A number of courts have been ruling against several Trump's executive orders/
So far the courts have ruled against Trump's birthright order
The hiring freeze.
The limiting of asylum seekers
Publishing names of FBI agents and prosecutors who were working on Jan 6 cases
Denying green cards for recipients who may qualify for public assistance
The limiting of funds to sanctuary cities
And there are more pending
like the buyout offer
denying medical care to transgender minors
And even more
Now, JD Vance, who has a law degree, says the courts cannot interfere with the legitimate powers of the executive branch.
One judge has already told Trump he cannot withhold federal funds twice.
Seems like the Trump administration is thumbing its nose at the courts, challenging them to enforce their rulings.
How can they enforce any of the rulings? Through the federal marshal service? How can the marshal service insure the government will keep running?
Meanwhile Congress is no stepping up to the plate. Trump knows congress will not move to impeach and convict him given the current make up.
A number of courts have been ruling against several Trump's executive orders/
So far the courts have ruled against Trump's birthright order
The hiring freeze.
The limiting of asylum seekers
Publishing names of FBI agents and prosecutors who were working on Jan 6 cases
Denying green cards for recipients who may qualify for public assistance
The limiting of funds to sanctuary cities
And there are more pending
like the buyout offer
denying medical care to transgender minors
And even more
Now, JD Vance, who has a law degree, says the courts cannot interfere with the legitimate powers of the executive branch.
One judge has already told Trump he cannot withhold federal funds twice.
Seems like the Trump administration is thumbing its nose at the courts, challenging them to enforce their rulings.
How can they enforce any of the rulings? Through the federal marshal service? How can the marshal service insure the government will keep running?
Meanwhile Congress is no stepping up to the plate. Trump knows congress will not move to impeach and convict him given the current make up.
In effect, we have a dictator government.
The Constitutional crisis may very well be here. Today a judge ruled that that the Trump administration is in defiance of a previously issued judicial order to restore grant funding that is being withheld. From the New York Times:
A federal judge on Monday said the White House has defied his order to release billions of dollars in federal grants, marking the first time a judge has expressly declared that the Trump White House was disobeying a judicial mandate.
The ruling by Judge John J. McConnell Jr. in Rhode Island federal court ordered Trump administration officials to comply with what he called “the plain text” of an edict he issued last month.
Judge McConnell’s ruling marked a step toward what could quickly evolve into a high-stakes showdown between the executive and judicial branches, a day after a social media post by Vice President JD Vance claimed that “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power,” elevating the chance that the White House could provoke a constitutional crisis.
I think the play here is that the administration believes it has replaced or hollowed out any entity with the power to enforce the law against them. We shall see if they're right.
Tariffs on Steel and aluminium signed. It will be across the board. This was of course not unexpected. From over this side of the pond it seems Trump is twisting the tiger’s tail. The tiger being the people of the US. If he carries on will some sort of coordinated mass public action happen. If so how quick will Donny be to use force to stop it?
A number of courts have been ruling against several Trump's executive orders/
So far the courts have ruled against Trump's birthright order
The hiring freeze.
The limiting of asylum seekers
Publishing names of FBI agents and prosecutors who were working on Jan 6 cases
Denying green cards for recipients who may qualify for public assistance
The limiting of funds to sanctuary cities
And there are more pending
like the buyout offer
denying medical care to transgender minors
And even more
Now, JD Vance, who has a law degree, says the courts cannot interfere with the legitimate powers of the executive branch.
One judge has already told Trump he cannot withhold federal funds twice.
Seems like the Trump administration is thumbing its nose at the courts, challenging them to enforce their rulings.
How can they enforce any of the rulings? Through the federal marshal service? How can the marshal service insure the government will keep running?
Meanwhile Congress is no stepping up to the plate. Trump knows congress will not move to impeach and convict him given the current make up.
In effect, we have a dictator government.
The Constitutional crisis may very well be here. Today a judge ruled that that the Trump administration is in defiance of a previously issued judicial order to restore grant funding that is being withheld. From the New York Times:
A federal judge on Monday said the White House has defied his order to release billions of dollars in federal grants, marking the first time a judge has expressly declared that the Trump White House was disobeying a judicial mandate.
The ruling by Judge John J. McConnell Jr. in Rhode Island federal court ordered Trump administration officials to comply with what he called “the plain text” of an edict he issued last month.
