US Politics Thread

[Gnarcore]

39 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

People on both the left and right only want an echo chamber that says what they want to believe is true.  He will lose money and won't get viewers if he doesn't at least become a smaller in size Fox News clone.  His audience is the same Fox-News loving Republicans he talked to with his old show.

That's most people indeed. I got a far out wing nut buddy. Had to explain confirmation bias to him. 

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

2 hours ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Hilarious....4 clowns desperately trying to tie Joe Biden to something "unethical".....Meanwhile, the guy they support is facing 91 criminal charges over 4 indictments....

 

How on earth does anyone with a functioning brain put CNN, or MSNBC on the same level as these disinformation pedlars?

Edgelords say this so they can feel smarter than the rest of us. There is no comparison. I can't think of anything even remotely comparable ever happening on the mainstream libtard networks. If anyone knows different, please prove me wrong.

[the destroyer of worlds]

SCOTUS agreed to hear the case.  4 Justices voted in favour.  They have until the 20th to file their briefs.  Will likely hear/rule on the case early next year.  All to keep the March data and kneecap TRUMP'S defense of his actions.  

 

I don't know how any justice will agree with TRUMP here.  Well, maybe the really corrupt ones will.  

 

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/dec/11/supreme-court-agrees-to-decide-donald-trump-immuni/

Supreme Court agrees to decide Trump immunity claim against special counsel’s criminal charges

[RupertKBD]

10 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Edgelords say this so they can feel smarter than the rest of us. There is no comparison. I can't think of anything even remotely comparable ever happening on the mainstream libtard networks. If anyone knows different, please prove me wrong.

 

Yeah, I get that all the time...."CNN is just as bad as Fox".....

 

....and my reply is always, "Really? When did CNN have to pay out three quarters of a billion dollars because of their on-air lies?"

[The Arrogant Worms]

 

[nuckin_futz]

 

[nuckin_futz]

 

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

SCOTUS agreed to hear the case.  4 Justices voted in favour.  They have until the 20th to file their briefs.  Will likely hear/rule on the case early next year.  All to keep the March data and kneecap TRUMP'S defense of his actions.  

 

I don't know how any justice will agree with TRUMP here.  Well, maybe the really corrupt ones will.  

 

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/dec/11/supreme-court-agrees-to-decide-donald-trump-immuni/

Supreme Court agrees to decide Trump immunity claim against special counsel’s criminal charges

 

I expect that this particular court will side with Trump.

[King Heffy]

5 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I expect that this particular court will side with Trump.

That's what the second amendment is for.

[nuckin_futz]

Not sure if this has been discussed in here but long story short. Texas woman is pregnant. Already has 2 children ages 1 and 3. Desperately wants to have a third child. Her fetus has a fatal diagnosis. If she doesn't abort she may endanger her own health and her ability to reproduce in the future. State court granted her access to an abortion.

 

Enter Texas AG and pretend OBGYN Ken Paxton who knows better than anyone else ....

 

Texas Supreme Court rules against woman who sought abortion hours after she says she’ll travel out of

 

A Texas woman whose fetus has a fatal diagnosis and who was awaiting a decision from the Texas Supreme Court about whether she would be allowed to get an abortion said Monday that she has decided to leave Texas to get the procedure.

 

Kate Cox, a mother of two who is around 20 weeks pregnant, found out just after Thanksgiving that her developing fetus has trisomy 18, a fatal diagnosis. Seeking to terminate the pregnancy to protect her health and future fertility, she and her husband sought a court order to block Texas’ abortion bans from applying in her case.

A state district judge granted the request Thursday, but then the state Supreme Court temporarily paused the lower court’s order Friday. On Monday evening, the Texas Supreme Court directed the lower court to vacate its order.

 

"A woman who meets the medical-necessity exception need not seek a court order to obtain an abortion," the court wrote in its decision, adding: "The law leaves to physicians — not judges — both the discretion and the responsibility to exercise their reasonable medical judgment, given the unique facts and circumstances of each patient."

 

Molly Duane, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Cox, said the Supreme Court "ruling should enrage every Texan to their core."

 

"If Kate can’t get an abortion in Texas, who can? Kate’s case is proof that exceptions don’t work, and it’s dangerous to be pregnant in any state with an abortion ban," Duane said.

 

Before the Supreme Court issued its ruling, Cox’s lawyers said she intended to proceed with the lawsuit despite seeking an out-of-state abortion.

Duane said Cox had to seek medical care outside Texas "due to the ongoing deterioration" of her health.

