US Election

[Bird on a Fire]

Fair enough, thanks for the explanation. That does sound a bit of a long shot.

Even without the unforeseen partisanship of judges, though, the whole "lifelong appointment" thing seems pretty unwise to me. And I bet it's tricky to prove "bad behaviour".

[El Pollo Diablo]

Just needs the senate to impeach, but it's a bad idea to go down that route as a partisan step.

[Woodchopper]

It's in the Constitution, Article 3, Section 1. They "hold their Offices during good Behaviour" with no provision for a fixed term.

So no, Congress and the President can't change this on their own. It would require a constitutional amendment. Which would take 2/3 votes in the House and the Senate, and then ratification by 3/4 of the states. Not really imaginable in the near term.

There would also need to be a lot of prior thought about how to prevent abuse of any new process to remove sitting judges. The last thing we need is President Ivanka Trump replacing the whole Supreme Court with her cronies.

[Woodchopper]

f.ck. Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died, leaving Mitch McConnell with a Supreme Court seat that definitely can't be filled in an election year.

One issue is the the Senate will be in recess for a month after 9 October. If we assume that the Republicans can’t be sure they’ll win a Senate majority on 3 November that leaves three scenarios.

1. Trump waits and doesn’t appoint a new Supreme Court Justice. The leave it to Biden option.

2. Trump appoints a new justice within the next week. It’s then up to Mitch to decide whether to try to confirm the appointment before 9 October. If he does expect the Democrats to try to filibuster.

3. Trump waits until 11 October to make a recess appointment. That person could be confirmed when the Senate comes back from recess in November. As far as I know it would have the same composition as now as the newly elected senators wouldn’t assume office until the new session starts in January.

Three seems more likely than two. With three Trump gets to have his person on the court when it has to decide about whatever shenanigans he’s planning for the election.

[lpm]

They've already said what they will do. Trump has been told to nominate in a few days. McConnell will bring it to a vote.

The Senate recess can be changed by McConnell at will so the 9 October date is meaningless. They could possibly attempt to push it through before the election, but they want it to be a live issue at election day so it's more likely in the lame duck session.

The only thing that would stop this is if 4 Republican Senators rebel. Which they won't.

Collins, Graham and a couple of others are on record as firmly stating that they definitely wouldn't vote in a SC judge in this scenario, but that was when it was a hypothetical scenario. Collins etc will handwring and then do as they're told. The only dissenting vote will be Romney.

The lame duck Senate is unchanged, except for the Arizona senator if Kelly wins. Because McSally was never elected, in theory the new elected Senator gets sworn in during November. But again, this is the norm only - McConnell gets to choose when to hold a swearing in ceremony and he will break this norm.

People are saying it's going to be some mad catholic extremist who believes the US constitution is subservient to God's laws. She would be chosen because the USA is a backwards uncivilised country full of men who want to control women and who think terminating a pregnancy is something of remarkable import rather than a simple everyday occurence.

[lpm]

It's kind of sweet to see Americans on twitter think there's some other outcome. They think if they remind McConnell of his rule or remind Republicans of their previous statement it will make a difference. Here we are in 2020 and they have a belief that Republicans won't exploit anything and everything for power. So hopeful. So innocent.

[FlammableFlower]

f.ck me McConnell is a slimy two-faced bastard:

When Democrats raise fears of about interference in the election by foreign states apparently they're actually doing the work of those states for them by sitting doubt in the reliability of the election, according to Mitch.

Whereas Trump's efforts regarding postal ballots is fine.

Oh, and he also said the Democrats are doing the work of both Russia and China... China? Of the two countries there, which one has the Democrats been worried about and which one has the Republicans raised?

Slimy sh.t.

[Little waster]

A conspiracy theory that Donald Trump is waging a secret war against an elite who engage in ritual child abuse is growing across UK social media, Guardian analysis has found.

The QAnon conspiracy theory is propelled by an unlikely coalition of spirituality and wellness groups, vigilante “paedophile hunter” networks, pre-existing conspiracy forums, local news pages, pro-Brexit campaigners and the far right.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... ysis-shows

It’s nice all the tw.ts have voluntarily climbed into Dara’s sack, you can just whack whatever sticks out without any real concerns,

[Cardinal Fang]

If the Democrats try to hold up any nomination because it's close to an election and people complain, they only need to remind the Republicans that they did that under Obama, when the election was much further away.

Seeing nominees have to be vetted, and then examined by senate committees, it could be possible to hold any appointment up. Obama nominee Merrick Garland was held up for over a year in 2016. And with senators out campaigning, it may be very difficult to convene hearings before the elections. After the election it gets more complicated - the republicans may try for a lame duck confirmation. They need 50 votes in the senate to confirm a nominee. They have a majority of 53, but 2 republican senators have already said that if Biden wins in November that they wouldn't support a Trump pick, because Biden should be given the chance to nominate. If Trump loses in a big way, more moderate republicans may very well join them.

CF

[Little waster]

If Trump loses in a big way, more moderate republicans may very well join them.

From your lips to the ears of God.

However when presented with the chance to potentially lock in a solid Conservative majority in the SC for decades to come versus letting the Democrats performing a like-for-like in 2021, with whoever they want if they win big in the Senate, how many more Republicans are likely to grow a conscious.

Nothing in the last 4 years fills with me much hope there.

