US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In 2021–22, MSNBC and Rachel Maddow were sued by OANN for defamation after Maddow said they were “literally paid Russian propaganda.” MSNBC’s lawyers responded by arguing in court that “reasonable viewers know that Rachel Maddow’s segments are opinion and hyperbole, not statements of fact.”

The judge agreed, ruling that Maddow’s show is understood to be commentary and thus protected under the First Amendment. That legal framing — our primetime hosts are opinion commentators, not news anchors — saved them potentially millions.
This sounds insane. Literally nobody who watches Rachel Madcow unironically thinks of her show as anything other than preaching fact and truth. (None of those viewers are reasonable, either.) So, it's ok to accuse somebody of factually untrue things just so long as your show is advertised as or perceived as commentary? Guess, the Jon Stewart defense works in a court of law.
 
I don’t think they’d move a hundred Ospreys to PR and practice beach landings if this was intended to be an exclusively aerial operation.
Ever heard the term “sabre rattling”?

You show what you have, but don’t intend to use, just to make the other guy think about what happens if you use it on him, as a way to remind him that what you’re doing now is not the worst you can inflict on him.
 
Twenty-three states and three governors are suing the government over SNAP benefits being suspended.
In addition to the (attached) complaint, they of course have moved for a temporary restraining order (TRO), and included a proposed draft of such an order. Behold, the utter entitlement of these people.
If the name of the judge assigned to this case sounds familiar (Indira Talwani, appointed by Obama), we've crossed paths with her before. She's been playing "nuh-uh, no you can't" with Trump on the subject of deportations ever since he took the chair. Link to a previous thread where SCOTUS overruled her bullshit anyway. Should be fun, for those of us who find these things fun. Link to CourtListener docket.

Following up on the big SNAP (food stamps) lawsuit in which literally half the country is suing America, the judge held an in-person hearing yesterday to talk about the TRO. (I checked and there was no way to listen in at the time, hence "in-person only").
1761933502516.png
1761933470874.png

Today, the judge has issued an uncharacteristically cautious order (see also attached).
1761933578024.png

Highlights:
1761933640762.png
1761933713210.png
1761933861785.png

Worth noting that earlier today in Speaker Johnson's presser, he had the Secretary of Agriculture with him, in which she talked about how according to statute, they legally cannot use the contingency funds (which wouldn't be enough anyway) on the SNAP program unless the SNAP funds are actually flowing, i.e. appropriations are restored. C-SPAN link to today's full presser. This is also mentioned in today's order.
1761933965459.png
1761933989052.png

The subject of standing to sue is addressed, and rejected out of hand:
1761934045672.png
1761934125033.png

The judge has thoughts on success on the merits, and states that the admin is wrong about the above-mentioned contingency funds.
1761934225859.png

Again, those monies are a pittance ($6 billion) and not enough to cover a month's bennies anyway ($8.6 billion). Oh, but that's no problem, though, because the states can just go through and reduce everybody's gibs. Piece of cake.
1761934389683.png

Besides, there's plenty of money elsewhere you can yoink:
1761934498534.png
1761934525451.png

In conclusion, gimme gimme gimme:
1761934601598.png

So she did not just grant the TRO outright, as would've been expected from this judge. She's giving the admin the weekend to write a term paper explaining how wrong they were and what they'll do to make sure the gibs flow, due Monday. And they've scheduled another hearing in a couple of weeks. Further bulletins as events warrant.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Again, those monies are a pittance ($6 billion) and not enough to cover a month's bennies anyway ($8.6 billion). Oh, but that's no problem, though, because the states can just go through and reduce everybody's gibs. Piece of cake.
1761934389683.png
could a higher court rule that the ermergency funds cannot be used and so November will go unpaid, but uphold the reduction in SNAP spending which is binding for all future payments?
 
"Christianity is facing an existential threat":
View attachment 8105788
Source (Archive)
Fantastic news, if the US must spend dollars overseas, better that it should go to helping these Christian niggas defend themselves from jihadist niggers rather than into the pockets of, say, that Druze drug cartel making the shittiest corner of Syria even shittier or the commie Kurds crawling around the north of that same particular sandpit.
 
Back
Top Bottom