The Official Former President Trump thread

[Detournement]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-ginsburg-idUSKBN0G12V020140801

Absolute hubris.

[welshbairn]

1 hour ago, Detournement said:

She was truly one of the good racists.

 

[Savage Henry]

5 hours ago, GordonS said:

It's hard for them to ram this through in 6 weeks when they blocked Obama's nomination to replace Scalia in his final year for 8 months, until after the election. It'll look blatantly hypocritical and political.

It won't affect most but there are a few in tight races, including on the judiciary committee. There are a few with consciences too. Well informed people think there's reason to hope that it might not happen, so you never know.

 

Hypocrisy is the calling card of the GOP now.  And Trump enablers, the anti-anti Trump crowd, will find a way to justify it.  

These are the times that Trump apologists really get what they deserve.  

[welshbairn]

6 hours ago, GordonS said:

It's hard for them to ram this through in 6 weeks when they blocked Obama's nomination to replace Scalia in his final year for 8 months, until after the election. It'll look blatantly hypocritical and political.

It won't affect most but there are a few in tight races, including on the judiciary committee. There are a few with consciences too. Well informed people think there's reason to hope that it might not happen, so you never know.

 

They've got till January rather than just till the election. Doesn't seem like there's much the Dems can do to stop it it without Republican rebels, but if they win the Presidency and take over the Senate they could just appoint 2 more Justices to restore the balance. There's nothing in the constitution to prevent it, now that the norms of precedent and what's deemed as acceptable behaviour have gone out of the window.

[Wee-Bey]

Me and the girls going to pour one out over brunch in memory of the Notorious RBG.

Rest in power kween.

Wakanda forever.

[G51]

Trump and McConnell will replace Ginsberg before the election, no doubt about it. And the Democrats will just let them, then whine about it. Centrists lack the courage to do what is necessary.

[Savage Henry]

4 minutes ago, G51 said:

Trump and McConnell will replace Ginsberg before the election, no doubt about it. And the Democrats will just let them, then whine about it. Centrists lack the courage to do what is necessary.

There’s literally nothing the Democrats can do to stop it.

[NotThePars]

RBG was a fucking idiot, RIP

[Aladdin]

I doubt Murkowski, Collins and Romney would vote to confirm a new appointment.

Just needs one more to break ranks.

[welshbairn]

10 minutes ago, Aladdin said:

I doubt Murkowski, Collins and Romney would vote to confirm a new appointment.

Just needs one more to break ranks.

You'd think there must be at least one more retiring Senator who just wants to f**k Trump up out of spite. Maybe an old friend of MacCain.

[G51]

58 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:

There’s literally nothing the Democrats can do to stop it.

There's a million things they can do if they really want to stop it. All they have to do is run out the clock, after all.

They won't do it, because another right-wing justice isn't a threat to centrism, it's a threat to the left. And that's just fine with the Democrats.

[Detournement]

17 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

You'd think there must be at least one more retiring Senator who just wants to f**k Trump up out of spite. Maybe an old friend of MacCain.

It isn't fucking Trump though. Appointing another right wing justice is about their long term neoliberal project. 

If there is a hold out Trump will just do his drain the swamp routine and say that Biden is going to appoint a radical Marxist to the court. 

[welshbairn]

4 minutes ago, G51 said:

There's a million things they can do if they really want to stop it. All they have to do is run out the clock, after all.

They won't do it, because another right-wing justice isn't a threat to centrism, it's a threat to the left. And that's just fine with the Democrats.

There's nothing they can do while the Republicans have the numbers. The Republicans changed the rules so they can block filibustering with a majority of one. 

[welshbairn]

7 minutes ago, Detournement said:

It isn't fucking Trump though. Appointing another right wing justice is about their long term neoliberal project. 

If there is a hold out Trump will just do his drain the swamp routine and say that Biden is going to appoint a radical Marxist to the court. 

I have absolutely no idea what you're on about. Do you think the Democrats want another Justice in favour of abolishing abortion rights and continually siding with employers versus workers?

[Savage Henry]

1 hour ago, Aladdin said:

I doubt Murkowski, Collins and Romney would vote to confirm a new appointment.

Just needs one more to break ranks.