 

In a statement, Nancy Northup, the president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said: "This past week of legal limbo has been hellish for Kate. Her health is on the line. She’s been in and out of the emergency room and she couldn’t wait any longer."

 

"She desperately wanted to be able to get care where she lives and recover at home surrounded by family," Northup added. "While Kate had the ability to leave the state, most people do not, and a situation like this could be a death sentence."

 

Texas has two primary laws restricting abortion. The first, enacted before the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs decision struck down Roe v. Wade last year, authorizes private citizens to file civil suits against anyone who provides or abets an abortion after about six weeks' gestation. Under the second — the state's trigger law, which took effect after Dobbs — it is a felony to perform an abortion from the moment of fertilization. Each law offers limited exceptions for medical emergencies.

 

Trisomy 18 is a rare chromosomal disorder likely to cause stillbirth or the death of a baby shortly after it’s born. It also poses health risks to a pregnant patient.

 

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and lawyers for the state argued that Cox’s attorneys hadn’t sufficiently demonstrated that her situation qualified for an exception to the state’s abortion laws or that she would suffer “immediate and irreparable injury” without one.

 

In the filing Monday, Cox’s attorneys said another reason she chose to leave the state is the attorney general’s “ongoing threats” to enforce Texas’ abortion laws against her.

After the lower court’s ruling, Paxton said in statement that the order wouldn’t prohibit private citizens or district or county attorneys from enforcing Texas’ pre-Roe abortion laws against Cox’s doctor or anyone else. He added that the judge’s order would “expire long before the statute of limitations for violating Texas’ abortion laws.”

 

The panel of judges that decided on Cox’s case leans conservative.

 

"A pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a life-saving abortion in Texas. Our ruling today does not block a life-saving abortion in this very case if a physician determines that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard, using reasonable medical judgment," it said in its decision.

 

Kimberly Mutcherson, a professor of law at Rutgers Law School, said that part of what the Texas Supreme Court judges had to consider was whether they wanted “to be in the business of having every single medical exemption case end up” in their hands.

 

During the lower court hearing Thursday, Duane argued that Cox was at high risk for multiple pregnancy complications, including hypertension, gestational diabetes and infection.

 

“Many of Miss Cox’s health risks during this pregnancy will put her life in danger if left untreated, and carrying this pregnancy to term will significantly increase the risks to her future fertility, meaning that she and her husband may not be able to have more children in the future,” Duane said.

 

State District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble acknowledged those risks when she granted Cox's requested order Thursday.

 

“The idea that Miss Cox wants desperately to be a parent and this law might actually cause her to lose that ability is shocking and would be a genuine miscarriage of justice,” Gamble said.

 

A 2017 study found that trisomy 18 was associated with an increased risk of gestational diabetes, preterm delivery and cesarean section.

 

Dr. Leilah Zahedi-Spung, a maternal-fetal medicine physician in Colorado and a spokesperson for the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, said prolonging a pregnancy “only increases the risks of things like gestational diabetes and preeclampsia, which we know have long-standing effects on the health of people who can have children down the line.”

 

According to her petition, Cox has elevated glucose levels, which put her at high risk for gestational diabetes. She also delivered both her children via cesarean section, and that makes her more likely to need the surgery — which brings more risks than vaginal birth — again.

 

Already, Cox has been to the emergency room four times "for pregnancy symptoms including severe cramps, leaking fluid and elevated vital signs," according to her lawyers.

 

Trisomy 18 is random, occurring in around 1 out of every 2,500 pregnancies, according to the Cleveland Clinic. At least 95% of fetuses with the condition don’t survive to full term, meaning pregnancies end in miscarriage or babies are stillborn. Almost 40% don’t survive labor, and less than 10% live past their first year.

 

The condition causes multiple anomalies that prevent babies from surviving outside the womb, such as brain, facial, cardiac and abdominal wall defects.

 

Cox’s lawsuit is among the first of its kind — very few pregnant women have filed legal challenges to their states’ abortion restrictions.

 

In Kentucky, a pregnant woman filed a similar suit last week, alleging that she and others like her are suffering “irreparable harm” as a result of the state's abortion ban.

In an ongoing lawsuit in Texas, meanwhile, a group of women who were denied abortions have sued the state seeking to clarify the types of situations that constitute medical emergencies.

Edited December 12, 2023 by nuckin_futz

[RupertKBD]

47 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

I expect that this particular court will side with Trump.

