ChiGoose
-
Posts
4,259 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ChiGoose
-
-
3 minutes ago, B-Man said:
Elena Kagan’s dissenting opinion in SCOTUS’ EPA decision suggests Congress is full of idiots who should let unelected bureaucrats run things
Congress IS full of idiots.
-
3
-
-
40 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:
I suspect your thinking will change when Democrats are not in control.
That used to be my argument when friends said they wanted to get rid of the filibuster during the Obama administration. That they would regret it when the GOP took over.
But at this point, we are so polarized, so divided into our "us vs them" two party camps, that there is zero incentive for senators of one party to do anything that might benefit the other. You could propose a bill that 80% of Americans support but you'd get few people from the other side to join you and reaching the 60 vote threshold, even on a popular bill, would be next to impossible.
Congress doesn't actually legislate on anything important any more. There's just no incentive for them to cooperate. But all the American public sees is those bums in Washington not doing anything for the average American.
So do away with the filibuster entirely. It will allow the parties to actually pass meaningful legislation AND it would make it very clear to the American public who is responsible for it.
If the Dems somehow manage to pick up two senate seats in the Fall, they should immediately do away with the filibuster and pass the legislation they believe they were elected to enact. And if they overreach or don't do what the public wants, then the GOP will take over in 2024. And then the GOP can pass what it wants to pass with no obstruction from the Dems. And the voters can judge them on that.
But in the current environment, so long as the filibuster stands, the senate will obstruct meaningful legislation from either party. And the public will blame everyone instead of those doing the obstruction. It's a recipe for nothing getting done and increasing division.
[EDIT] Addendum:
Removing the filibuster may actually create an incentive for bipartisanship. If the minority party knows that the majority party can pass any legislation it wants, then the minority party may be incentivized to be involved in the legislation to help shape it in a manner they find more acceptable. Currently, there is no incentive for this as the minority party can just block the legislation outright.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, B-Man said:
I used to think that too.Now I believe it’s too dangerous to keep the filibuster.
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said:
You might be on to something here. Maybe they left a confession note or signed copies of their elaborate and foolproof insurrection plan somewhere like on Adam Schiff's desk? Or mailed a copy to the NYT's? Or a napkin found in the trash at the local IHOP?
They constantly blabbed about it. They wouldn’t shut up about it, raised $200 million from gullible people on it, and tried to pressure Mike Pence to join in on it. -
Just now, B-Man said:
Good.
They should get rid of the filibuster entirely.
-
5 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
Proving election fraud is next to impossible once its been done. You either have to abide by and not change laws via courts and state level executive branches that are designed to prevent it, or catch them in the act, as 2000 mules has come closest to showing.
Our country might already be toast, but you can pull the plug if we allow a fertile playground for fraud to ever occur again, which unquestionably happened in 2020.
Trump’s DoJ investigated 2,000 Miles and found it to be a joke. It also investigated all of the conspiracy claims and found them to be not true. In fact, the leaders of the DoJ and Trump’s Campaign Chair and campaign lawyers are on the record as stating there was no widespread fraud and that Trump lost.
Also, it’s not that hard to find voter fraud. For example, if the claims of double scanning ballots in Georgia were true, that would have been discovered in the hand recount.
If the mules claim was true, it would have been discovered during the verification process when signatures didn’t match.
The independent legislature doctrine is a crazy theory that has no history in our country but would allow states to override the will of the voters.
-
1
-
-
Lol. SCOTUS changed constitutional law enough this term that the bar exam had to release a statement:
QuoteExaminees taking the NCBE-developed July 2022 MBE, MPT, and MEE will not be required to be familiar with this term's US Supreme Court decisions.
-
1
-
-
Well, this isn't good...
On the independent state legislature theory:QuoteThe Constitution delegates power to administer federal elections to the states, subject to Congressional override. There is, however, a disagreement about how much power is delegated and to which state actors exactly.
There are two relevant clauses. One is the Elections Clause, which reads, “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations.”
The other is the Presidential Electors Clause, which reads, “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.”
The dispute hinges on how to understand the word “legislature.” The long-running understanding is that it refers to each state’s general lawmaking processes, including all the normal procedures and limitations. So if a state constitution subjects legislation to being blocked by a governor’s veto or citizen referendum, election laws can be blocked via the same means. And state courts must ensure that laws for federal elections, like all laws, comply with their state constitutions.