Judge McConnell’s ruling marked a step toward what could quickly evolve into a high-stakes showdown between the executive and judicial branches, a day after a social media post by Vice President JD Vance claimed that “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power,” elevating the chance that the White House could provoke a constitutional crisis.
I think the play here is that the administration believes it has replaced or hollowed out any entity with the power to enforce the law against them. We shall see if they're right.
He's discovered the boundaries to power are illusory. What can possibly stop him? Only Congress. No sign.
I guess we’re talking contempt of court here. And the judge has the power to issue subpoenas. Let’s see how far he takes it.
Do the recent SCOTUS rulings effectively prohibit a subpoena to the President acting in his official capacity? Maybe, maybe not. I guess that is untested.
How about to a high ranking member of the Executive obeying a Presidential E.O.? Probably not if the E.O. Is ruled unconstitutional.
And does an appeal process prevent the issue of subpoenas? As I read the ruling, it does not. It looks like subpoenas can be issued on the basis of the decision even if it is overturned by a higher court.
We shall see indeed. A fair amount of head-butting is predicted.
I do wish you would stop cosplaying as Private Frazer.
Though I do feel that we are in the realm of law only being real if it's actually enforced. The rhetoric at least is one where they are happy to go along with the judiciary when it rules in their favour and when it doesn't they wave the 'we the people' banner.
As I said up-thread or possibly in another thread, Vance is a fan of the integralists, and in practice all this may amount to is rather liking the conception of an Imperial Executive. DOGE is also proceeding along such lines. The Dark Enlightenment types are also fans of this approach.
It's also a setup almost designed to show up the weakness of not having mass parties.
I thought “cosplaying” was a typo until I looked it up.
Originally saw it as “co-splaying; some kind of description of Martin54 doing the splits. Then of course I realised that the late, dear, John Laurie (Private Frazier) was way past being able to do the splits!
My thought processes are “doomed I tell you. Doomed!”
There's a fairly substantial list of officials from the first Trump Admin. who ignored Congressional subpoenas. This time around will only be worse. And while I can't find it just now, there is a paragraph or two in the Project 25 Mandate that speaks directly to the Executive Branch ignoring checks on its activities by the Judicial.
I've said for a while, now, that MAGA wants to be ruled over, not governed. Well, more distinctly, MAGA wants Blue America to be ruled over, and for that one needs something other than a POTUS.
There's a fairly substantial list of officials from the first Trump Admin. who ignored Congressional subpoenas. This time around will only be worse. And while I can't find it just now, there is a paragraph or two in the Project 25 Mandate that speaks directly to the Executive Branch ignoring checks on its activities by the Judicial.
I've said for a while, now, that MAGA wants to be ruled over, not governed. Well, more distinctly, MAGA wants Blue America to be ruled over, and for that one needs something other than a POTUS.
Congressional subpoenas were backed by only as much testicular fortitude as Democrats were able to summon, which is roughly the same as that of harem guards. Federal judges are rather less likely to take "no" for an answer.
Though I do feel that we are in the realm of law only being real if it's actually enforced. The rhetoric at least is one where they are happy to go along with the judiciary when it rules in their favour and when it doesn't they wave the 'we the people' banner.
As I said up-thread or possibly in another thread, Vance is a fan of the integralists, and in practice all this may amount to is rather liking the conception of an Imperial Executive. DOGE is also proceeding along such lines. The Dark Enlightenment types are also fans of this approach.
In 2012, Curtis Yarvin — Peter Thiel’s “house philosopher”—called for something he dubbed RAGE: Retire All Government Employees. The idea: Take over the United States government and gut the federal bureaucracy. Then, replace civil servants with political loyalists who would answer to a CEO-type leader Yarvin likened to a dictator.
“If Americans want to change their government, they’re going to have to get over their dictator phobia,” he said.
Yarvin, a software programmer, framed this as a “reboot” of government.
Elon Musk’s DOGE is just a rebranded version of RAGE. He demands mass resignations, locks career employees out of their offices, threatens to delete entire departments, and seizes total control of sensitive government systems and programs. DOGE = RAGE, masked in the bland language of “efficiency.”
Nothing is more deceptive or more dangerous than the pretence of a desire to simplify government. The simplest governments are despotisms.
At any rate, Yarvin's plan for installing an American dictatorship are publicly well known in the circles in which Musk moves and Musk seems to be following Yarvin's blueprint fairly assiduously. Read the rest of the essay for details.
