Jump to content
Crisis

American Politics

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, purplehaze said:

Sadly it seems that most Republicans are in lock-step with Trump and McConnell. I doubt there is enough sanity there to do the right thing. :( Romney is not enough by himself.

agreed. :(

 

saw on social media somewhere Lisa Murkowski also said she'd not vote.

 

4 hours ago, Astreya said:

You obviously need term limits for judges in the Supreme Court, too.

Out of curiosity - what would be needed to achieve that? Who sets this stuff? The Supreme Court itself?

I'm not at my computer right now, but I think (??) the lifetime appts for judges might be in the constitution.  if that's the case, it can only be changed by a constitutional amendment.  BUT i can look that up later tonight when I'm back on my computer (as opposed to my phone rn)

 

@Fuzzbucket - hello fellow B5-er! 👋

 

Edited by trystan

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, trystan said:

I'm not at my computer right now, but I think (??) the lifetime appts for judges might be in the constitution.  if that's the case, it can only be changed by a constitutional amendment.  BUT i can look that up later tonight when I'm back on my computer (as opposed to my phone rn)

 

@Fuzzbucket - hello fellow B5-er! 👋

Thanks!  And yeah, Londo had his moments indeed :D

Which reminds me - the arc about President Clark could be somewhat prescient - hopefully not as I don't really see any John Sheridan out there. -_-'

Edited by Astreya

Share this post


Link to post

ok, i did some looking.  here's what i got.... the article was written at the time of Kavanaugh's hearing for SCOTUS:

 

"The U.S. Constitution doesn't specifically grant Supreme Court justices a lifetime appointment. Instead, Article III, Section 1, states that federal judges "shall hold their Offices during good Behavior" and… that's it. As long as federal judges don't commit a crime — and remember their pleases and thank yous — they keep their seat.

 

The phrase "during good Behavior" translates to a lifetime appointment because the Founders set no specific term or age limit for service. This means that the only actions that can remove a federal judge are death, resignation, or impeachment by Congress."

(https://bigthink.com/politics-current-affairs/why-supreme-court-lifetime-tenure?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1)

 

Article III, Section. 1 of the Constitution says:

"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office."

(https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript#:~:text=Article III.,-Section.&text=The judicial Power of the,to time ordain and establish.)

 

and that's all the Constitution says.

 

as to make term limits, it still might need a Constitutional amendment to add term limits to a federal judgeship.

 

6 hours ago, Astreya said:

Thanks!  And yeah, Londo had his moments indeed :D

Which reminds me - the arc about President Clark could be somewhat prescient - hopefully not as I don't really see any John Sheridan out there. -_-'

ooh, another B5-er! yaay!

yeah, we could use a John Sheridan about now. 👍

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, trystan said:

ooh, another B5-er! yaay!

yeah, we could use a John Sheridan about now. 👍

 

I'd be happy to settle for a Susan Ivanova, if we can't find a John Sheridan.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, catstaff said:

I'd be happy to settle for a Susan Ivanova, if we can't find a John Sheridan.

how about a Delenn with a White Star? :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, trystan said:

how about a Delenn with a White Star? :D 

 

And Marcus leading the Rangers!

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, catstaff said:

And Marcus leading the Rangers!

sounds like a good plan to me!

Share this post


Link to post

@trystan

Thanks for looking this up!

 

I prefer the Federal Constitutional Court setup - our judges have a term limit of 12 years and they have to retire at 68, no matter whether they completed the 12 years. Plus half of them are appointed by the Bundestag (parliament / lower chamber) and half of them by the Bundesrat (upper chamber).

 

And of course it has to be Delenn:

 

Share this post


Link to post

I'm going to take the controversial step of supporting McConnell.  I'm from Kentucky.  Why would we want to give up such a powerful senator?  True, he's far from perfect.  McGraff is giving him a run for his money.

Edited by Classycal

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Astreya said:

@trystan

Thanks for looking this up!

 

I prefer the Federal Constitutional Court setup - our judges have a term limit of 12 years and they have to retire at 68, no matter whether they completed the 12 years. Plus half of them are appointed by the Bundestag (parliament / lower chamber) and half of them by the Bundesrat (upper chamber).

 

And of course it has to be Delenn:

 

Ivanova, Delenn, Sheridan - we could use them all right now!

 

8 hours ago, trystan said:

you're welcome, @Astreya

 

and yes, Delenn! i was thinking of that speech, of course. 

wow, so many B5 fans! :D  (i have a group of B5 dragons, actually)

Me, too - https://dragcave.net/group/54186

 

My FB feed is full of comments that matched the first one here when she died. (In fact, the first one I saw matched @TacticianLyra's almost verbatim. XD Are you Paula in real life?)

 

It doesn't make sense to have a lifetime appointment really. What do you do if they become mentally feeble in their old age?

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Lagie said:

It doesn't make sense to have a lifetime appointment really. What do you do if they become mentally feeble in their old age?

i completely agree.  darn vaguely-worded Founders! XD 

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Lagie said:

It doesn't make sense to have a lifetime appointment really. What do you do if they become mentally feeble in their old age?

Make sure they won't find their way to wherever they need to go in order to do their rulings. 😛 Or just take away their car keys. Problem solved.

Share this post


Link to post

Lifetime appointments with no caveats, are bad when it is someone who goes against what most people would want but when it's someone like RBG it's a very good thing! 🙃

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/18/2020 at 8:53 PM, trystan said:

McConnell's going to shove someone else through, we know this.  maybe enough (4) repubs in the senate will vote with the dems to not confirm? (mitt romney...)