Proponents of the independent state legislature theory reject this traditional reading, insisting that these clauses give state legislatures exclusive and near-absolute power to regulate federal elections. The result? When it comes to federal elections, legislators would be free to violate the state constitution and state courts couldn’t stop them.
Extreme versions of the theory would block legislatures from delegating their authority to officials like governors, secretaries of state, or election commissioners, who currently play important roles in administering elections.
Somehow, I'm not optimistic that SCOTUS will end up ruling in a way that's good for democracy...
-
5 minutes ago, B-Man said:
Senate pause, again: Leahy breaks hip
For the second time this year, Senate Democrats will likely have to pause the more contentious items on their agenda due to medical issues.
Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy, at 82 the longest-serving member of the upper chamber, broke his hip in a fall at his home last night. He will undergo surgery to repair the damage, and so will be unable to cast any votes in a 50/50 chamber:
First off, we certainly want to wish Senator Leahy a speedy and full recovery. A broken hip at 82 is no joke, but medical response and rehabilitation for such injuries has markedly improved over recent decades.
That brings us to the rest of Leahy’s colleagues. This makes the second time this year that Senate Democrats have dipped below the 50-seat mark in the Senate for any significant period, and that creates some headaches. In February, Ben Ray Luján suffered a stroke and had to have brain surgery, which forced him to remain absent a few weeks. Luján made a full recovery and came back to work in the spring, but the absence forced Chuck Schumer to juggle the more contentious parts of his agenda until he had all 50 votes again.
I'm so tired of the gerontocracy.
-
1
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, Tiberius said:
I am incredibly skeptical of a blue wave:
- GOP won the redistricting fight, Dems couldn't even fight to a draw
- Midterms of a first term presidency
- Inflation & gas prices
Right now, we're going to see things really turn around for the Dems as the bottom drops out for the GOP on suburban women voters, but it's not even July yet. When Roe is five months in the rearview mirror and it still costs $90 to fill their gas tank, I'd expect we'd see things return to the expected GOP wins in the Fall.
It might not be as big as it would have been without Roe but I just can't see a Dem win in the midterms, not to mention an actual blue wave.
-
25 minutes ago, B-Man said:
WV vs EPA
Congress did not give the EPA the power to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the (Obama era) Clean Power Plan.What's weird about this is that the rule at the heart of this case wasn't even in effect. It had been revoked during the Trump administration. This probably should have been mooted out. But SCOTUS gonna SCOTUS.
-
1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said:
No. The idiots are the people believing the fantasy that you can execute a successful coup without any support from the military or other people with lots of guns acting in coordination at multiple sites around the country to take over key and critical facilities and infrastructure.
Yes, I think we can all agree that Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and John Eastman are idiots.
Glad we found this common ground.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, Over 29 years of fanhood said:
Wait so they could have charged him with an obvious felony almost two years ago and just haven’t gotten around to it?
Maybe you should look into how prosecutions work…Also, there is currently a grand jury in Georgia looking at this.
-
6 minutes ago, Doc said:
That's it? But no charges because the DoJ is inept or too scared, is that right?
Well there’s a grand jury in Georgia looking at it now.
But I imagine that professionals would want to make sure they could absolutely prove their case before they make a Durham of themselves…
-
3 minutes ago, Doc said:
Let's see them.
Trump quote from around 51:45:
QuoteAll we have to do, Cleta, is find 11,000-plus votes. So we don’t need that. I’m not looking to shake up the whole world. We won Georgia easily. We won it by hundreds of thousands of votes.
Around 1:01:17:
QuoteAnd the real truth is, I won by 400,000 votes. At least. That’s the real truth. But we don’t need 400,000 votes. We need less than 2,000 votes. And are you guys able to meet tomorrow, Ryan?
