Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VIII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

aloyisious

This might be seen as a victory for the virology medical scientists in the fight against Covid-19 in the Trump Admin. Dr Scott Atlas has tweeted the content of his resignation letter as special advisor to the president on the White House Covid-19 committee. Following on from Dr Birx media speech yesterday to those who visited relatives and friends over the Thanksgiving period to quarantine themselves immediately to prevent onward transmission of the virus which she believes they inevitably contacted. it look's like sensibility has returned to the committee. As I'm not on twitter, I don't have a link to his account and statement. It was reported on Reuters and M.S.N.

Quin_Dub

aloyisious wrote: »

So a one-off legalized form of gerrymandering could be given the OK to suit a party/operative to offset the electoral losses they/he suffered due to an inadequate use of office, slipped in under the guise of a census [almost like a boundary referendum vote of the people] despite the U.S.S.C blocking the office-holders earlier attempt to use the census for that as unconstitutional.

I'm reading media reports that the U.S.S.C may take weeks to provide a decision on the matter, "YES or NO" on the the president having the constitutional power to issue his order or "Its not for us to decide at this time, we'll consider it later in 2021" kicking the can of worms down the road past the date the census report has to be sent to congress by Trump's admin which would mean Trump's order would be dead in the water and left for the Biden presidency to cancel officially. That might be a satisfactory exit route for the USSC, the GOP and the Dems to walk away honour satisfied, leaving the boundaries in situ and Trump as ineffectual.

Reading the reports of the hearings yesterday it certainly seems like the SCOTUS are trying to run out the clock on Trump.

The Census bureau are saying that they cannot hit the Dec 31st target for a full and final report , they are saying it will be the end of January before it's ready. If they are given that extension , then anything Trump might like to do is moot.

Brussels Sprout

banie01 wrote: »

Constitutions should be treated as living documents that can be amended by society to better meet their needs as society evolves.

Constitutional originalists are a dangerous legal fundamentalism and like all fundamentalism should be addressed head on and rebutted.

Absolutely. I think the US Constitution and Bill of Rights showed incredible foresight and ingenuity for the time in which they were written. In retrospect the biggest flaw with it has been how difficult it has been to alter it.

Ignoring the Bill of Rights, which accounts for the first 10 amendments in 1791, there have only been 17 amendments and none since 1971*.

Compare that to the Irish constitution which has been amended 30 times alone since 1971!

They need an amendment to make it easier to make amendments.

In many individual states voters can get ballot initiatives up for a vote in order to bypass politicians. I would suggest something similar on the national level. They could have, for example, a national popular referendum that would require 60% of the states to vote in favour with a simple majority or 65% of the overall national vote to pass.



*if you ignore the bizarre timeline of the 27th amendment which was proposed at the same time as the Bill of Rights but then forgotten about for 200 years.

serfboard

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

if you ignore the bizarre timeline of the 27th amendment which was proposed at the same time as the Bill of Rights but then forgotten about for 200 years.

I remember reading about it before in Wikipedia's list of US Consititutional Amendments and I couldn't believe what I was reading:

27th Proposed: September 25, 1789 Completed: May 5, 1992 Time Span: 202 years, 223 days

hotmail.com

pixelburp wrote: »

"Amending the constitution" is scarcely a simple, easy task in America. Especially when the so-called "originalists" have started making waves in the political sphere. Very hard to make changes to a document that has achieved "sacred text" levels of worship.

We have a bizarre element of our constitution, namely a referendum to change it.

And we've overcome that obstacle.

The lack of political will from the Democrats on this issue suggests and confirms to many, that both parties are very similar when you think about it.

aloyisious

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Reading the reports of the hearings yesterday it certainly seems like the SCOTUS are trying to run out the clock on Trump.

The Census bureau are saying that they cannot hit the Dec 31st target for a full and final report , they are saying it will be the end of January before it's ready. If they are given that extension , then anything Trump might like to do is moot.

It's hard to tell [and rightly so] what SCOTUS might come out with. I'm hoping that being in the job might enlighten the latest member as to the limitations the job imposes on freedom to do as one might [have liked to] do and act as a re-fresher course on the constitutional role of SCOTUS in the U.S.

dogbert27

hotmail.com wrote: »

We have a bizarre element of our constitution, namely a referendum to change it.

And we've overcome that obstacle.

The lack of political will from the Democrats on this issue suggests and confirms to many, that both parties are very similar when you think about it.

Probably because it was never so brazenly being proposed by a president who has something to hide that there hasn't been a political will to date.

I think Biden has more pressing issues to clean up too from the current administration that fighting with the Republicans on amending the constitution for this issue would be low on the list.