 

Thomas and Alito will for sure....they're completely partisan.....probably Gorsuch as well. (although he isn't as sure a thing as the other two)

 

Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson will almost definitely decide Trump is not immune to prosecution, so it will be down to ACB, Kavanaugh and Roberts. I'm not so sure they side with Trump....bear in mind, they would be deciding that a POTUS is above the law....

[Bob Long]

28 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Thomas and Alito will for sure....they're completely partisan.....probably Gorsuch as well. (although he isn't as sure a thing as the other two)

 

Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson will almost definitely decide Trump is not immune to prosecution, so it will be down to ACB, Kavanaugh and Roberts. I'm not so sure they side with Trump....bear in mind, they would be deciding that a POTUS is above the law....

 

My guess is that they find a way to say this president is in this one instance.

[Spur1]

I would love for the SC say that the president is exempt from the law and have Biden immediately have Trump and his right wing court arrested. 

[King Heffy]

8 minutes ago, Spur1 said:

I would love for the SC say that the president is exempt from the law and have Biden immediately have Trump and his right wing court arrested. 

Probably the best solution.  Something has to be done to denazify to SCOTUS and undo the damage they've done over the last couple of years.

[The Arrogant Worms]

9 hours ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Edgelords say this so they can feel smarter than the rest of us. There is no comparison. I can't think of anything even remotely comparable ever happening on the mainstream libtard networks. If anyone knows different, please prove me wrong.

Anyone who uses the term "libtard" should not be trying to engage in intelligent conversation.  Please prove me wrong.

[RupertKBD]

Yet another reason we should hope that as many Republicans as possible, lose in 2024:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/j-d-vance-ukraine-is-going-to-have-to-cede-some-territory-to-the-russians/ar-AA1lo7PJ?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=b2aa3a198edf428a85c5d273b594e6c8&ei=18

 

Quote

 

Republican U.S. Senator J.D. Vance suggests that Ukraine may have to give up territory to Russia as a potential means to halt the ongoing Russian invasion, according to The Guardian and NBC News.

“What’s in America’s best interest is to accept Ukraine is going to have to cede some territory to the Russians and we need to bring this war to a close,” Vance, senator of Ohio, said on CNN’s State of the Union.

 

 

"I'm Vladimir Putin and I approved this message"....

[RupertKBD]

12 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:

Not sure if this has been discussed in here but long story short. Texas woman is pregnant. Already has 2 children ages 1 and 3. Desperately wants to have a third child. Her fetus has a fatal diagnosis. If she doesn't abort she may endanger her own health and her ability to reproduce in the future. State court granted her access to an abortion.

 

Enter Texas AG and pretend OBGYN Ken Paxton who knows better than anyone else ....

 

Texas Supreme Court rules against woman who sought abortion hours after she says she’ll travel out of

 

A Texas woman whose fetus has a fatal diagnosis and who was awaiting a decision from the Texas Supreme Court about whether she would be allowed to get an abortion said Monday that she has decided to leave Texas to get the procedure.

 

Kate Cox, a mother of two who is around 20 weeks pregnant, found out just after Thanksgiving that her developing fetus has trisomy 18, a fatal diagnosis. Seeking to terminate the pregnancy to protect her health and future fertility, she and her husband sought a court order to block Texas’ abortion bans from applying in her case.

A state district judge granted the request Thursday, but then the state Supreme Court temporarily paused the lower court’s order Friday. On Monday evening, the Texas Supreme Court directed the lower court to vacate its order.

 

"A woman who meets the medical-necessity exception need not seek a court order to obtain an abortion," the court wrote in its decision, adding: "The law leaves to physicians — not judges — both the discretion and the responsibility to exercise their reasonable medical judgment, given the unique facts and circumstances of each patient."

 

Molly Duane, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Cox, said the Supreme Court "ruling should enrage every Texan to their core."

 

"If Kate can’t get an abortion in Texas, who can? Kate’s case is proof that exceptions don’t work, and it’s dangerous to be pregnant in any state with an abortion ban," Duane said.

 

Before the Supreme Court issued its ruling, Cox’s lawyers said she intended to proceed with the lawsuit despite seeking an out-of-state abortion.

Duane said Cox had to seek medical care outside Texas "due to the ongoing deterioration" of her health.

 

In a statement, Nancy Northup, the president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said: "This past week of legal limbo has been hellish for Kate. Her health is on the line. She’s been in and out of the emergency room and she couldn’t wait any longer."

 

"She desperately wanted to be able to get care where she lives and recover at home surrounded by family," Northup added. "While Kate had the ability to leave the state, most people do not, and a situation like this could be a death sentence."