At any rate, Yarvin's plan for installing an American dictatorship are publicly well known in the circles in which Musk moves and Musk seems to be following Yarvin's blueprint fairly assiduously. Read the rest of the essay for details.
Yarvin is very close to Thiel, and Thiel and people linked to Palantir have had a hand in recruiting the interns Musk is putting to work as part of the 'DOGE' effort.
We have been complaining about how Musk was not elected or even approved by congress to be a member of the administration. Last night, Rachel Maddow listed how many members of the administration had been previously rejected by the voters and/or congress for various posts. It is really a pretty long list. I tried to get the link for that segment, but somehow my computer would not allow me to capture it. Look for the segment on the RMS Trump fills administration with team of losers voters already rejected.
Now, JD Vance, who has a law degree, says the courts cannot interfere with the legitimate powers of the executive branch.
That's rather a tautology, isn't it. If the executive branch is exercising legitimate power, then the courts indeed can't stop them. But when the executive branch exceeds its legitimate powers, then it is explicitly the place of the courts to stop them.
We have been complaining about how Musk was not elected or even approved by congress to be a member of the administration. Last night, Rachel Maddow listed how many members of the administration had been previously rejected by the voters and/or congress for various posts. It is really a pretty long list. I tried to get the link for that segment, but somehow my computer would not allow me to capture it. Look for the segment on the RMS Trump fills administration with team of losers voters already rejected.
So much for winning.
As in he isn't? Or look what he does when he is? Whatever he wants? Which is to forge bureaucracy, violently, in his own charismatic image. The trifecta of power. The Beast and his Image.
"A torrent of angry and malignant passions will be let loose. To judge from the conduct of the opposite parties, we shall be led to conclude that they will mutually hope to evince the justness of their opinions, and to increase the number of their converts by the loudness of their declamations and the bitterness of their invectives. An enlightened zeal for the energy and efficiency of government will be stigmatized as the offspring of a temper fond of despotic power and hostile to the principles of liberty. An over-scrupulous jealousy of danger to the rights of the people, which is more commonly the fault of the head than of the heart, will be represented as mere pretense and artifice, the stale bait for popularity at the expense of the public good. It will be forgotten, on the one hand, that jealousy is the usual concomitant of love, and that the noble enthusiasm of liberty is apt to be infected with a spirit of narrow and illiberal distrust. On the other hand, it will be equally forgotten that the vigor of government is essential to the security of liberty; that, in the contemplation of a sound and well-informed judgment, their interest can never be separated; and that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants."
"A torrent of angry and malignant passions will be let loose. To judge from the conduct of the opposite parties, we shall be led to conclude that they will mutually hope to evince the justness of their opinions, and to increase the number of their converts by the loudness of their declamations and the bitterness of their invectives. An enlightened zeal for the energy and efficiency of government will be stigmatized as the offspring of a temper fond of despotic power and hostile to the principles of liberty. An over-scrupulous jealousy of danger to the rights of the people, which is more commonly the fault of the head than of the heart, will be represented as mere pretense and artifice, the stale bait for popularity at the expense of the public good. It will be forgotten, on the one hand, that jealousy is the usual concomitant of love, and that the noble enthusiasm of liberty is apt to be infected with a spirit of narrow and illiberal distrust. On the other hand, it will be equally forgotten that the vigor of government is essential to the security of liberty; that, in the contemplation of a sound and well-informed judgment, their interest can never be separated; and that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants."
When the constitution was written and enacted the founders did not imagine the bi party system that came about. It was assumed if a president started to act up, congress would step in and impeach the guy if they had to. Now that Trump owns the Republican party and the Republicans are afraid to cross him, this will mean we have to wait another two years for the chance the Democrats will gain control. Two years of slash and burn!
Up to now, our president would acquiesce to the courts. Even Nixon, for all his dirty tricks, turned over the white house recordings during Wattergate even though he did not want too.
Now, no one knows what will happen if Trump choses to continue to ignore the courts.
I think it's one of the biggest, most damnable failures of the F-ing FF's in America that they didn't grasp game theory.
The way they set up the political system made a two party competition inevitable, and while I think they sometimes wrung their hands about the potential problem, they never really found a way around it.
And I guess it was just a matter of time until one party or another learned how to play the system like a computer will eventually master chess.
And I guess it was just a matter of time until one party or another learned how to play the system like a computer will eventually master chess.
I think currently someone is pointedly unbolting the table from the floor in the middle of the game. Smart money says they're about to throw the table, board and all, across the room.
