• Subverb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    This election is so seriously fucked up that Dick Chaney and AOC are voting for the same candidate.

    Weird timeline we’re in.

    • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      No, who are you calling a weird timeline? this timeline is extremely solid. It’s a very solid timeline. When we’re talking these kinds of numbers, then we tax countries when they ship stuff here, and they will not like it, but we can see how solid the timeline is…

      I feel like I should have left out all punctuation in that paragraph.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Weird timeline we’re in.

      neoliberals and conservatives are flip sides of the same coin to be spent in the same vending machine of american hegemony; whether or not they select the same flavor makes little difference compared to the very real choices available in some other vending machines rich enough to effectively defend itself from the american machine.

      • Microw@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        So, are you considering AOC to be a neoliberal or to be a conservative?

        • eldavi@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          how she contrasts with cheney has little impact on the genocide; future the cia induced coups; nor the continuing widening wealth gap; etc.

          cheney is an accelerant and aoc is an inhibitor to the same child bombing, rich guy party we’re calling a country since people like cheney hold all of he cards and the best people like aoc can hope for is play along and act surprised each time they re-discover that the game is rigged toward’s cheney’s side each time people like aoc fail and cling on increasingly rarer watered down victories to justify the relatively tiny distinctions between the two.

          <SARCASM> and even when they fail it’s simply because you didn’t vote hard enough and ABSOLUTELY NOT because your vote is diminished or suppressed because only lazy non-voting americans are simply too lazy to overcome studied, coordinated, and court-busting-proven astro-turfed national conservative movements financed by unknown multi-milion/bilion dollar interests in coordination with most states and the federal governments since 1980, all intent on keeping them from voting…</SARCASM>

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Justice Thomas and Alito’s repeated failure over decades to disclose that they received millions of dollars in gifts from individuals with business before the court is explicitly against the law. And their refusal to recuse from the specific matters and cases before the court in which their benefactors and spouses are implicated represents nothing less than a constitutional crisis,” Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat from New York, said in a statement.

    Moderate Dems don’t want to actually fix the SC.

    They love complaining about it. And saying that’s why they can’t fix anything.

    But they refuse to even bring up that we can fix it by impeaching the problematic ones or just expanding the court.

    People say “if we do it, trump will do it” which is just insane to me because why the fuck would any republican not do something unless a Dem does it first?

  • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    This article is from July. Johnson has not allowed this near the floor and never will because hes a corrupt sack of fucked up rotten eggplants; even if he does, it will obviously fail on party line votes. Non story.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Johnson has not allowed this near the floor and never will because hes a corrupt sack of fucked up rotten eggplants

      There’s a very good chance that Democrats retake the House after November. Any idea whether Hakkem Jefferies will allow this proposal to advance?

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Knowing how absolutely fucking stupid our politicians are id imagine IF we win we’ll suddenly hear a whole bunch about needing to heal and show solidarity or some such bullshit that will just equate to “we aren’t going to do anything about Republican corruption.”

      • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Jeffries would have everything to gain by forcing the issue, and i would frankly expect him to. But unless a miracle happens in the Senate post-election, an actual conviction will of course not happen as Republicans will never sign on to get the 2/3rds majority there.

        • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If the Democrats can keep their Senate majority then they can have an actual trial for these impeachments, something that didn’t happen for the Trump impeachments (since the Republicans had Senate control then.) There probably still won’t be enough votes for the removal to actually happen, but it’ll let the Democrats really rub the Republicans’ noses in the corruption going on in the Supreme Court and make their vote to protect Thomas and Alito more damaging in the next election.

          At any rate, Thomas and Alito are currently the two oldest justices on the court, and if Harris gets two terms then there’s a good chance that one or both of them will be dead by the next time there’s a GOP President. That, combined with some strategic retirements on behalf of some of the older Democratic appointees has a good chance of unfucking the court for a while.

    • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s a good reminder before a big election that one side is actively attempting to govern, while the other side is blocking any and all actions so as to curry more favor with their billionaire backers.

      • distantsounds@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Please

        Both ‘sides’ are blocking any and all actions so as to curry favor with their billionaire backers.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        In order to advance the measure, the Speaker of the House would have to allow it. He is an ally of the two. Then, once advanced, the House would have to vote to impeach, and the House is currently controlled by the gop, and they too are unlikely to impeach their allies.

        So the chances of it getting anywhere are near-zero, for this year anyway. Next year could potentially be different.

        • El Barto@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Thanks. I wonder why AOC is doing this now instead of waiting until after the elections when the House may (may) flip.

          • Fuzzy_Dunlop@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            So that everyone running for a House seat can get their position on record before the election, I suppose

        • kinsnik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          honestly, even if the house is turned in november and they vote to impeach them, the next step is trial at the senate. it requires 2/3 of the votes, so they won’t get convicted and removed

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah, fair point. A Senate trial would still be useful to publicly air all of the evidence though.

      • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Republicans control the House and even if they didn’t, there is nothing close to a majority vote of the House that want to impeach members of SCOTUS.

  • zante@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Is there no method of self policing for the judiciary or legal profession?

    • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      the Supreme court justices have exempted themselves from prosecution for accepting gifts through previous decisions and C. Thomas was not required to recuse himself in the Jan 6 cases involving his own wife so let’s go with no policing at all.