President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

It's this century's version of the Civil War.

 

Suing doesn’t make it real. Millions of frivolous lawsuits are filed every day and millions are dismissed without any relief gained. Those 17 states are losers and the Supreme Court IF they have ANY substance to them will kill this charade. Those 17 states don’t have the most basic element needed for relief; any standing to request relief. This voters in the states have standing. That’s it. Not some foreign state.

 

Maddow speculated the other day that Paxton is angling for a pardon. One problem with that ... Paxton was indicted on state charges. Twitchy can’t help him.

 

If the Supreme Court rules against Trump, he's got a fallback he's already exploring, having one or both houses of Congress refuse to acknowledge the Electoral College vote. It's a better bet. He could well get a majority of the Senate to do so, which would eventually throw the election to the House where he's got a majority of state delegations. Then the riots will start.

 

So dumb question because I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV, but in going down a rabbit trail trying to figure out how one state could pretend to be injured by laws not affecting them, what justification for standing are they making? So in my rabbit trail, I started with the fact elections are up to the states to run and up to the states to decide what works. It's why the voting rights act was necessary and eventually successfully challenged. But (and here is where the not being a lawyer comes in) every state operates knowing they can control their state but trust the other states do the same to protect the voice of their populations. Now that voice is watered down on a national stage because 535 of the 537 nationally elected leaders are only chosen within the states they represent and the other two are voted on by just 538 people. Even so, everyone works with the idea that each state chooses electors in roughly the same way with roughly the same safe guards. So if in good faith Texas votes but Pennsylvania rigs the game to nullify Texas' vote by giving it's 20 EVs to the other candidate to make it less likely Texas' choice is elected, are the people of Texas deprived of their right to a republican form of government?

I know the answer is no but I'm not entirely sure if I can articulate why with any sort of legal reason.

 

That's not how it works. They vote as a joint session. It doesn't matter Republicans control the Senate, the Democrats have a bigger majority in the House to make up for it.

 

They meet in joint session and each state’s electors are assumed valid unless both houses of Congress reject them. Just having the senate isn’t enough

 

That is not what the suit is charging, because there is no actual proof of fraud they have to offer. Texas' position is that these four states violated the Constitution by making it easier to vote by mail or in early voting, meaning there could be fraud that couldn't be detected. Of course, Texas did the same thing. It is important to remember the FACT of these cases. There is no evidence of any kind of systemic fraud anywhere in this election. The Republican elected officials who say there is are traitorous liars. The whole thing is based on monstrous lies aimed at the fascist-loving brain-dead Republican voter base.

 

Important late-night read:

(M)any others familiar with Feinstein’s situation describe her as seriously struggling, and say it has been evident for several years. Speaking on background, and with respect for her accomplished career, they say her short-term memory has grown so poor that she often forgets she has been briefed on a topic, accusing her staff of failing to do so just after they have. They describe Feinstein as forgetting what she has said and getting upset when she can’t keep up. One aide to another senator described what he called a “Kabuki” meeting in which Feinstein’s staff tried to steer her through a proposed piece of legislation that she protested was “just words” which “make no sense.” Feinstein’s staff has said that sometimes she seems herself, and other times unreachable. “The staff is in such a bad position,” a former Senate aide who still has business in Congress said. “They have to defend her and make her seem normal.”
…
Schumer had several serious and painful talks with Feinstein, according to well-informed sources. Overtures were also made to enlist the help of Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum. Feinstein, meanwhile, was surprised and upset by Schumer’s message. He had wanted her to step aside on her own terms, with her dignity intact, but “she wasn’t really all that aware of the extent to which she’d been compromised,” one well-informed Senate source told me. “It was hurtful and distressing to have it pointed out.” Compounding the problem, Feinstein seemed to forget about the conversations soon after they talked, so Schumer had to confront her again. “It was like Groundhog Day, but with the pain fresh each time.” Anyone who has tried to take the car keys away from an elderly relative knows how hard it can be, he said, adding that, in this case, “It wasn’t just about a car. It was about the U.S. Senate.”
Meanwhile, the Feinstein situation has triggered the latest round in a larger generational fight in the Democratic Senate caucus. Unlike the Republican leadership in the Senate, which rotates committee chairmanships, the Democrats have stuck with the seniority system. Some frustrated younger members argue that this has undermined the Democrats’ effectiveness by giving too much power to elderly and sometimes out-of-touch chairs, resulting in uncoördinated strategy and too little opportunity for members in their prime.​

If you’re on an Apple device and you get hit by the paywall in your web browser, here’s the Apple News version (you don’t need to sign up for News+ to read it): Dianne Feinstein’s Missteps Raise a Painful Age Question Among Senate Democrats — The New Yorker

 

What if there's a split decision? BTW, I am not sure all 52 Republican Senators would go along with this. Romney won't, for one. Doesn't sound like Toomey will. Unlike the Court, Senators are not beyond the revenge of their electorates.

 

I'm 71. Being a sportswriter is an easier job in many ways than being a US Senator. Even if I were offered the chance to return to the gig I loved so dearly, I wouldn't take it. I couldn't stand the gaff, mentally or physically. Why do these pols, most of whom, like Feinstein, are set for life, hang on so long? Has their title become their entire identity? If so, how sad for them and how dangerous for the rest of us.

 

This will, I think, really complicate the GOP’s alleged attempt to try to recruit Manchin to change parties.