Here's the text of 52 U.S.C. 20511:
QuoteA person, including an election official, who in any election for Federal office—
(1) knowingly and willfully intimidates, threatens, or coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any person for—
(A) registering to vote, or voting, or attempting to register or vote;
(B) urging or aiding any person to register to vote, to vote, or to attempt to register or vote; or
(C) exercising any right under this chapter; or
(2) knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by—
(A) the procurement or submission of voter registration applications that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held; or
(B) the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held,
shall be fined in accordance with title 18 (which fines shall be paid into the general fund of the Treasury, miscellaneous receipts (pursuant to section 3302 of title 31), notwithstanding any other law), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.So we have Trump on the record saying he won by 400,000 votes but asking the Secretary of State of Georgia to just add about 11,000 votes because that's what he needs to win.
If Trump truly believed that he won by 400,000 votes, that is a crime.
-
Just now, Doc said:
Hey, you can be naive if you want. It's no skin off my nose.
Right back at ya.
Would be really embarrassing for you if there were tapes of Trump committing a crime.
Oh wait...
-
Just now, Doc said:
Tinfoil hat *****? LOL. OK Chi.
The Ray Epps stuff is dumb as ***** because even if it was true, Trump would still have committed crimes. It's just a distraction from people drinking from the right wing conspiracy fire hose.
-
11 hours ago, Tenhigh said:
Accusing people of ***** AND pedophilia. So civil.
In @716er's defense, @DRsGhost is probably the single dumbest person on this board and has not only never added anything of value, but actively works to make the board as bad as possible.
If the purpose of this board was to facilitate good discussion and discourage trolling, they would be banned.
-
1
-
-
-
21 minutes ago, Doc said:
There's nothing to believe. He actually said it, in defense of Ray Epps not being criminally charged. And no one on the J6 sham, er, committee refuted him. I would expect consistency even if Trump had told them to do it, which he did not. Or I'd expect Epps to be put in jail immediately. Kinzinger unwittingly FUBAR'd the whole thing before it ever began.
This is some real tinfoil hat *****.
I have a golf course in Scotland I'm selling if you're interested...
-
6 minutes ago, Andy1 said:
It’s a simple problem to solve. The states need to give exclusive authority to determine the medical need for an abortion to the patients doctor. No other subjective qualifications required for the procedure. Somehow, I don’t think that’s going to happen.
I think that there is good room for common ground of a majority of Americans.
Prevent unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortions:
- Comprehensive sex ed
- Easy access to free contraceptives
Make it easier to choose life:
- Re-enact the child tax credit from last year
- Universal free pre-natal and post-natal healthcare
- Parental leave
- Free or affordable childcare
- Free or affordable meals for kids
If we focused on why we have abortions, we could make progress towards both reducing the number of abortions and starting a pro-natalist movement in the US. We could remove the messiness of doctors needing lawyers to tell them what they can and can't do to help their patients while making it far likely that someone would seek an abortion for non-medical needs.
But if we leave it to the states, then women in some states are going to have to make some very difficult choices about their lives and their legal liability.
-
4 minutes ago, Doc said:
It doesn't matter. Again Kinzinger, speaking on behalf of the J6 farce, er, committee, said that telling people to break into the Capitol isn't a crime. They have zero evidence he even did that. And he's on videotape saying "peacefully and patriotically." If they heard something different, that's on them.
Ah, gotcha. We should believe members of the committee when they say things we agree with, but they are a farce when they say something we disagree with?
As I've stated, I am skeptical that the DoJ would or could secure a guilty verdict of Trump on incitement. But they have shown plenty of evidence that he committed other crimes.
-
26 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
Short answer….yes, you’re good. Nobody is guilty of a crime because you think you know what they’re thinking. Our system doesn’t work that way no matter how much you seem desperate that it does.
For the record, I think an incitement charge against Trump has a big hill to climb.
But to claim that simply saying "peacefully" negates any other context or history around his other words and actions is laughable. That would be a loophole so big as to allow criminals to run wild. "I want you to go deliver a message to that other gang, but do it peacefully..."
Ultimately, in the real world (not the fabulous world of criminal conspiracies being impossible to prosecute that you seem to think we live in), this would be up to a jury to decide. As I said, I am not confident they would decide it against Trump, but to dismiss it out of hand is ridiculous.
-
12 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
Which is why the Court said to take these debates up with the elected representatives. This should all be hashed out there, and then come back to the court if there are disputes.
Personally, I don't think it should be up to politicians as to whether people live or die. But that's just me.
Clarence Thomas IS conflicted
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Maybe Ginni isn't the only QAnon follower in the Thomas household...