Quin_Dub

hotmail.com wrote: »

We have a bizarre element of our constitution, namely a referendum to change it.

And we've overcome that obstacle.

The lack of political will from the Democrats on this issue suggests and confirms to many, that both parties are very similar when you think about it.

It's a fairly different obstacle in the US though , let's be fair.

Here it's a simple majority in a single vote.

In the US it starts with 52 Separate Votes, of which you have to win 37 of them with a minimum of 65% of the vote in each one.

And then after that you have to get at least 35 State Houses/Senates to approve the change with a margin of 75%.

So that 72 votes that have to go your way and each by a clear and substantial margin.

Not the same at all.

Brussels Sprout

serfboard wrote: »

I remember reading about it before in Wikipedia's list of US Consititutional Amendments and I couldn't believe what I was reading:

I was the same. For anyone not familiar with the story:

The proposed congressional pay amendment was largely forgotten until 1982, when Gregory Watson, a 19-year-old sophomore at the University of Texas at Austin, wrote a paper for a government class in which he claimed that the amendment could still be ratified. An unconvinced teaching assistant graded the paper poorly, motivating Watson to launch a nationwide campaign to complete its ratification. The amendment eventually became part of the United States Constitution, effective May 5, 1992, completing a record-setting ratification period of 202 years, 7 months, and 10 days, beating the previous record set by the 22nd Amendment, with 3 years and 343 days.[

link


In 2017 he received a document from the college stating that they had upgraded his paper to an A+

pixelburp

hotmail.com wrote: »

We have a bizarre element of our constitution, namely a referendum to change it.

And we've overcome that obstacle.

The lack of political will from the Democrats on this issue suggests and confirms to many, that both parties are very similar when you think about it.

You cannot compare the Irish constitution against the American one; both documents are manifestly different both in application - and, as I mentioned already, interpretation and borderline worship. Our system has a healthy tradition of change through referenda - the US does not. The opposite in fact.

It's glib to say "political will" when it's equivalent to proposing the removal of a book from the bible. That will won't last long when up against the aforementioned Originalists who have only become more brazen and public since one of "theirs" apparently found her way into the SC. Your noted "plus ca change" fatigue is well documented but on this, it's picking an odd hill to die on - cos when you think about it, you'd recognise the manifest difficultly in making any sizable change to the Sacred Text that is the US Constitution.

Water John

Giuliani has had discussions on a pardon for himself with Trump. No wonder he was doing that crazy sh1t the last few weeks;
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2020/dec/01/us-election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-scott-atlas-coronavirus-covid-live-updates

hotmail.com

dogbert27 wrote: »

Probably because it was never so brazenly being proposed by a president who has something to hide that there hasn't been a political will to date.

I think Biden has more pressing issues to clean up too from the current administration that fighting with the Republicans on amending the constitution for this issue would be low on the list.

The pardon has been abused before, most famously by Gerald Ford when he pardoned Richard Nixon.

Abusing the privilege isn't a new thing and no party seems keen to end it. The Republicans will be complaining about Biden's pardons in 4 years. Same old boys club in America.

BonnieSituation

hotmail.com wrote: »

No signs Biden is going to try to abolish the privilege.

It's amazing how little Biden has done since the election. I mean. He should just get on with it already. Lazy.

---

I wonder what else is on the list of Biden-criticisms?

I'm excited to see just how loud his critics shout from the rooftops about the smallest things.

BonnieSituation

hotmail.com wrote: »

We have a bizarre element of our constitution, namely a referendum to change it.

And we've overcome that obstacle.

The lack of political will from the Democrats on this issue suggests and confirms to many, that both parties are very similar when you think about it.

That's an interesting take on our well formed referendum and constitutional amendment procedures.

duploelabs

hotmail.com wrote: »

The pardon has been abused before, most famously by Gerald Ford when he pardoned Richard Nixon.

Abusing the privilege isn't a new thing and no party seems keen to end it. The Republicans will be complaining about Biden's pardons in 4 years. Same old boys club in America.

No president has every abused the term 'privilidge' as trump has, not even Nixon obstructed every witness called for in his investigation

banie01

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It's amazing how little Biden has done since the election. I mean. He should just get on with it already. Lazy.

---

I wonder what else is on the list of Biden-criticisms?

I'm excited to see just how loud his critics shout from the rooftops about the smallest things.

Deficit!
Biggest national debt in the history of the US and as usual!
That record will be set under a Dem

I mean Don made the economy great, best economy ever and then dem dam Dems came along with their deepstate child killing Covid creating rituals and now look...
Even Q has been beaten...
Doom, doomed I tell ya!

