[Malankazooie]

After, but Trump gonna Trump.

[Vengeance]

amphibian, on 23 November 2020 - 10:10 PM, said:

I'm very much hoping that Biden listens to the wise people and doesn't hire Rahm Emanuel. The guy is toxic and left Chicago with a lot of bad feelings. There's not much he brings to the table as a person who can push a legislative agenda or be anyone other than one of the 3 Emanuel asshole brothers.

Amen!!

[Terez]

Cause, on 24 November 2020 - 01:05 AM, said:

Im confused, did GSA authorize it and than trunk Wrote that. Or did trump himself give Permission first.

Trump didn't write that. No way he would use the words "initial protocols" lol. She probably said at some point that if Michigan certified its results she would have no legal basis for continuing to withhold her ascertainment so Trump tried his damndest to intimidate the powers that be in Michigan - the Wayne county canvassers, the state canvassers, and the heads of the state legislative bodies are all well-documented cases of that effort - and when it didn't work he just told her to do it.

[Malankazooie]

Any you guys see the introduction of Biden's cabinet picks? After four years of what we just had, I almost forgot what a competently run presidency looks like.

The refutation of how Trump has run things was very apparent and lovely to see. Feeling full of confidence.

[Cause]

Pardoned Flynn. Let’s see how many more of these he hands out

[Macros]

Presidential pardons are a shit show in themselves normally, what this fruitloop will do with them will be diabolical.

[Malankazooie]

Reporter: If the Electoral college does elect Joe Biden are you going to leave?

Trump: Certainly I will, but I think that there will be a lot of things happening between now and January 20.

[Malankazooie]

Caught some sound bytes of Trump talking about election fraud on Fox News this morning. For all the tough guy, we're bad asses his supporters like to portray themselves as, they sure do back a whiny little bitch. If I was a Trump supporter, I would second guess my allegiance based on that alone .... that my guy is a whiny little bitch.

[Tiste Simeon]

Malankazooie, on 30 November 2020 - 12:52 AM, said:

Caught some sound bytes of Trump talking about election fraud on Fox News this morning. For all the tough guy, we're bad asses his supporters like to portray themselves as, they sure do back a whiny little bitch. If I was a Trump supporter, I would second guess my allegiance based on that alone .... that my guy is a whiny little bitch.

People who vote for him are sheep. They can't comprehend of not completely agreeing with everything he says and does.

[Primateus]

Malankazooie, on 30 November 2020 - 12:52 AM, said:

Caught some sound bytes of Trump talking about election fraud on Fox News this morning. For all the tough guy, we're bad asses his supporters like to portray themselves as, they sure do back a whiny little bitch. If I was a Trump supporter, I would second guess my allegiance based on that alone .... that my guy is a whiny little bitch.

Yes, I've been thinking about that as well. How is it that they do not see truly whiny he is. It's the same god damn thing with their "Aww, you gonna go cry in your safe space, you little snowflake?"

The same people who makes fun of that are heading off to parler, which is a whole big safe space just for them.


I have said it before and I will say it again, they are weak! Weak-willed, weak of character and weak of conviction. Unfortunately that does not make them any less dangerous.

[EmperorMagus]

Primateus, on 30 November 2020 - 11:12 AM, said:

Malankazooie, on 30 November 2020 - 12:52 AM, said:

Caught some sound bytes of Trump talking about election fraud on Fox News this morning. For all the tough guy, we're bad asses his supporters like to portray themselves as, they sure do back a whiny little bitch. If I was a Trump supporter, I would second guess my allegiance based on that alone .... that my guy is a whiny little bitch.

Yes, I've been thinking about that as well. How is it that they do not see truly whiny he is. It's the same god damn thing with their "Aww, you gonna go cry in your safe space, you little snowflake?"

The same people who makes fun of that are heading off to parler, which is a whole big safe space just for them.


I have said it before and I will say it again, they are weak! Weak-willed, weak of character and weak of conviction. Unfortunately that does not make them any less dangerous.

He's just telling it as it is!!!

[Abyss]

EmperorMagus, on 30 November 2020 - 04:45 PM, said:

Primateus, on 30 November 2020 - 11:12 AM, said:

Malankazooie, on 30 November 2020 - 12:52 AM, said:

Caught some sound bytes of Trump talking about election fraud on Fox News this morning. For all the tough guy, we're bad asses his supporters like to portray themselves as, they sure do back a whiny little bitch. If I was a Trump supporter, I would second guess my allegiance based on that alone .... that my guy is a whiny little bitch.

Yes, I've been thinking about that as well. How is it that they do not see truly whiny he is. It's the same god damn thing with their "Aww, you gonna go cry in your safe space, you little snowflake?"

The same people who makes fun of that are heading off to parler, which is a whole big safe space just for them.


I have said it before and I will say it again, they are weak! Weak-willed, weak of character and weak of conviction. Unfortunately that does not make them any less dangerous.

He's just telling it as it is!!!

70 million and the GOP is not weak.
Weak minded maybe...

[Malankazooie]

Scott Atlas has resigned. Which is a great thing, but not sure if this should be alarming because of how he is a Trump sycophant who backed and perpetuated the opposite of what scientists and doctors have been saying about the pandemic. In other words, if he is leaving who is next? Gary Busey? Or hopefully the post is just left vacant in these last weeks until Biden takes over. The net gain I guess is Scott Atlas is out, which is a great thing.