Collins is utterly tied in to having Trump’s backing.  No chance she’s not voting to confirm.   This is the be all and end all for these people: having a conservative leaning Supreme Court.  Romney might be the better bet to join Murkowski, but I don’t see any others.   The brazen hypocrisy of Mitch McConnell is going to come to the fore, but it’s also the brazen hypocrisy of the Republican Party at this point, and they need to be voted out at every conceivable level of government.  It bares repeating: does anyone genuinely still hold the view that Biden would be ‘just as bad’?  

The other point is that the filibuster is no longer an option; with Pence the deciding vote, it’s a gimme that Trump gets his nominee.  

[G51]

22 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

There's nothing they can do while the Republicans have the numbers. The Republicans changed the rules so they can block filibustering with a majority of one. 

This just proves my point.

If you can't do anything within the rules, then you do something outside of the rules. Tie it up in legal action, civil disobedience, targeted action against prospective justices and potential swing senators. If it matters that much, you'll find a way of making it happen or give everything trying.

But another right-wing justice doesn't bother the centrist Democrats. Mostly because it poses no real threat to them - the middle classes won't suffer. I've no doubt there are some centrists who are thinking that the spectacle of Trump forcing through another justice will help them in the election.

Sadly, the vulnerable in society who will be affected by this have no representation. They are supposed to be represented by the Democrats, but this is a party that has no interest in enacting meaningful change that will help them. Coming second to the Republicans and maintaining the status quo is much more preferable than winning on a platform of radical action.

[carpetmonster]

22 minutes ago, G51 said:

This just proves my point.

If you can't do anything within the rules, then you do something outside of the rules. Tie it up in legal action, civil disobedience, targeted action against prospective justices and potential swing senators. If it matters that much, you'll find a way of making it happen or give everything trying.

But another right-wing justice doesn't bother the centrist Democrats. Mostly because it poses no real threat to them - the middle classes won't suffer. I've no doubt there are some centrists who are thinking that the spectacle of Trump forcing through another justice will help them in the election.

Sadly, the vulnerable in society who will be affected by this have no representation. They are supposed to be represented by the Democrats, but this is a party that has no interest in enacting meaningful change that will help them. Coming second to the Republicans and maintaining the status quo is much more preferable than winning on a platform of radical action.

Re ‘tie it up in legal action’ - which court are they gonna take it to?

[welshbairn]

I'm sure if there is a way to block the vote through legal or extra legal means the Democrats would be looking into it, none of the experts have come up with anything yet. They could always try to disrupt the proceedings or stand outside the Capitol building with "It's Not Fair!" placards, but the vote would be held anyway and Trump would win without 4 defections. 

I get bored of this argument that they're all the same and there's no point in siding with the less bad option, everyone should sit on their hands until Noam Chomsky sweeps to power in his inevitable popular landslide.

[Savage Henry]

40 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I'm sure if there is a way to block the vote through legal or extra legal means the Democrats would be looking into it, none of the experts have come up with anything yet. They could always try to disrupt the proceedings or stand outside the Capitol building with "It's Not Fair!" placards, but the vote would be held anyway and Trump would win without 4 defections. 

I get bored of this argument that they're all the same and there's no point in siding with the less bad option, everyone should sit on their hands until Noam Chomsky sweeps to power in his inevitable popular landslide.

Right.  Hypocrisy isn’t illegal. It’s completely distasteful, but it’s not against the law.  

[GordonS]

4 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

Hypocrisy is the calling card of the GOP now.  And Trump enablers, the anti-anti Trump crowd, will find a way to justify it.  

These are the times that Trump apologists really get what they deserve.  

Generally yes, but there's already one Senator said he won't approve a Justice before inauguration, and Romney is expected to follow. It only takes two more and folk in the know think it's possible. 

3 hours ago, welshbairn said:

They've got till January rather than just till the election. Doesn't seem like there's much the Dems can do to stop it it without Republican rebels, but if they win the Presidency and take over the Senate they could just appoint 2 more Justices to restore the balance. There's nothing in the constitution to prevent it, now that the norms of precedent and what's deemed as acceptable behaviour have gone out of the window.

True. But they'd need to control the Senate and at this stage that's 50-50 at best.