147
this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
147 points (98.7% liked)
News
37032 readers
2116 users here now
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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
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. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
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.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This was always going to happen. Leaving the enforcement of this very federal matter to the individual states would have terrible consequences. No one wants Abbot or DeSantis to have this power, because they would immediately abuse it by declaring anyone but trump unfit for the ballot based entirely on lies and fever dreams.
Of course the ultra shitty consequence is that we're stuck with the equally fucked-by-insane-people Congress's complete inability to act.
If bad faith gamesmanship has gone that far then we're already in the pot and we just don't know it yet. What's better, finding that out with Biden in the White House or Trump? Because the rules are very clear and bending them in hopes that the bad guys will just magically stop being bad is ridiculous. If they're willing the DQ all other candidates then they're also willing to just declare him victor of their state and send his delegates to D.C. In which case nothing we do matters.
The best thing we can do is hew to the rules while we have a sane president and deal with the fallout now. It only gets worse the longer you push it off.
At this point, the best outcome would be for Biden to self-sacrifice, and go on the ultra-offensive:
(Just in case there's a way to veto these Executive Orders, he should send guards to discreetly lock Congress at nighttime so they can't hold a vote just before he goes on TV.)
I think you'd see either some VERY quick backtracking by the entire SCOTUS, plus the GOP asking for an emergency meeting and a chance to make things right, or a short Civil War. Which is coming anyhow, by the looks of it, so might as well get it over with now.
He's near the end of his life, so why not perform this selfless act for the good of the nation?
I laughed, but I'd rather not have this happen for one really good reason. What if he pulls it off and we just killed democracy?
I really wish they could be made to answer questions rather than just ask them. I want to hear who they think does have authority to enforce the 14th amendment. It seems like they think they can effectively repeal a Constitutional amendment by simply not acknowledging that anyone has a right to enforce it.
Trumps lawyer and some of the judges were obviously of the opinion that Congress has to create some sort of system for dealing with this. But that's nonsense because no other bar to office requires positive action from Congress. And the next argument they're going to make is that if Congress proposed a system it would require a 2/3rds majority to pass and implement because that's the threshold for removing the bar from a candidate. They know full well that's impossible but they'll pretend that's the actual law until the day they die because words mean nothing to fascists, only results.
You have full throated agreement from me.
This is the truth. They were always going to rule to keep him on the ballot as a matter of law and the implications of that ruling. Just because people were trying to remove King Asshat today doesn’t stop a complete abuse of this tomorrow with an actually qualified candidate.
That said, ruling “for” him here gives them the opportunity to rule “against” him when Jack Smith’s case is pushed about Trump’s immunity from prosecution.
I’m wiling to put money on the fact that they will not even hear the appeal to that case.
I'm hoping they do their fucking jobs when that case lands in front of them, but it's a slim hope.