[Cause]

Will batt just said the doj can find no evidence of voter fraud. So will Trump finally acknowledge reality or go full meltdown. The answer seems obvious.

[QuickTidal]

Cause, on 01 December 2020 - 08:31 PM, said:

Will batt just said the doj can find no evidence of voter fraud. So will Trump finally acknowledge reality or go full meltdown. The answer seems obvious.

Nah, he turned on Barr too...this is the thing....this guy CANNOT let his narcissistic facade/veneer drop. His whole being "crumbles" if that occurs. That's a mental health break. So he will throw everyone (and I do mean everyone, his kids included) under whatever bus allows him to keep up the "I won" facade, even if it's obviously a lie.

[Macros]

even the sexy daughter he wants to date?

[Terez]

He wouldn't throw her under the bus like he would his sons, no, but he does disrespect her all the time. She's not a great person and I don't have much sympathy for her but making comments like that about her in public is extremely disrespectful and humiliating for her. Everyone agrees that she is the one person behind the scenes trying to get him to act right because his behavior in general is embarrassing for her. Even now the anonymous sources are all saying she's the only one trying to talk him into conceding. He adores her but he doesn't respect her.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Macros, on 01 December 2020 - 09:06 PM, said:

even the sexy daughter he wants to date?

If by 'date' you mean....

Wonder how old she was when she first had plastic surgery. 'Ivanka appears to have had some nasal reshaping and also breast augmentation. It is likely that she has had some minor additions, such as Botox and chemical peels, to give her skin that smooth appearance.'

https://www.drschulm...lastic-surgery/

What would an inbred royal line of Trumps be like?...

On a more serious note:

'The Supreme Court Wants to Revive a Doctrine That Would Paralyze Biden's Administration

It could cripple even the most basic government functions.

[...] the new 6–3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court may soon burn down the federal government's regulatory powers.

At least five conservative justices have signaled that they are eager to revive the "non-delegation doctrine," the constitutional principle that Congress can't give ("delegate") too much lawmaking power to the executive branch. On paper, the rule requires Congress, when delegating power to an agency, to articulate an "intelligible principle" (like air pollution regulation needed "to protect public health") to guide the agency's exercise of that power. But in practice, the nondelegation doctrine is effectively dead. [...]

Today, most of the government's work is done through the "administrative state," the administrative agencies and offices, like the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Education, which issue regulations and enforce laws. Congress doesn't have the capacity to pass laws that nimbly address complex, technical, and ever-changing problems like air pollution, COVID-19 exposure in workplaces, drug testing, and the disposal of nuclear waste. So Congress tasks agencies staffed with scientists and other specialists to craft regulations that directly address those problems. This division of responsibility—Congress legislates policy goals and agencies implement them effectively—is the foundation of functional government.

The dormant nondelegation doctrine is the foundation of thousands of regulations across dozens of agencies, allowing agencies to make technical decisions about, say, hospital reimbursement rates to administer Medicare or wage and hour rules that protect workers from exploitation.

But last year, in a case called Gundy v. United States, four conservative justices announced that they wanted to bring the nondelegation doctrine back to life. Gundy arose out of a national sex offender registry law that explicitly applied to everyone convicted after the law took effect but delegated authority to the Department of Justice to determine when and how it applied to people convicted before the law took effect. [...] Gorsuch's dissent argued that Congress may only delegate policymaking power to agencies under three narrow circumstances: to "fill up the details" of a legislative scheme; for executive fact-finding to determine the application of a rule; and to assign nonlegislative responsibilities to the executive and judicial branches. Alito wrote separately to say he'd like to "reconsider" the nondelegation doctrine—just not in a case about sex offenders' rights.

Kavanaugh wasn't on the court in time to hear Gundy. But last fall, in a separate opinion, he signaled his support for Gorsuch's new, revived nondelegation doctrine. That makes five votes for resurrecting the nondelegation doctrine and taking a hatchet to landmark labor, environmental, and consumer protection law—even without Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who, administrative law experts warn, shares the conservative justices' hostility to the administrative state.

As Justice Elena Kagan pointed out in Gundy if the conservative justices bring back the nondelegation doctrine, "most of Government is unconstitutional." Exactly how much government would be unconstitutional, though, isn't clear. What does Gorsuch mean when he writes that Congress may give agencies the power to "fill up the details" of a legislative scheme? What does Kavanaugh's test—that Congress may not delegate "major policy questions" to agencies—actually forbid in practice? [...]

[...] would not only threaten existing regulations. It endangers every piece of future progressive legislation, too. Big, transformative legislative packages, like a Green New Deal or "Medicare for All," would require a million and one technical decisions that Congress is poorly positioned to make. Biden and Congress can pass legislation phasing the United States toward 100 percent clean energy by 2030—but someone will have to actually sweat the details about which engines can be included in which cars.


Government doesn't work without the administrative state. But that's sort of the point. The conservative justices have long been hostile to regulation and executive action. And now they may finally have the votes to bring virtually any regulation to a halt.'

https://slate.com/ne...tive-state.html

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 01 December 2020 - 09:32 PM

[Primateus]

[QuickTidal]

Saw this one. Yes. This is the sort of unequivocal rebuke that EVERY politician worth their salt in the States should have been saying since the Election was won weeks ago.

This was good, because this guy doesn't mince words and goes right after the root of the problem AND the instigators/enablers.