Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 19

[Delphic Oracle]

Here's a fun "How Cynical Am I?" test that I just invented. Assume Trump loses re-election and Ginsburg dies after Thanksgiving. Do you 1) Believe Trump would nominate a replacement? 2) Believe McConnell would schedule hearings?

Plus if they somehow lose the Senate, they will "de-nuclear" the nominations, then wail and gnash teeth at any mention of "re-nuclearing."

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Here's a fun "How Cynical Am I?" test that I just invented. Assume Trump loses re-election and Ginsburg dies after Thanksgiving. Do you 1) Believe Trump would nominate a replacement? 2) Believe McConnell would schedule hearings?

Of course. And he'd rush the nomination through. Hypocrisy means nothing to McConnell and a whole slew of other Republicans.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Plus if they somehow lose the Senate, they will "de-nuclear" the nominations, then wail and gnash teeth at any mention of "re-nuclearing."

That too.

But they can't de-nuke the nominations. Rules can only be changed at the beginning of the Senate session.

No telling what scheming McConnell could try though.

 

[acbytesla]

That too.

But they can't de-nuke the nominations. Rules can only be changed at the beginning of the Senate session.

No telling what scheming McConnell could try though.

I'm not sure that is true. The rules are set by majority vote. It might be unusual to change those rules mid-session, but the only thing that might stop them are Senators that might defect.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'm not sure that is true. The rules are set by majority vote. It might be unusual to change those rules mid-session, but the only thing that might stop them are Senators that might defect.

I'm only going by my memory, it could be wrong.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

That too.

But they can't de-nuke the nominations. Rules can only be changed at the beginning of the Senate session.

No telling what scheming McConnell could try though.

That is one way to change the rules by majority vote. The rules can be changed any time, but most methods require 3/5s or 2/3s support, so trying to change a cloture rule when faced with a Senate blocking a cloture vote is obviously not going to happen.

This is where they got creative. When the presiding officer makes a ruling from the chair, that ruling can be appealed. That ruling is upheld or overturned by majority vote.

A very simple version:

Majority Leader: I don't care that cloture failed, we're moving forward.
Presiding Officer: Uh, no, you can't do that.
ML: I appeal your decision.
PO: uh-oh.
ML: I win.
PO: It does appear so.

Basically this is taken as a new precedent because the majority just demonstrated they can do it whenever they want, so let's not make it require an entire roll call to settle the same question next time.

ETA: It's been a while since I waded into this, but that whole issue may only apply to the full floor consideration. I'm not familiar enough with the rules of the Judiciary Committee to know if the Ds have leverage to stall it there, instead.

 

[Stacyhs]

Christ.

On.

A.

Cracker.

I pointed out a weak/vague statement that was made. I can see this has upset several people greatly.

No, you claim it was a weak/vague statement. That does not make it so. A statement that you immediately misrepresented when your first response was to claim Barr didn't write the policy when was nothing in my sentence that stated or implied he had.
You.
Read.
Something.
Into.
It.
That.
Wasn't.
There.

I do not need a lesson on the timeline of events or the positions individuals have taken, I'm quite aware and have been following along the whole time.

Apparently you do as I quoted two examples of Barr's bias even before he became AG.

I will probably continue calling out weak or vague statements in the future,

Be my guest....when you actually find one. Mine wasn't.

theatrics and hysterics don't sway me.

Projecting much?

Weak, overbroad claims erode a premise.

Attacking a premise that was never made in the first place erodes a defense,too.

Stop using them.

Take you own advice.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

No, you claim it was a weak/vague statement. That does not make it so. A statement that you immediately misrepresented when your first response was to claim Barr didn't write the policy when was nothing in my sentence that stated or implied he had.
You.
Read.
Something.
Into.
It.
That.
Wasn't.
There.

I didn't mean to imply you said he wrote it. I know you didn't say he wrote it. I never said that you said he wrote it.

I said that his stating that is the DOJ policy is not evidence of him being biased. It's a factual statement. His making a factually correct statement is evidence of bias? As a lead example?

That's weak. Pick a better lead example.

Apparently you do as I quoted two examples of Barr's bias even before he became AG.

The fact that you supplied better evidence of him being biased does not mean I had to be told that. You did so because you misunderstood the specific objection I was raising.

I know he's biased. You don't have to convince me. You never at any point had to convince me of that.

But your initial example of why he is biased not a very good example.