[jimbob]

Meanwhile:

https://twitter.com/AnthonyTilghman/sta ... 4559706113

Trump Supporters came over to the early voting site to protest while people are in line to Vote in FairFax Virginia. #EarlyVoting

In the thread you can see them blocking the entry to the polling station

[EACLucifer]

I realise this is only marginally on topic, but I see Trump has claimed General Lee could have won the civil war for the Confederacy if not for Gettysburg.

Well yes, perhaps he could, but he lost Gettysburg because of his own mistakes, his own failings as a general.

Firstly, he did not necessarily need to fight there. His strategic position could have allowed him to pick the ground for the battle, and given the significance of ground in the Civil War, this would have given him a huge advantage.

Secondly, he failed to keep control of General Stuart, depriving him of his cavalry until the last day, when they were of no use. By contrast, federal cavalry under General Buford fought a vital delaying action on the first day.

Thirdly, on the first day, he failed to capitalise on the good fortune of having his largely concentrated army meet a less concentrated union one. He failed to decisively order General Ewell to take Cemetary Hill, and so allowed the Union to retain the ridge of high ground (famously shaped like a fishhook), a superb defensive position which ultimately proved decisive.

Fourthly, on the second day, he failed to adequately reconnoitre the ground and dismissed the suggestions of his subordinates, attacking the Union left head on, on the extraordinarily difficult ground of Devil's Den and Little Round Top, where they were famously repulsed.

Fifthly, on the third day he comitted one of the greatest and most fundamental mistakes a general can make; assuming his soldiers were capable of doing what he needed them to do, rather than accurately assessing what they were up to. The frontal assault on cemetary ridge, across a mile of open ground against men dug in behind a stone wall, needs to be remembered as one of the greatest acts of military stupidity of the gunpowder era, ranking alongside Paardeberg and the Nivelle offensive for it's idiotic, ridiculous optimism. Even in Napoleon's day, men advancing in the open were at an awful disadvantage against musketry. Against shrapnel shot and the minie rifle, there is only one way Pickett's charge could ever have ended.

Lee was not a great general, but an adequate one who built his reputation against a poor one, before losing the war. Obviously good generals bear no relationship to the morality of the belligerents - consider Rommel, for example, or depending on your sympathies, Wellington and Napoleon. Lord Clive was clever, and not lacking in personal courage or audacity, qualities that just enabled him to be a total sh.t on a grander scale. That said, Lee was not a great general, merely an adequate one flattered by a period of his career when he was set against political appointees who should never have commanded an army. Fawning over him is a sign of historical illiteracy, but also tendencies that are rather uglier than mere ignorance.

I know this isn't the key point, but it's one I wanted to make, and right now I'm stoned on prescription painkillers and feeling in the mood to ramble about things. More importantly, the veneration of Lee is disturbing from anyone, and a key part of the lost cause mythos, a key part of deflecting attention from the abhorrent evil that was the Confederacy. Particularly disturbing, in Trump's case, as he is a New Yorker, a man whose tribal allegiance would, but for racism and the desire to appeal to racists, naturally lie with the Union.

[dyqik]

They've already said what they will do. Trump has been told to nominate in a few days. McConnell will bring it to a vote.

The Senate recess can be changed by McConnell at will so the 9 October date is meaningless. They could possibly attempt to push it through before the election, but they want it to be a live issue at election day so it's more likely in the lame duck session.

There is the interesting little matter of a government shutdown starting 1 October unless the Senate passes the bill that the House is about to pass, and which the GOP in the Senate is opposing. That may take Senate time to negotiate and pass, and if the House passes its bill first, leaves the GOP shutting down the government just before the election.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Interesting stuff

Thanks for that

[JQH]

Interesting stuff

Thanks for that

+1

In other news Mike Adams predicts/yearns for Civil War and deems anybody to the left of Mussolini to be a commie mutant traitor.

If his batshit views are held by even a sizable minority of Americans then the US is f.cked.

[jimbob]

What do people think about the revelation of the existence of hydrosonic missiles?

Sorry, super-duper missiles.

[Bird on a Fire]

I've only seen "hydrosonic" used to describe electric toothbrushes. How does it work in a missile context? Presumably the idea is to kill people and break things, rather than clean their teeth.

[Grumble]

I’d be more surprised if the Americans didn’t have something like that. The Russians boasted about having some a while back didn’t they?

[jimbob]

I’d be more surprised if the Americans didn’t have something like that. The Russians boasted about having some a while back didn’t they?

There are semi public programs for hypersonic missiles.

The Soviets had a supercavitating torpedo, which is apparently still in service

I'm guessing he was talking about the first

[TimW]

The Soviets had a supercavitating torpedo, which is apparently still in service

Another weapon invented by dentists?

[Little waster]

The Soviets had a supercavitating torpedo, which is apparently still in service

Another weapon invented by dentists?

No you are thinking of Molaris*.



*so called because that's all that's left of you after you've been blowed-up.

[dyqik]

The Soviets had a supercavitating torpedo, which is apparently still in service

Another weapon invented by dentists?

No you are thinking of Molaris*.

I thought Molaris had been replaced by Tri-Dent now.

[Gfamily]

Another weapon invented by dentists?

No you are thinking of Molaris*.

I thought Molaris had been replaced by Tri-Dent now.

Very good use of thE NAME, Lol'd

[El Pollo Diablo]

Consider this a warning.

[dyqik]

Consider this a warning.

Four minutes is enough time to floss and brush.