By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
RIP truth, evidence, decency, reason and potentially civilisation on 12:40 - Jan 31 by StokieBlue
A month ago I would have agreed with you but it's been so nuts I think all bets are off.
SB
This.
Trump is already breaching the constitution with the order about citizenship and has appointed that court politically ratjer than with the aim of justice.
RIP truth, evidence, decency, reason and potentially civilisation on 11:52 - Jan 31 by DanTheMan
They have a stacked supreme court who will go with whatever their team wants.
And they are the ones who get to interpret what the constitution means.
i read a very interesting article about the supreme court in the 60s under warren. it was radically activist in pushing through a whole raft of liberal decisions - which involved in places a pretty imaginative and politicised reading of the constitution. so it was a supreme court stacked in the opposite direction. that's the problem with the american system and the politicisation of the judicial system - it isn't the case that what we have now has broken with the past or that the supreme court is always evenly balanced and above politics. but politics aside, judges of any colour do believe in the rule of law and there are limits to where they will go. they are not in the end political operatives and, however they were appointed, they do retain independence.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
2
RIP truth, evidence, decency, reason and potentially civilisation on 13:47 - Jan 31 with 623 views
RIP truth, evidence, decency, reason and potentially civilisation on 11:59 - Jan 31 by DJR
I am still not sure I have heard anyone in the media calling him that. Maybe populist has replaced it but I tend to think populist is a much tamer way of describing people like Trump and demagogue is much more powerful and apt.
In what you say, "was" appears to me to be the key word. It is not clear to me that Trump will be able to do anything to stop the States being a democracy, albeit, according to the Economist Democracy Index, a flawed democracy (since 2015).
[Post edited 31 Jan 12:10]
Technically, Germany remained a democracy throughout the nazi era (albeit with special powers reserved to the leader, plus the roles of Chancellor and President merged). They even held "elections" after gaining power. Parliament continued to meet, in the Kroll Opera House.
Thanks to the Supreme Court, Trump can do pretty much what he wants, including running again, postponing elections or disenfranchising voters. Any challenge will eventually reach the SC, who are his people and who have already said nothing a President does in an official capacity is illegal. I don't think people have twigged how much power he currently has. Nobody is in a position to stop him.
RIP truth, evidence, decency, reason and potentially civilisation on 13:33 - Jan 31 by lowhouseblue
i read a very interesting article about the supreme court in the 60s under warren. it was radically activist in pushing through a whole raft of liberal decisions - which involved in places a pretty imaginative and politicised reading of the constitution. so it was a supreme court stacked in the opposite direction. that's the problem with the american system and the politicisation of the judicial system - it isn't the case that what we have now has broken with the past or that the supreme court is always evenly balanced and above politics. but politics aside, judges of any colour do believe in the rule of law and there are limits to where they will go. they are not in the end political operatives and, however they were appointed, they do retain independence.
I'd need to view the article and agree that the politicisation of the judicial system is bonkers.
With that said, the idea that this current lot of judges is independent seems naive to me. Some of the most recently appointed lot said they wouldn't upturn Roe vs. Wade and yet at the first chance they did.
Clarence Thomas frequently gets given luxury trips / gifts from wealthy donors.
The whole presidential immunity thing is completely bonkers and it seemed primarily driven to protect Trump.
Even if we go further down the chain, the court case he had around the secret documents he kept at his house had one of his judges who constantly delayed it to the point where it could never be tried.
I'm sure there are examples of Democrats doing similar but I don't think this is a "both sides" thing here.
Years ago I think the Republicans would have been much more hesitant to support wrongdoing, such as they were with Nixon (even if he was pardoned). Now they've realised they don't have to bother as nobody gives a toss anymore about right and wrong, as long as their side "wins".
RIP truth, evidence, decency, reason and potentially civilisation on 13:47 - Jan 31 by Guthrum
Technically, Germany remained a democracy throughout the nazi era (albeit with special powers reserved to the leader, plus the roles of Chancellor and President merged). They even held "elections" after gaining power. Parliament continued to meet, in the Kroll Opera House.
Thanks to the Supreme Court, Trump can do pretty much what he wants, including running again, postponing elections or disenfranchising voters. Any challenge will eventually reach the SC, who are his people and who have already said nothing a President does in an official capacity is illegal. I don't think people have twigged how much power he currently has. Nobody is in a position to stop him.
Trump's immunity relates to criminal prosecution, and your take is not one I would share although Trump is likely to push things as far as he can.
[Post edited 31 Jan 14:33]
0
RIP truth, evidence, decency, reason and potentially civilisation on 14:32 - Jan 31 with 482 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
