sparseMatrix

keeb420, 9 months ago

and so far theyve done fuck all about it happening. lock this walking crime spree up already. hes a flight risk and hes attacking judges and intimidating witnesses.

Hairyblue, 9 months ago

Gov. Kemp is not having this circus of lies Trump want to perform.

Georgia's Republican governor responded to that with his own social media post declaring, "The 2020 election in Georgia was not stolen. For nearly three years now, anyone with evidence of fraud has failed to come forward -- under oath -- and prove anything in a court of law.”

Nougat, 9 months ago

What I'm expecting for Monday: Trump climbs into the Starship Heart of Gold and activates the Infinite Improbability Drive.

wrath-sedan, 9 months ago (edited 9 months ago)

I mean no? If you're saying that's because Trump's already been indicted, that's because he's been indicted on 4 separate occasions for dozens of counts of various crimes, 2 at the state and 2 at the federal level. All of these are playing out simultaneously but independently.

At this point, with how airtight some of these cases are and the sheer number of them, he's going to face some kind of conviction. What that will look like is still an unknown. Jail time? House arrest? We've never convicted an ex-president of a crime before so there are a lot of unknowns, and no one can predict what exactly happens next. But I would say "fizzle out like a wet sock" is extremely low on the list of possibilities.

kibiz0r, 9 months ago

Being appealed already, and I’m sure the amicus briefs are already flying around, but I’m still heartened.

Having this ruling at a constitutional level anywhere lends credence to the fact that energy production involves human rights questions and is not just an economic matter.

Raise_a_glass, 9 months ago

The only reason Tuberville is able to hold things up is because the senate generally votes on these all at once and that type of vote is required to be unanimous. If republicans want to play games, the senate majority leader should bring up these high level positions one at a time and hold normal votes.
It wastes time, but at least it helps get around this nonsense.

neptune, 9 months ago

Is Tuberville running for President? Of Belarus? Really no explanation for this besides bad faith, in the worst sense.

antangil, 9 months ago

Don’t we have the concept of recess appointments to cover these shenanigans? Wait for congress to recess, fill the posts, rinse and repeat.

pgm_01, 9 months ago

I believe the phrase is:
"Lock him up! Lock him up!"

Seriously, put his ass in home confinement, slap on an ankle monitor and take away all of his electronics because he can't behave himself.

keeb420, 9 months ago

this is already much bigger than watergate.

kelvin0mql, 9 months ago

@sparseMatrix
“You’ve heard it said ‘The arc of the moral universe is long and bends toward justice.’ But it doesn’t bend towards justice by gravity, you have to bend it. And there’s a bunch of people trying to bend it back.”

• • Jon Stewart

HWK_290, 9 months ago

Ugh, the deep state is compromising mental healthcare AND our elections

kelvin0mql, 9 months ago

@sparseMatrix
Understood & agreed.

I just don’t consider his death a tragedy in quite the same way I’m inferring you do. I feel bad for the FBI agents if they suffer any emotional discomfort for doing the right, necessary thing.

I don’t suggest we euthanize all GOPers. But if they volunteer like this ass did, then fine. Natural Selection do your thing.

#MaybePartlyKidding

LEDZeppelin, 9 months ago

I’m frustrated with these motherfucking traitors

Lemmylefty, 9 months ago

It’s okay; it’s a bit of a puzzle, putting some of these threads together. That, and while I can see the number of comments, it rarely matches up, so I think some comments aren’t popping up or are disappearing when deleted.

Oh yeah, I see therapy as a reactive effort, with the biggest issue being the profit made from polarization and conspiracy laced media. But it’s a good barometer for who is more prone to develop these issues. It’s a numbers game whenever you’re dealing with big populations with respect to limited resources, so focusing on those people who are most susceptible or most surrounded by this rot and get it within their closest social spheres is useful.

The problem is that once the fire takes hold you have to shift a lot of the effort to firefighting and not fire prevention. That, and for all their monitoring, agencies like the FBI aren’t as good at suppressing extremism as, say, increasing social services and a focus on healthy communities. They’re hammers, and we’ve all got a bunch of loose screws…

HappyMeatbag, 9 months ago

Now we know who many of them are. Never trust them.

This is how I feel about people wearing swastikas and such. It’s a handy “warning label”. It’s like a blinking sign over their head that says DO NOT ENGAGE, BUT KEEP AN EYE ON ME.

anon6789, 9 months ago

I can’t imagine being 75 and deciding that the best use of my final years is to try to assassinate a moderate president. Even if you do feel the country is going to hell, you’ve got a decade left tops.

He let himself give into selfishness and anger instead of spending time with all that family, sitting on a patio chair with his dog and an icy Arnold Palmer waving to neighbors, and enjoying old man hobbies. What a frickin tragedy…

I want to know about serious issues with this country, but screw extremist media big time. News isn’t entertainment. It needs to be real or this crap happens.

Nougat, 9 months ago (edited 9 months ago)

You may be wrong.

The paper is available for download, it's 126 pages long. I'm on page 18 49, and it's a steamroller. Oh yeah, and Calabresi, the author of your linked article, is cited in the NY Times article above.

Edit: Just got to page 61, and there's a bit there which addresses your concerns.

For those (like us) who value First Amendment liberties of speech, press, assembly, religion, and the right to dissent generally, might Section Three therefore be thought a little dangerous? Might Section Three, in the wrong hands or applied improperly, be used to suppress dissent in the name of excluding insurrectionists from office? Perhaps. We do not shy away from the point. But the supposed danger of a constitutional provision is not really an argument against its meaning. And the potential abuse of a constitutional power, privilege, or disqualification is not really a good legal argument against its existence. Section Three’s exclusion could be thought to pose a danger; but insurrection and rebellion are dangers too—all too real dangers, as recent events have shown. Where exactly that line is drawn by the Constitution, and the extent to which that line changes the prior rules of the First Amendment, are ultimately questions of the meaning of Section Three’s general terms triggering disqualification from future office—“insurrection,” “rebellion,” “engaged in,” “given aid or comfort to”—and of who all is included under Section Three’s ban.

binaryphile, 9 months ago

This conveniently ignores that Trump's situation is predicated on actual behavior during an actual honest-to-goodness insurrection (yes, it has been adjudicated an insurrection many times at this point, see Jan 6 convictions). He publicly and directly addressed the terrorist group Proud Boys in televised remarks, the group at the heart of the insurrection, whose leaders are now jailed for it, calling them to attention to "stand by". No one doubts he failed his constitutional duty to protect the transfer of power. He disavows it to this day! When they invaded the capitol in an insurrection, that made it a lot harder for some other presidential candidate to come to the table with the same resume for being barred from the ballot. If I were any candidate in the future and the bar were this high, I'd rest easy every day of the week.

GTFO with this slippery slope bullshit.