Pretty much. Imagine the most hysterical takes that “crazy blue haired feminists” from 20 years ago were nocked for for warning about what Bush’s christian nationalists with a desire for absolute power wanted to do to this country. This is now what they are openly saying is their platform - dissolution of civil servants’ employment rights, deeply researched ideological purity tests that will be leveraged to staff the government, brazen politicization of the courts…Everything they have spent 2 generations mocking people for “hysterically” suggesting they wanted to do they are now freely admitting the claims were right all along.
Trump himself cannot get himself organized to reliably put his socks on before his shoes, but this is being driven by serious if fucked up people with links to the party going back to Regan and Bush.
The threat of lots of Trump’s worst impulses have historically been waved away by self identified serious people as a hysterical over reaction, because “even if he wanted to that he doesnt have the skill or focus to do it”. He will leave peacefully if he loses the election. His people wont really dissolve Roe vs Wade.
No matter how many times the things we were told was a hysterical over reaction and would not happen actually happened, these same fucks just moved on to the next thing to chide “crazed liberals” about over reacting to rather than focusing on what the people around trump were increasingly clearly and unambiguously stating they were going to do.
That is what makes this so chilling - as i mentioned in my last post, it is not the Trump adjacent morons who are pushing this. The fuckwits have given way to the actual competent people. These are people who have been working in the background of establishment Republican politics for decades. They have deep knowledge of how government works and where its vulnerabilities is, and have methodically over the course of decades inched us on a path to this. When Handmaid’s Tale first started airing, one of the responses was that opposition to Trump had become deranged. Lots of people were then shocked to find out Atwood originally write it as a warning against the desires of Regan’s “Moral Majority”
There are interesting parallels to the Biden situation, not in terms of capacity, but the party sticking with a candidate with a seemingly firm hold on his party despite probably not being in a position to win. There is time for the Liberals to get a new leader in place, which would have the potential side benefit of putting a new face in front for what might be a very awkward Trump 2nd term.
Problem with Poilievre is he is a shallow twat who has never done a damn thing outside politics, and isn’t really that accomplished politically either - very much the tall poppy effect as the Conservatives just ran out of figures to cycle through. But a lot of his persona may be appealing to Trump.
For as outrageous a departure as this ruling was, it is the brain child of orthodox republican philosophy, something that was tested out by the 3 Republican administrations before Trump (Barr is a connecting thread) and formally implemented by Bush appointees
It WILL get much worse if Trump wins again and gets to appoint even more judges across other courts
Well not the thread for it I guess, but using that rationale, Trump = Trudeau and Biden = Poilievre, just neither on the same side of the political spectrum.
Some of you are being overly dramatic here. The delay is not the case, its to determine what is an official act within his presidency (not before and not after). I don’t see how this pertains to that as it was outside his presidency (before). I assume it’s a chance for the judge to determine if there was anything within the case that would be inadmissible, IF it was linked to an official act during his presidency.
A US president can’t pass off a seal strike against his opponent as an official act (I know that was a tongue in cheek joke). He cant rob a bank and claim it was an official act, etc, etc. I have zero doubt that a Democrat president will be taking advantage of this ruling sometime in the future.
As far as I am aware (with my limited knowledge), impeachment is the way to go, and its the right way as the burden of proof is a majority in the House and Senate, as this way doesn’t disenfranchise ~50% of the population. So in other-words it has to be a damn solid case to get a 66% vote, which essentially rules out political bias.
Nah, Biden may be old, but he has done a lot over the years. Poilievre is Trump Light without the stardom, and really just a career Hill guy. Our problem is that ‘shallow twat who has never done a damn thing outside politics’ actually sort of describes both of them. Trudeau just happened to be born on 3rd base, so now has a decade of experience.