And Romney disappoints! https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/22/politics/scotus-nomination-congress-latest-mitt-romney/index.html

Without his opposition there is no chance of blocking the appointment from going through. There were two Republicans who stood against it, but four are needed. :(

Share this post


Link to post

Generally, I avoid politics like the plague. I could write more about it, but it comes down to the fact that I believe in politics being unproductive and toxic.

 

I think I’m going to step outside of that rule I have for myself and vote for Biden. I’d be lying if I said that wasn’t partially because I’m curious as to what Trump will say and do, though, if Trump loses.

Edited by KrazyKarp

Share this post


Link to post

well, there's this:

 

Quote

President Donald Trump on Wednesday would not commit to providing a peaceful transition of power after Election Day, lending further fuel to concerns he may not relinquish his office should he lose in November.

"Well, we're going to have to see what happens," Trump said when asked whether he'd commit to a peaceful transition, one of the cornerstones of American democracy.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/23/politics/trump-election-day-peaceful-transition/index.html

 

yikes.

Share this post


Link to post

This does not surprise me. But at least the military have thus far stuck to the rule of law; several high-ups refused to agree to "send in the troops" when Trump wanted them in, as it would be illegal.

Share this post


Link to post

Sadly, it may not be that easy.

 

This article is very long and I have not read it completely, but it is very scary in pointing out that we really have no mechanism in place to stop a truly ruthless President and his complicit Party from subverting the results of an election. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/what-if-trump-refuses-concede/616424/?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20200924&instance_id=22476&nl=the-morning&regi_id=126303623&section_index=2&section_name=four_more_big_stories&segment_id=38913&te=1&user_id=9946e4355e83136a95f0d0f6fc020917

Share this post


Link to post

hopefully McConnell actually means this, and isn't just saying it~

 

Quote

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on Thursday that there would be an "orderly" transition of power in 2021, after President Trump refused to commit to a peaceful hand off of power if he loses in November. 

"The winner of the November 3rd election will be inaugurated on January 20th. There will be an orderly transition just as there has been every four years since 1792," McConnell said in a tweet.  

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/517973-mcconnell-pushes-back-on-trump-there-will-be-an-orderly-transition

 

edit:

i'm still waffling about how to vote. even though I requested a mail-in ballot, I still feel like I should vote in person. I'm in Pennsylvania, we are definitely a battleground state, and actually going to the polls and checking a box or pushing the button tells me that the state actually did get my vote.

 

With our mail-in ballots, I'll get an email saying that my ballot has been received, but that's just the envelope with my signature. How do I know the vote in the inside envelope has actually been counted?

 

if i DO go in person, i plan on bringing my mail-in ballot with me to show whoever's at the polling place that while i got the ballot, i haven't sent it, and i want to vote in person.

 

Edited by trystan
so i don't double-post

Share this post


Link to post

Well, well... Mr.Trump is showing his true colours more and more openly:

Quote

The Trump administration has stopped vital technical assistance to pro-democracy groups in Belarus, Hong Kong and Iran, which had helped activists evade state surveillance and sidestep internet censorship.

The Open Technology Fund (OTF) has had to stop all its operations in Belarus, and many of its activities supporting civil society in Hong Kong and Iran, because a congressionally-mandated grant of nearly $20m has been withheld by a new Trump appointee, Michael Pack.

The OTF is a small non-profit organisation which develops technologies for evading cyber-surveillance and for circumventing internet and radio blackouts imposed by authoritarian regimes. It provides daily help to pro-democracy movements in installing and maintaining them, with the aim of staying at least one step ahead of the state.

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/24/trump-open-technology-fund-hong-kong-belarus-iran

Share this post


Link to post

Seriously. Is there a plan in place if orange dude refuses to step down when voted out?!?

"Get rid of the ballots and there won't need to be a transfer of power."

"What they're doing is a hoax with the ballots"

"The election will not be decided by the voters."

"He expects it will be the Supreme Court that handles the decision of the next election."

Rachel - 

"We are here. It is now upon us. There is not any ambiguity about where this is heading, or how bad his intentions might be or what lengths he'd go to. We're here.

Now he's flat out saying that the reason he wants to move ahead with getting a new Supreme Court justice on the bench before the election is because he's declaring now in advance that ballots cast in the election don't count, that ballots cast in the election are part of a fraud and a hoax that is illegitimate and therefore it will be the court -including his newly appointed justice- that will "get rid of the ballots" so there doesn't have to be a transfer of power to a new president."

244 years to stand this republic up.  Four years to cut it down. :(

 

Amy Coney Barrett is the selection for the Supreme Court.

Share this post


Link to post

there are so many frustrations in your post Lagie.  DisgustingUntimelyApe.gif.e996883e23028837da59889ee59a8eb9.gif

 

i hate the orange dude, i hate that he's sowing fear and hate. i hate that so many republicons/trumpists won't stand up to him.

 

i hate Amy Coney Barrett - she's a devout Catholic, but that's not why i hate her - she's part of an Xian group - People of Praise - that believes women should do what their husbands tell them, she's anti-abortion, and while she SAYS her views and religion won't interfere with her court rulings, you KNOW they WILL.  there goes women's HEALTH. (nevermind Roe v Wade, that's only a PART of it.)

 

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2020/09/24/explainer-amy-coney-barrett-people-of-praise-catholic-charismatic-trump

https://www.newsweek.com/role-women-amy-coney-barrett-people-praise-1534033

 

Edited by trystan

Share this post


Link to post

I know how people laughed at me when I said four years ago that I now expect that soon no one will ask anymore how Hitler and the Nazis could manage to grab power in Weimar Germany to turn it into the horrific dictatorship of the Third Reich.

Share this post


Link to post