No, @Gramps49, not the current two-party system you and I enjoy, but from the very beginning there were two factions: one that wanted strong Federal authority and control, and one that more favored the individuality of States. We'll see what happens when a few Trumpocracy lawsuits reach the SCOTUS, which some inevitably will. David Frum comes to mind:
“Maybe you do not care much about the future of the Republican Party. You should. Conservatives will always be with us. If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject Democracy.”
Now that Trump owns the Republican party and the Republicans are afraid to cross him, this will mean we have to wait another two years for the chance the Democrats will gain control. Two years of slash and burn!
I am also highly amused that you think Trump and Musk plan to have real elections again, either in two years or any other time.
And I guess it was just a matter of time until one party or another learned how to play the system like a computer will eventually master chess.
I think currently someone is pointedly unbolting the table from the floor in the middle of the game. Smart money says they're about to throw the table, board and all, across the room.
That is just brilliant. The really bad news is that it may turn out to be completely accurate.
I think it's one of the biggest, most damnable failures of the F-ing FF's in America that they didn't grasp game theory.
The way they set up the political system made a two party competition inevitable, and while I think they sometimes wrung their hands about the potential problem, they never really found a way around it.
And I guess it was just a matter of time until one party or another learned how to play the system like a computer will eventually master chess.
The ratification of the Twelfth Amendment shows that the American political elite (which still included many of the still-living framers* of the Constitution) shows that they were able to adapt to and account for the rise of the First Party system. I'd say a bigger failure was the embedding of so many counter-majoritarian structures (e.g. the Senate, the electoral college) in the Constitution. If you include a way to rule without popular support, eventually someone is going to game that system.
*I dislike referring to the framers of the U.S. Constitution as "Founding Fathers", since it conflates two distinct groups (with some overlap) operating at different times for different purposes. It seems more apt to refer to those prominent in establishing American independence (active 1775-1783) as "founders" while those involved in the drafting and ratification of the U.S. Constitution (active 1787-1789) as "framers".
Now that Trump owns the Republican party and the Republicans are afraid to cross him, this will mean we have to wait another two years for the chance the Democrats will gain control. Two years of slash and burn!
I am also highly amused that you think Trump and Musk plan to have real elections again, either in two years or any other time.
Steady. I'm the doomsaying alarmist remember. And which one is The Beast and which His Prophet?
Now that Trump owns the Republican party and the Republicans are afraid to cross him, this will mean we have to wait another two years for the chance the Democrats will gain control. Two years of slash and burn!
I am also highly amused that you think Trump and Musk plan to have real elections again, either in two years or any other time.
Elections are a state right held every two years with every fourth year reserved for the presidential election. See FindLaw. If Trump and company try to usurp them, even the red states would rebel.
Now that Trump owns the Republican party and the Republicans are afraid to cross him, this will mean we have to wait another two years for the chance the Democrats will gain control. Two years of slash and burn!
I am also highly amused that you think Trump and Musk plan to have real elections again, either in two years or any other time.
Steady. I'm the doomsaying alarmist remember. And which one is The Beast and which His Prophet?
Neither. Because Trump and Musk both lack one of the main features attributed to the Beast: universal popularity.
Trump is more popular than most of us here are comfortable with, but at most, he's got about half the American population, plus some of the self-styled-"Eurasian" leaders(who cynically just like the fact that he's rapidly smashing up the western alliance), and a few of the brexit and le-pen types in Europe.
And Musk might very well be a major danger to democracy, but it's not because he himself has any huge charisma-based following. He was mostly brought on board for his skills, and even Republicans don't put him anywhere near the centre of their emotional pantheon.
(Seriously. I love the BoR as much as the next English major, but the Beast and Company are really getting to be an overused metaphor for evil politicians. I think the symbolism assumes a state cult that has managed to capture the geographical entirety of the writer's worldview, which we haven't really had since whenever the entire world finally became aware of the world's existence.)
Now that Trump owns the Republican party and the Republicans are afraid to cross him, this will mean we have to wait another two years for the chance the Democrats will gain control. Two years of slash and burn!
I am also highly amused that you think Trump and Musk plan to have real elections again, either in two years or any other time.
Elections are a state right held every two years with every fourth year reserved for the presidential election. See FindLaw. If Trump and company try to usurp them, even the red states would rebel.