When the above narratives start to play out.
The Dem's need to hammer home every single point of failure and moment of enabling Crazy uncle Don and co undertaken by the GOP.

Not as whataboutery, but as a reminder that their actions are why harsh measures are needed now.

hotmail.com

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It's amazing how little Biden has done since the election. I mean. He should just get on with it already. Lazy.

---

I wonder what else is on the list of Biden-criticisms?

I'm excited to see just how loud his critics shout from the rooftops about the smallest things.

It wasn't a criticism. It was an observation.

BonnieSituation

hotmail.com wrote: »

It wasn't a criticism. It was an observation.

Another hot(mail) take as it were?

It's pretty similar to all of your observations [sic] of Joe Biden's presidency [sic] thus far.

I'm guessing he's not likely to live up to your high standards?

Itssoeasy

Nbc news is reporting that AG William Barr has defied president trump by saying that the DOJ have found no evidence of widespread fraud in the election.

aloyisious

Similar report on CNN that uses AP as the source - no evidence of wide spread fraud that would change election result to date.

Igotadose

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Another hot(mail) take as it were?

It's pretty similar to all of your observations [sic] of Joe Biden's presidency [sic] thus far.

I'm guessing he's not likely to live up to your high standards?

By that same 'reasoning', when the #IMPOTUS is again a private citizen, we can criticize him for not getting things done, amiright? I mean, he's got all these gormless sheeple followers and he never lost the election and and and...

Frank Bullitt

Barr will be fired now for that.

check_six

Gintonious wrote: »

Barr will be fired now for that.

He can jam any loolah in there as AG, right? Can you imagine the scenes at a congressional hearing if Rudi gets nominated?! (Or a Trumpling!)

There surely couldn't be time for that though?

froog

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Nbc news is reporting that AG William Barr has defied president trump by saying that the DOJ have found no evidence of widespread fraud in the election.

ouch. that one has to hurt. rage tweet incoming.

aloyisious

After the attacks made by Trump alleging state officials [governors and judges] were directly involved in the alleged electoral fraud he and his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, have been claiming was perpetrated against Trump's re-election, I'm looking forward to the day I see Trump and Giuliani's fraud called out in state law courts either by state or personal lawyers acting for the people they maligned and the duo answer for their criminal actions.

Giuliani's response "there was no DOJ investigation into the election fraud" is as laughable as the 2nd bit "we have the evidence".

Barr has appointed a special counsel to investigate the handling of the FBI's Russia Investigation which means it'll be ongoing as Biden takes up office. The DOJ is reported to have stated that the appointment was not announced to avoid interfering with the election. That takes some brass to put out. They are coming after Comey again.

If Barr didn't see the obvious, that the last Special Counsel could be called to provide rebuttal to any alleged wrongdoing he uncovered in his investigation, Barr would lack lawyers foresight. There's a lot of redacted material in the SC's report hidden so far.

Biden can can the investigation if he chose but he'd be better advised to ask the new SC if he thinks his new investigation would come up with evidence that the DOJ's Russia Investigation interfered with the 2015 election. The DOJ, after all, will have involvement 100% in both investigations. Imagine Jeff Sessions and Jim Comey taking the witness stand.

aloyisious

It's noticable that Barr made his statement to the AP before he went in to meet Trump so that no matter what Trump tweets or his press sceretary says or Giuliani puts out, they will be doing catch-up to what Barr put on the public record first.

StringerBell

Tell me how wrote: »

The district attorneys of New York, Maryland and Washington would beg to differ.

I'd be surprised if anything sticks tbh - there are already the murmurings of moving on and not going after a former President, none has ever been prosecuted before as one talking head said and the country has bigger things to worry about that trump etc.

We can hope though.

Capt'n Midnight

pixelburp wrote: »

"Amending the constitution" is scarcely a simple, easy task in America. Especially when the so-called "originalists" have started making waves in the political sphere. Very hard to make changes to a document that has achieved "sacred text" levels of worship.

Their bluff should be called.


Day 1, inform them that they have unilaterally removed their 1st amendment rights.

Day 2, inform them that they have unilaterally removed their 2nd amendment rights.

Day 3, some marines will be billeted to you, hope y'all have plenty of crayons.

Itssoeasy

CNN are reporting that the justice department is investigating a potential bribery scheme in return for presidential pardons according to court records involving the White House or PACs. I mean is anyone shocked by this ?

listermint

Itssoeasy wrote: »

CNN are reporting that the justice department is investigating a potential bribery scheme in return for presidential pardons according to court records involving the White House or PACs. I mean is anyone shocked by this ?

It's excellent news.. absolutely Excellent more timber for the dumpster fire that has been this presidency.

I hope this is tied to the GOP too. Delighted.