Trumps Presidency 2025

[Sports_Freak]

3 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

I've never seen an administration where there were so many sex scandals. 

 

Only the best...

Edited 9 hours ago by Sports_Freak

[Sports_Freak]

10 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

 

I guess we shoulda seen this coming. It goes to the Virgina State Supreme Court first. If Trump doesnt like their decision, can he take it to the SCOTUS? Or do they stay out of state elections?

[guy incognito]

What could possibly go wrong

[romad1]

5 hours ago, guy incognito said:

What could possibly go wrong

Peter Thiel is a menace. 

[romad1]

So, the story about the Navy Secretary being fired was Kegsbreath didn't like that he had his own relationship with Trump and pitched the new "Trump Battleship" to Trump without having consulted with Kegsbreath. 

The new Navy Secretary is a wacko who was trying to be the congressman for my district last year. 

[pfife]

Hearing on npr the dude that got fired sucked.   The replacement is crazy

[oblong]

With this admin there's two reasons people get fired and neither is good:

1) They're so bat**** crazy or the crimes so severe that even this group says "get them out of here"

2) THey refused to go along with some bat**** crazy idea

 

[Shades of Deivi Cruz]

56 minutes ago, pfife said:

Hearing on npr the dude that got fired sucked.   The replacement is crazy

NPR is way behind. The presidential election was a long time ago.

[romad1]

Trump says he 'has to be careful' in rare health admission

Not much of an admission.  There are lot of people who wake up each morning hoping for the best news possible and then are sad until the next morning. 

[chasfh]

11 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

I've never seen an administration where there were so many sex scandals. 

 

Hate to quibble with Ron on this one, but Trump never said he was going to hire the “most qualified” people. He said he was going to hire “only the best” people. I think we now fully understand what he meant by that.

[chasfh]

8 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

I guess we shoulda seen this coming. It goes to the Virgina State Supreme Court first. If Trump doesnt like their decision, can he take it to the SCOTUS? Or do they stay out of state elections?

States do have to conduct elections in accordance with the Constitution, so in that sense SCOTUS does have some jurisdiction over interpreting what that means. If the State Supreme Court overturns the election without a strong enough constitutional basis, SCOTUS can overturn their decision. That’s how it’s supposed to work, anyway.

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, romad1 said:

Peter Thiel is a menace. 

Glad I got my money back out of them.

[Sports_Freak]

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

States do have to conduct elections in accordance with the Constitution, so in that sense SCOTUS does have some jurisdiction over interpreting what that means. If the State Supreme Court overturns the election without a strong enough constitutional basis, SCOTUS can overturn their decision. That’s how it’s supposed to work, anyway.

I don't want SCOTUS anywhere near this issue. I read the Virginia Supreme Court is conservative but one report i read said that it's a small c in conservative. Moderate conservatives? Is there even such a thing? 😆😆

[chasfh]

3 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

I don't want SCOTUS anywhere near this issue. I read the Virginia Supreme Court is conservative but one report i read said that it's a small c in conservative. Moderate conservatives? Is there even such a thing? 😆😆

Oh, right, I wouldn’t want this particular Court to weigh in on it, either. I’m talking about SCOTUS’s role in this on a theoretical basis.

[Sports_Freak]

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

Oh, right, I wouldn’t want this particular Court to weigh in on it, either. I’m talking about SCOTUS’s role in this on a theoretical basis.

But what i wonder is SCOTUS would even take it up? If they ruled Texas is allowed to rework their maps, wouldn't that set precedent? I just don't really understand if the vote by citizens of Virginia is going to be taken away. It seems unconstitutional.

[romad1]

He's doing great.  Remember when HW Bush posted during the 1992 election about how he was ambassador to the UN in 1970?  

Or, when Eisenhower bragged in 1957 about being on MacArthur's staff in the Philippines in 1935? 

Or, when Reagan bragged in 1981 about his time as SAG president in the late 1950s?  

 

[Motown Bombers]

 

[CMRivdogs]

1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

I just don't really understand if the vote by citizens of Virginia is going to be taken away. It seems unconstitutional.

It comes down to whether or not the State Legislature followed the State Constitution in the writing and timing of the Constitutional Amendment that we voted on. Without getting deep in the weeds the question for the court to decide is whether the General Assembly legally put the issue on the ballot in the first place.  

According to yesterday's lower court ruling the amendment was passed during a special session to deal with the state budget. Expanding the session's scope required a 2/3 vote, not a simple majority. 

Under the State Constitution, the Governor sets the agenda for the session. The General Assembly cannot pass unrelated constitutional amendments unless it properly expanded the session.   

From ChatGPT...

Quote

Virginia has a very strict process for amending the constitution:

To amend the Virginia Constitution:

Amendment must pass the General Assembly

Then pass again in a new legislative session

Then go to voters

If any part of that chain is flawed, the referendum is void.

Deeper into the woods. Voters approved redistricting in 2020. Tuesday's vote overrode that vote temporally (until 2030). Then they get to do the process over.

 

Here's where it seems weird to me. The State Supreme Court seemed skeptical of the special election when it was first presented to them but voted to allow the vote to proceed...why? 

 

Edited 11 minutes ago by CMRivdogs

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, Sports_Freak said:

But what i wonder is SCOTUS would even take it up? If they ruled Texas is allowed to rework their maps, wouldn't that set precedent? I just don't really understand if the vote by citizens of Virginia is going to be taken away. It seems unconstitutional.

I think they are capable of parsing out a ruling that allows Texas and overturns Virginia through their shadow docket, and willing to do it, too, if they calculate the political consequences to their benefactor to be minimal enough.