I suppose the question is whether the elections that will take place are impeded such that there's a question over whether they are "real". For example, is there time in the next year or so for the Trump administration to make it harder for Democrat voters to actually vote (eg: restrictions on postal votes, reduce voting capacity in strongly democrat areas and cut queues in Republican, prevent likely Democrat voters to register). Can Trump so control the processes within the Republican party that only his loyalists are on the ballots? What options are there for Trump to gerrymander boundaries of electoral districts to favour Republicans? Moves to reduce rights for citizenship can be a step towards restricting the electorate to Trump supporters.
A very good question, @Alan Cresswell . He's already fired a bunch of people who are in charge of making sure elections are not influenced by foreign powers.
Now that Trump owns the Republican party and the Republicans are afraid to cross him, this will mean we have to wait another two years for the chance the Democrats will gain control. Two years of slash and burn!
I am also highly amused that you think Trump and Musk plan to have real elections again, either in two years or any other time.
Elections are a state right held every two years with every fourth year reserved for the presidential election. See FindLaw. If Trump and company try to usurp them, even the red states would rebel.
I suppose the question is whether the elections that will take place are impeded such that there's a question over whether they are "real". For example, is there time in the next year or so for the Trump administration to make it harder for Democrat voters to actually vote (eg: restrictions on postal votes, reduce voting capacity in strongly democrat areas and cut queues in Republican, prevent likely Democrat voters to register).
Directly, no, he can’t do that. Elections in the US are run by the states, not by the federal government.
Indirectly, by pushing state Republican legislators and elected or appointed officials to do things his way? Quite possibly, but it depends on the laws and situations in each state.
Using my state as one example, you mentioned redistricting. Our state constitution provides that once redistricting, at least for the state legislature, has been done after the census, it can’t be done again until the following census. In other words, once new lines are drawn, they can’t be redrawn later in the decade. The exception to that rule is if a court strikes a districting plan down.
You also mentioned restrictions on voting by mail. Absentee voting, including voting by mail and early voting (which is a subset of absentee voting here), are goverened by state law here. While the Republicans, thanks to gerrymandering, have a majority in both houses of our legislature, they only have a super-majority in one chamber. And we have a Democratic governor. So, the governor would undoubtedly veto any bill that imposes restrictions on voting, and Democrats could probably prevent the veto from being overridden.
As for staffing, that’s handled at the county level here.
So, a lot depends on the particulars in each state. This is one of those times that I think having such a decentralized system of elections administration may serve us well.
So, a lot depends on the particulars in each state. This is one of those times that I think having such a decentralized system of elections administration may serve us well.
Trump has demanded Newsom of California institute Voter ID in order to receive disaster assistance for the LA fires. Newsom on his own cannot do it. It has to go through the legislature.
Knowing how shit actually works has never been a strong suit of his.
In a related note, I see that Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna intends to interview members of the Warren Commission to finally sort out some things about the JFK assassination she's not happy with.
Erump would supposedly like to be invied to make a state visit to the UK, complwte with military parade, royal recepyion, state dinner and a soeech to Parliament. He is meanwhile doubling down on the idea of annexing Canada. Has he really not grasped that Charles III is King of Canaba as well as the UK and may well have views on the natter?
Can Trump so control the processes within the Republican party that only his loyalists are on the ballots?
He and his allies (Musk etc.) have a lot of money. He has explictly stated that he and his deep-pocketed allies will fund primary campaigns and attack PACs against any Republican politician that opposes him.
Directly, no, he can’t do that. Elections in the US are run by the states, not by the federal government.
Mostly by the states. There are some federal rules that apply. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is the most obvious example. The Motor Voter Act is another. Congress theoretically has the power to regulate elections for federal office, as stated in Art. I, § 4, cl. 1 of the U.S. Constitution:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Just because Congress has, until now, been fairly frugal with its use of this power is no guarantee that this will remain the case. I can see the current Congress getting clever and trying to pass something billed as "the New Voting Rights Act" or similar.
Erump would supposedly like to be invied to make a state visit to the UK, complwte with military parade, royal recepyion, state dinner and a soeech to Parliament. He is meanwhile doubling down on the idea of annexing Canada. Has he really not grasped that Charles III is King of Canaba as well as the UK and may well have views on the natter?
No doubt, if he does visit the UK, he will demand to have tea with the Queen once more...
FWIW, my sister sent me a wry comment on Trumpianity in the form of a cartoon - I can't link to it, but it goes something like this:
A flying saucer lands next to a man with a MAGA hat.
