You think you just fell out a coconut tree? Men make their own history, but they don't make it as they please; they don't make it under self-selected circumstances but under circumstances existing already. You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you.
5 replies
45 reposts
270 likes
Reposted by b-boy bouiebaisse
Orange Man Bad explains far more than many comparative politics PhDs care to admit
7 replies
81 reposts
437 likes
right, but conservatives have argued that you can only be found criminally liable IF you're impeached
5 replies
1 reposts
62 likes
okay, well the supreme court just did, i don't know what else to tell you
5 replies
5 reposts
301 likes
one thing democrats need to understand is that in this moment transparency is their ally
7 replies
67 reposts
727 likes
this case against biden's resignation makes sense. i do think that if biden decides to step away from reelection, he should explicitly say that he is doing this because House Republicans are too corrupt to confirm a replacement for Harris.
36 replies
132 reposts
919 likes
i wish erickson would just give up the charade and start using the slurs he has in mind
4 replies
7 reposts
208 likes
the difference been pundits who have spent too much time huffing gasoline and journalists who are actually thinking through this with seriousness is whether they think having a contentious, brokered convention is less problematic than just going with biden's elected successor.
20 replies
58 reposts
402 likes
i think akhil amar reed captures something very important, which is that the roberts court rewrote article ii, which explicitly states that a president can be held criminally liable after impeachment (and which has long been understood to mean that he can be held liable after leaving office)
23 replies
408 reposts
1251 likes
i think @adamserwer.bsky.social has the best case for Biden's resignation www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc...
29 replies
21 reposts
112 likes
i.e., the UCMJ tells members of the armed forces that they are empowered to disobey illegal orders given by commanding officers, up to and including the president.
7 replies
6 reposts
77 likes
not only does Congress has the explicit right to declare war but also has the explicit right "to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces." it's on that basis that it passed the UCMJ. but the UCMJ also directly interferes with the president's power as C-in-C.
2 replies
4 reposts
61 likes
for example, is the Uniform Code of Military Justice unconstitutional under this separation of powers doctrine?
5 replies
9 reposts
86 likes
given the roberts' courts expansive (and frankly extra-constitutional) notions of "separation of powers," i do wonder if they would eventually turn their eyes toward any congressional regulation of presidential power, even that which is specified under congress' article i powers
2 replies
14 reposts
96 likes
Reposted by b-boy bouiebaisse
time and time again people are confused that the content they see is directly related to the people they follow and that they’re absolutely lost navigating the internet without an algorithm force feeding them lowest common denominator dreck
78 replies
235 reposts
1612 likes
Reposted by b-boy bouiebaisse
"Balance" means printing obvious Republican lies about Biden and also printing obvious Republican lies about what Republicans think.
10 replies
70 reposts
404 likes