Attacking a premise that was never made in the first place erodes a defense,too.

I was showing you how your stated example made your premise easy to pick apart.

I don't care how you feel about me or what I've said here.

Just please do not go around repeating to people that Barr making a factual statement about DOJ policy proves he is biased, that just gives his supporters the ammunition to dismiss us as having TDS.

 

[Andy_Ross]

As someone noted, if Ilhan Omar had posted in farsi or Obama had posted a tweet in Arabic, Conservatives would have **** their collective colons inside out in absolute apoplectic rage.

 

[varwoche]

Here's a fun "How Cynical Am I?" test that I just invented. Assume Trump loses re-election and Ginsburg dies after Thanksgiving. Do you 1) Believe Trump would nominate a replacement? 2) Believe McConnell would schedule hearings?

I have no doubt. If she dies the day before inauguration, they will still manage to jam someone through. Because I genuinely believe this to be true, I win.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Retweeted

Kevin McCarthy
@GOPLeader
Think of the contrast. ↴
While Democrats are trying to remove President Trump from office, the President is focused on removing terrorists from the face of the earth.

Tom Cotton
@SenTomCotton
The future of our Iran policy is critical to the global competition that will determine America’s safety and position in the next century. Recent events have shown we are up to the task.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Tweeted

Congratulations to @serenawilliams on another big win. She is a great player and an even greater person. Our members in Virginia (Tennis) will never forget you!

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Tweeted

To the leaders of Iran - DO NOT KILL YOUR PROTESTERS. Thousands have already been killed or imprisoned by you, and the World is watching. More importantly, the USA is watching. Turn your internet back on and let reporters roam free! Stop the killing of your great Iranian people!

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Tweeted

George @GStephanopoulos, ask Crazy Nancy why she allowed Adam “Shifty” Schiff to totally make up my conversation with the Ukrainian President & read his false words to Congress and the world, as though I said it? He got caught! Ask why hearing was most unfair & biased in history?

John Kerry got caught essentially admitting that funds given ridiculously to Iran were used to fund attacks on the USA. Only a complete fool would have given that 150 Billion Dollars Plus to Iran. They then went on a Middle East Rampage!
@foxandfriends @PeteHegseth

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Trump Tweeted

Congratulations to @serenawilliams on another big win. She is a great player and an even greater person. Our members in Virginia (Tennis) will never forget you!

Trump Tweeted

To the leaders of Iran - DO NOT KILL YOUR PROTESTERS. Thousands have already been killed or imprisoned by you, and the World is watching. More importantly, the USA is watching. Turn your internet back on and let reporters roam free! Stop the killing of your great Iranian people!

Brought to you by our great staff.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Trump Tweets

Michael Goodwin, New York Post: “Trump’s peace through strength philosophy is what America needs. His (John Kerry) claim bears no relation to reality. The Agreement didn’t create opportunities for America & other signatories to confront Iran’s malign activities. It overlooked....

....and then helped to fund them...And zero progress was made on curbing those activities, until Trump droned Soleimani...Plainly, Trump is not a warmonger. He’s a deal maker & his record is that of someone who uses our military might as a deterrent, unleashes it with....

....discretion, and only as a last resort.” Thank you to the great Michael Goodwin. Could not have said it better myself!

 

[Andy_Ross]

In the past 11 days, Puerto Rico was hit by major earthquakes.
Thousands of people in shelters, 1M without power, hundreds of thousands without water

Trump hasn’t mentioned it once.

 

[alfaniner]

In the past 11 days, Puerto Rico was hit by major earthquakes.
Thousands of people in shelters, 1M without power, hundreds of thousands without water

Trump hasn’t mentioned it once.

It hasn't gotten much coverage in the media, either. If he doesn't see it on TV, it ain't happening.

 

[Trebuchet]

I have no doubt. If she dies the day before inauguration, they will still manage to jam someone through. Because I genuinely believe this to be true, I win.

Except the new Senate takes office almost three weeks earlier, on 3 January, and may no longer have a Republican majority. At least I hope that'll be the case.

It hasn't gotten much coverage in the media, either. If he doesn't see it on TV Fox and Friends, it ain't happening.

Fixed that for you.

 

[acbytesla]

Except the new Senate takes office almost three weeks earlier, on 3 January, and may no longer have a Republican majority. At least I hope that'll be the case.

There are two months between November 3rd, 2020 and January 3rd 2021.