An alien gets out, goes up to the man, and punches him.
The man falls over, and his bright red MAGA hat also falls to the ground
The alien returns to his flying saucer, and departs.
Because it was a big campaign issue in 2024, I'm posting this historical record of where the "MEG economy" (milk, eggs, gasoline*) was on election day and inauguration day
October 2024
Whole Milk = $4.041/gallon
Grade A Eggs = $3.370/dozen
Regular Unleaded Gasoline = $3.279/gallon
January 2025
Whole Milk = $4.025/gallon
Grade A Eggs = $4.953/dozen
Regular Unleaded Gasoline = $3.211/gallon
All data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics data center U.S. city averages. These are month-long averages which is why October's numbers are a better fit for election day, especially given the wider prevalence of early voting these days. Let's see where these are a year from now after President Tariff has had a go at the economy, assuming the Bureau of Labor Statistics still exists at that point.
*These are, according to most media outlets, the only commodity prices Americans care about.
Gas prices are shooting up around here. Eggs much higher, even being rationed. Milk products also jumping. I think you will find the February report much different.
Gas prices are shooting up around here. Eggs much higher, even being rationed. Milk products also jumping. I think you will find the February report much different.
Is there any easily discernable reason for these increases? I'm wondering if, perhaps, severe winter weather might be delaying deliveries.
Gas prices are shooting up around here. Eggs much higher, even being rationed. Milk products also jumping. I think you will find the February report much different.
Is there any easily discernable reason for these increases? I'm wondering if, perhaps, severe winter weather might be delaying deliveries.
Bird flu is affecting egg prices for sure. I don't think we've had serious numbers of cows infected by bird flu yet, but we likely will. And protecting the cows from it might be affecting prices?
Comments
A number of courts have been ruling against several Trump's executive orders/
So far the courts have ruled against Trump's birthright order
The hiring freeze.
The limiting of asylum seekers
Publishing names of FBI agents and prosecutors who were working on Jan 6 cases
Denying green cards for recipients who may qualify for public assistance
The limiting of funds to sanctuary cities
And there are more pending
like the buyout offer
denying medical care to transgender minors
And even more
Now, JD Vance, who has a law degree, says the courts cannot interfere with the legitimate powers of the executive branch.
One judge has already told Trump he cannot withhold federal funds twice.
Seems like the Trump administration is thumbing its nose at the courts, challenging them to enforce their rulings.
How can they enforce any of the rulings? Through the federal marshal service? How can the marshal service insure the government will keep running?
Meanwhile Congress is no stepping up to the plate. Trump knows congress will not move to impeach and convict him given the current make up.
In effect, we have a dictator government.
The Constitutional crisis may very well be here. Today a judge ruled that that the Trump administration is in defiance of a previously issued judicial order to restore grant funding that is being withheld. From the New York Times:
I think the play here is that the administration believes it has replaced or hollowed out any entity with the power to enforce the law against them. We shall see if they're right.
He's discovered the boundaries to power are illusory. What can possibly stop him? Only Congress. No sign.
Martin oscillates between Private Frazer and Prof. Pangloss as the mood takes him.
I guess we’re talking contempt of court here. And the judge has the power to issue subpoenas. Let’s see how far he takes it.
Do the recent SCOTUS rulings effectively prohibit a subpoena to the President acting in his official capacity? Maybe, maybe not. I guess that is untested.
How about to a high ranking member of the Executive obeying a Presidential E.O.? Probably not if the E.O. Is ruled unconstitutional.
And does an appeal process prevent the issue of subpoenas? As I read the ruling, it does not. It looks like subpoenas can be issued on the basis of the decision even if it is overturned by a higher court.
We shall see indeed. A fair amount of head-butting is predicted.
Though I do feel that we are in the realm of law only being real if it's actually enforced. The rhetoric at least is one where they are happy to go along with the judiciary when it rules in their favour and when it doesn't they wave the 'we the people' banner.
As I said up-thread or possibly in another thread, Vance is a fan of the integralists, and in practice all this may amount to is rather liking the conception of an Imperial Executive. DOGE is also proceeding along such lines. The Dark Enlightenment types are also fans of this approach.
It's also a setup almost designed to show up the weakness of not having mass parties.
What do you mean by "mass parties" in this context?
Parties where the leadership and the elected representatives are - at least in theory - somewhat accountable to a mass permanent membership.
