top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 186 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (12 children)

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.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    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?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    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."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    I’m waiting to read that since they didn’t have a code of conduct, how could they have known?

    How could any suspect that accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes gifts would present a conflict of interest?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 182 points 2 years ago (19 children)

    Good. It is a start..Won't get anywhere but it is a start of a conversation

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [+] 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (18 children)
  • [–] 59 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago

    Politics. It's important that we keep this in the news cycle, so people remember why its important to work together to try to get these people thrown out. It also forces the gop to block the measures, which could potentially make them look like they are condoning corruption. Which they are.

    Symbolism basically.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 98 points 2 years ago (10 children)

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

    Weird timeline we're in.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    This reminds me of the current French politics. After the previous legislative elections were won by the left, neoliberal president Macron nonetheless appointed a conservative as his prime minister.

    At the end of the day, it's all about the bottomline.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 80 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    At least there's something. Agreed with sibling comment that nothing will come of it. But at least something is happening. The corruption is astronomical and a thumb in all of our eyes.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 33 points 2 years ago

    Literally 0% chance to change for good if all that happens is bearing witness to corruption and wrongdoing.

    This is doing something. It’s hitting on the root of so many problems which have arisen in the US since the corporate takeover of government began in 1978 in partnership with the Supreme Court. I applaud AOC for this!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 77 points 2 years ago
    [–] 53 points 2 years ago (27 children)

    “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?

  • source
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›