This is a very dumb read based on literally no evidence for the actions of this list of reliable quislings.

Ok, cool story. What is your point? They voted for a bill, whether other people stop it is irrelevant to their personal responsibility for voting to give Trump a tool of oppression.

What the fuck do you think happens to the powers on January 20th?

Been trying to get rid of Case for years now, but politics here is an insider club and he hasn’t had any real challengers since getting elected with a plurality in a 7 person primary where a former-Republican ran to his left. He’s been a horrible embarrassment ever since. One of the worst representatives in the entire party when you look at his district lean compared to his voting history.

I don’t even know if any mainline party beliefs are actually beliefs rather than just “is it worth it to me to support this population”. They’ll throw trans people under the bus because they’re a small population with limited engaged support. They also didn’t make a big stink about the Hatian false accusations. Sure, they’ll do a “why are Republicans bothering with this unimportant issue”, but the thrust there is that these issues are foolish, not wrong.

Support for every minority population is a calculation, not a principle. And since they’re always waiting to see whether a Republican libel is resonating before deciding their stance, there’s never any messaging to stop them from resonating in the first place. It’s “I’m in favor of social justice the moment 51% of the voting population is in favor and completely agnostic until that point”. And really the percentage requirement is probably more like 60%-70%.

That’s kind of fair, but this is also not a story that just came out of no where. They’d been telegraphing this for days. Have someone ready with a statement. Or just someone who can speak well off the cuff without running a strategy meeting and a focus group. An organization that is fundamentally partially about messaging shouldn’t be unable to get their preferred message into a news story.

I think the Peter Principle is supposed to freeze you in the first job you’re unsuited for, not just keep pushing you upward.

There was no immediate reaction from most House Democrats, including leadership

Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to present, the Democrats.

There was literally already a report saying he did crime but while he was president could not be prosecuted! Just fucking memory-holed by the Attorney General because somehow ignoring crimes because the criminal is a politician is supposed to be not-political.

Yes, and they were willing to say that and put it into practice. Guess which side was successful? The feigned indifference to any sort of larger picture by people like Chutkan and Garland contributed to this result.

The idea that there can be no special cases that demand high priority, even when the case is itself about an attack on the republic, is the failure of blind institutionalism. The public also has a right to know that trials will resolve in a timely manner, especially when the trials are about attacks against the People themselves.

“Justice takes time, let Mueller/Garland/Smith work” was the mantra of failure. There was a fetishization of a higher path, where the machinations of law take as long as they need to, with no deadlines or pressing public questions, but instead of leading to a purer and incontrovertible justice, it led to no justice at all.

Garland (and Biden as the one who appointed him) have a very direct responsibility for the loss of degradation of the American republic. Even should Trump’s term just pass as a bad four years, long-term damage has been done through this failure.

You can always blame the monarchy for perpetuating the monarchy. “They didn’t, as a whole, proactively reject our bullshit” doesn’t mean they have to keep doing the bullshit. Everyone has agency, stop pretending one of the richest and most privileged people in the world just doesn’t have any other choice.

He doesn’t have to abdicate, he can just stop pretending he’s special. Tell them “no thank you, I don’t think my role as king of a colony is appropriate”. Let’s see that democracy you think loves monarchy pass a measure to depose an absent king and choose a successor. The monarchy exists because people are lazy and just let it keep existing, not because they’re deeply devoted to maintaining this dumb farce. But he’s not going to do that, not because he cares about democracy, but because he believes he’s special and is happy to tour “his” colonies.

Musk’s new job doesn’t have any power to do anything. He can lobby Trump, the same power he already had as a rich man who gave campaign contributions. Musk may be dangerous to the US government, but it’s not because he was given a fake title.

That other villains exist in the story of the British empire doesn’t matter to whether he has to play king in Australia. It’s not a duty and he’s not a put upon civil servant. If he actually agreed that his position was illegitimate he could simply say so and stop performing it, with no meaningful loss to the world. But he’s a rich douche who’s happy to ride on his inherited privilege and claim to bestow his special personage to people across the world. People calling him illegitimate is the right and proper response to him pretending he has some special place in Australian society.

He could simply not go play king in Australia. If you don’t want to be king of a country your ancestors forcibly colonized, you can just not. None of this is an obligation.

Yes, of course, in the campaign where she ignored the left, campaigned with and for Republicans, and abandoned minority groups, the real problem was wokeness. While there’s always a factional blame game after an election loss, never in history has the argument from the centrists been so detached from the actual campaign that occurred.

I do take issue that you think he doesn’t care, at a human level I just don’t think that’s true.

How would you have any read on his personal feelings at all? And why would you care that they’re being besmirched? His actions are what matter to the world and the only path by which any of us has to judge him.

You’re getting downvoted because your understanding of the government is just made up. The vice president is an elected position, not an employee of Biden and not under some legal obligation to not contradict him. Until the Twelfth Amendment the vice president was just the person who got the second-most votes, often an actual opponent of the president.

which is still and order from her boss

This is complete nonsense. The vice president isn’t duty bound to never contradict the president, especially when running to succeed him. When a boss orders you to do something that’s wrong, you can say no, particularly when you don’t need the job anymore and are already applying for a better one.

Harris didn’t say more on Gaza because she didn’t want to, whether due to personal beliefs or because she for some reason thought it was a better electoral stance, not because of all-powerful orders from Joe Biden.

Biden wasn’t better, Trump’s issues were just more in the forefront of people’s minds. They asked themselves “do I want more of this” and said no. Since then there have been rose colored glasses that make people think he was good for the economy and they’ve forgotten the chaos. And now the “do I want more of this” question is moving against the Democrats and a candidate that was reticent to truly separate herself from “this”.