I thought “cosplaying” was a typo until I looked it up.
Originally saw it as “co-splaying; some kind of description of Martin54 doing the splits. Then of course I realised that the late, dear, John Laurie (Private Frazier) was way past being able to do the splits!
My thought processes are “doomed I tell you. Doomed!”
With thanks for online dictionaries.
Right, but I meant more in terms of the Democrats right now.
Yes, we are all doomed, in this the best of all possible worlds. My mood is independent of that.
Wake me up if a judge makes Trump do anything.
I've said for a while, now, that MAGA wants to be ruled over, not governed. Well, more distinctly, MAGA wants Blue America to be ruled over, and for that one needs something other than a POTUS.
Congressional subpoenas were backed by only as much testicular fortitude as Democrats were able to summon, which is roughly the same as that of harem guards. Federal judges are rather less likely to take "no" for an answer.
One of the things that has not gotten enough press is the degree to which Musk and his co-conspirators are following a detailed playbook publicly laid out by Curtis Yarvin.
It is at this point worth remembering Daniel Webster's comment about simplifying government.
At any rate, Yarvin's plan for installing an American dictatorship are publicly well known in the circles in which Musk moves and Musk seems to be following Yarvin's blueprint fairly assiduously. Read the rest of the essay for details.
Yarvin is very close to Thiel, and Thiel and people linked to Palantir have had a hand in recruiting the interns Musk is putting to work as part of the 'DOGE' effort.
So much for winning.
That's rather a tautology, isn't it. If the executive branch is exercising legitimate power, then the courts indeed can't stop them. But when the executive branch exceeds its legitimate powers, then it is explicitly the place of the courts to stop them.
As in he isn't? Or look what he does when he is? Whatever he wants? Which is to forge bureaucracy, violently, in his own charismatic image. The trifecta of power. The Beast and his Image.
"A torrent of angry and malignant passions will be let loose. To judge from the conduct of the opposite parties, we shall be led to conclude that they will mutually hope to evince the justness of their opinions, and to increase the number of their converts by the loudness of their declamations and the bitterness of their invectives. An enlightened zeal for the energy and efficiency of government will be stigmatized as the offspring of a temper fond of despotic power and hostile to the principles of liberty. An over-scrupulous jealousy of danger to the rights of the people, which is more commonly the fault of the head than of the heart, will be represented as mere pretense and artifice, the stale bait for popularity at the expense of the public good. It will be forgotten, on the one hand, that jealousy is the usual concomitant of love, and that the noble enthusiasm of liberty is apt to be infected with a spirit of narrow and illiberal distrust. On the other hand, it will be equally forgotten that the vigor of government is essential to the security of liberty; that, in the contemplation of a sound and well-informed judgment, their interest can never be separated; and that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants."
When the constitution was written and enacted the founders did not imagine the bi party system that came about. It was assumed if a president started to act up, congress would step in and impeach the guy if they had to. Now that Trump owns the Republican party and the Republicans are afraid to cross him, this will mean we have to wait another two years for the chance the Democrats will gain control. Two years of slash and burn!
Up to now, our president would acquiesce to the courts. Even Nixon, for all his dirty tricks, turned over the white house recordings during Wattergate even though he did not want too.
Now, no one knows what will happen if Trump choses to continue to ignore the courts.
The way they set up the political system made a two party competition inevitable, and while I think they sometimes wrung their hands about the potential problem, they never really found a way around it.
And I guess it was just a matter of time until one party or another learned how to play the system like a computer will eventually master chess.
“Maybe you do not care much about the future of the Republican Party. You should. Conservatives will always be with us. If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject Democracy.”
I am also highly amused that you think Trump and Musk plan to have real elections again, either in two years or any other time.
That is just brilliant. The really bad news is that it may turn out to be completely accurate.
Crœsos’ link is well worth a considered study.
The ratification of the Twelfth Amendment shows that the American political elite (which still included many of the still-living framers* of the Constitution) shows that they were able to adapt to and account for the rise of the First Party system. I'd say a bigger failure was the embedding of so many counter-majoritarian structures (e.g. the Senate, the electoral college) in the Constitution. If you include a way to rule without popular support, eventually someone is going to game that system.
*I dislike referring to the framers of the U.S. Constitution as "Founding Fathers", since it conflates two distinct groups (with some overlap) operating at different times for different purposes. It seems more apt to refer to those prominent in establishing American independence (active 1775-1783) as "founders" while those involved in the drafting and ratification of the U.S. Constitution (active 1787-1789) as "framers".
