and all the crazies would blame Democrats and John Roberts.
If the fix is in, that's bad news for Trump.
That being said, my opinion is that if the only way to stop Trump is to disqualify him, then this stupid country isn't worth saving and the goddamn constitution doesn't matter anyhow.
You're right. Any relation to the Yes Men?
/-----------------------\
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | O
| |
| |
| |
| |
|=====================
Supreme Court-
I think you're gonna be ok here. His brain has a thin candy shell. Surprised you didn't know that.
It will be interesting to see if this is the equivalent of the archduke's assassination, with respect to the collapse of the union.
I am certain it's going to be a 5-4 either way strongly towards Trump being exempt because "President isn't in the constitution"
It's going to fall on Roberts.
He’s already been certified on the ballot in Colorado though, so the court very well may likely just argue that it’s moot now and kick it down the road.