Steady. I'm the doomsaying alarmist remember. And which one is The Beast and which His Prophet?
Elections are a state right held every two years with every fourth year reserved for the presidential election. See FindLaw. If Trump and company try to usurp them, even the red states would rebel.
Neither. Because Trump and Musk both lack one of the main features attributed to the Beast: universal popularity.
Trump is more popular than most of us here are comfortable with, but at most, he's got about half the American population, plus some of the self-styled-"Eurasian" leaders(who cynically just like the fact that he's rapidly smashing up the western alliance), and a few of the brexit and le-pen types in Europe.
And Musk might very well be a major danger to democracy, but it's not because he himself has any huge charisma-based following. He was mostly brought on board for his skills, and even Republicans don't put him anywhere near the centre of their emotional pantheon.
(Seriously. I love the BoR as much as the next English major, but the Beast and Company are really getting to be an overused metaphor for evil politicians. I think the symbolism assumes a state cult that has managed to capture the geographical entirety of the writer's worldview, which we haven't really had since whenever the entire world finally became aware of the world's existence.)
Indirectly, by pushing state Republican legislators and elected or appointed officials to do things his way? Quite possibly, but it depends on the laws and situations in each state.
Using my state as one example, you mentioned redistricting. Our state constitution provides that once redistricting, at least for the state legislature, has been done after the census, it can’t be done again until the following census. In other words, once new lines are drawn, they can’t be redrawn later in the decade. The exception to that rule is if a court strikes a districting plan down.
You also mentioned restrictions on voting by mail. Absentee voting, including voting by mail and early voting (which is a subset of absentee voting here), are goverened by state law here. While the Republicans, thanks to gerrymandering, have a majority in both houses of our legislature, they only have a super-majority in one chamber. And we have a Democratic governor. So, the governor would undoubtedly veto any bill that imposes restrictions on voting, and Democrats could probably prevent the veto from being overridden.
As for staffing, that’s handled at the county level here.
So, a lot depends on the particulars in each state. This is one of those times that I think having such a decentralized system of elections administration may serve us well.
So, a lot depends on the particulars in each state. This is one of those times that I think having such a decentralized system of elections administration may serve us well.
Indeed. The alternative is truly scary...
In a related note, I see that Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna intends to interview members of the Warren Commission to finally sort out some things about the JFK assassination she's not happy with.
He and his allies (Musk etc.) have a lot of money. He has explictly stated that he and his deep-pocketed allies will fund primary campaigns and attack PACs against any Republican politician that opposes him.
Mostly by the states. There are some federal rules that apply. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is the most obvious example. The Motor Voter Act is another. Congress theoretically has the power to regulate elections for federal office, as stated in Art. I, § 4, cl. 1 of the U.S. Constitution:
Just because Congress has, until now, been fairly frugal with its use of this power is no guarantee that this will remain the case. I can see the current Congress getting clever and trying to pass something billed as "the New Voting Rights Act" or similar.
No doubt, if he does visit the UK, he will demand to have tea with the Queen once more...
FWIW, my sister sent me a wry comment on Trumpianity in the form of a cartoon - I can't link to it, but it goes something like this:
A flying saucer lands next to a man with a MAGA hat.
An alien gets out, goes up to the man, and punches him.
The man falls over, and his bright red MAGA hat also falls to the ground
The alien returns to his flying saucer, and departs.
Caption:
The rest of the Universe has had enough!
October 2024
Whole Milk = $4.041/gallon
Grade A Eggs = $3.370/dozen
Regular Unleaded Gasoline = $3.279/gallon
January 2025
Whole Milk = $4.025/gallon
Grade A Eggs = $4.953/dozen
Regular Unleaded Gasoline = $3.211/gallon
All data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics data center U.S. city averages. These are month-long averages which is why October's numbers are a better fit for election day, especially given the wider prevalence of early voting these days. Let's see where these are a year from now after President Tariff has had a go at the economy, assuming the Bureau of Labor Statistics still exists at that point.
*These are, according to most media outlets, the only commodity prices Americans care about.
Well, I meant the previous Queen, as he was quite impressed by her on his visit in whenever-it-was. HM was not impressed by him, of course.
Is there any easily discernable reason for these increases? I'm wondering if, perhaps, severe winter weather might be delaying deliveries.