 

Texas has two primary laws restricting abortion. The first, enacted before the U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs decision struck down Roe v. Wade last year, authorizes private citizens to file civil suits against anyone who provides or abets an abortion after about six weeks' gestation. Under the second — the state's trigger law, which took effect after Dobbs — it is a felony to perform an abortion from the moment of fertilization. Each law offers limited exceptions for medical emergencies.

 

Trisomy 18 is a rare chromosomal disorder likely to cause stillbirth or the death of a baby shortly after it’s born. It also poses health risks to a pregnant patient.

 

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and lawyers for the state argued that Cox’s attorneys hadn’t sufficiently demonstrated that her situation qualified for an exception to the state’s abortion laws or that she would suffer “immediate and irreparable injury” without one.

 

In the filing Monday, Cox’s attorneys said another reason she chose to leave the state is the attorney general’s “ongoing threats” to enforce Texas’ abortion laws against her.

After the lower court’s ruling, Paxton said in statement that the order wouldn’t prohibit private citizens or district or county attorneys from enforcing Texas’ pre-Roe abortion laws against Cox’s doctor or anyone else. He added that the judge’s order would “expire long before the statute of limitations for violating Texas’ abortion laws.”

 

The panel of judges that decided on Cox’s case leans conservative.

 

"A pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a life-saving abortion in Texas. Our ruling today does not block a life-saving abortion in this very case if a physician determines that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard, using reasonable medical judgment," it said in its decision.

 

Kimberly Mutcherson, a professor of law at Rutgers Law School, said that part of what the Texas Supreme Court judges had to consider was whether they wanted “to be in the business of having every single medical exemption case end up” in their hands.

 

During the lower court hearing Thursday, Duane argued that Cox was at high risk for multiple pregnancy complications, including hypertension, gestational diabetes and infection.

 

“Many of Miss Cox’s health risks during this pregnancy will put her life in danger if left untreated, and carrying this pregnancy to term will significantly increase the risks to her future fertility, meaning that she and her husband may not be able to have more children in the future,” Duane said.

 

State District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble acknowledged those risks when she granted Cox's requested order Thursday.

 

“The idea that Miss Cox wants desperately to be a parent and this law might actually cause her to lose that ability is shocking and would be a genuine miscarriage of justice,” Gamble said.

 

A 2017 study found that trisomy 18 was associated with an increased risk of gestational diabetes, preterm delivery and cesarean section.

 

Dr. Leilah Zahedi-Spung, a maternal-fetal medicine physician in Colorado and a spokesperson for the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, said prolonging a pregnancy “only increases the risks of things like gestational diabetes and preeclampsia, which we know have long-standing effects on the health of people who can have children down the line.”

 

According to her petition, Cox has elevated glucose levels, which put her at high risk for gestational diabetes. She also delivered both her children via cesarean section, and that makes her more likely to need the surgery — which brings more risks than vaginal birth — again.

 

Already, Cox has been to the emergency room four times "for pregnancy symptoms including severe cramps, leaking fluid and elevated vital signs," according to her lawyers.

 

Trisomy 18 is random, occurring in around 1 out of every 2,500 pregnancies, according to the Cleveland Clinic. At least 95% of fetuses with the condition don’t survive to full term, meaning pregnancies end in miscarriage or babies are stillborn. Almost 40% don’t survive labor, and less than 10% live past their first year.

 

The condition causes multiple anomalies that prevent babies from surviving outside the womb, such as brain, facial, cardiac and abdominal wall defects.

 

Cox’s lawsuit is among the first of its kind — very few pregnant women have filed legal challenges to their states’ abortion restrictions.

 

In Kentucky, a pregnant woman filed a similar suit last week, alleging that she and others like her are suffering “irreparable harm” as a result of the state's abortion ban.

In an ongoing lawsuit in Texas, meanwhile, a group of women who were denied abortions have sued the state seeking to clarify the types of situations that constitute medical emergencies.

 

....and to the surprise of exactly nobody, the Texas Supreme Court has ruled against her:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/us/texas-supreme-court-rules-against-woman-who-sued-for-an-emergency-abortion/ar-AA1llhSe?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=a5b679ce7d914576853f621d6148e08c&ei=57

 

Quote

In its opinion, released Monday night, the Texas Supreme Court acknowledged that Cox’s pregnancy "has been extremely complicated" and "parents would be devastated to learn of their unborn child’s trisomy 18 diagnosis." In its opinion, though, the judges wrote that "[s]ome difficulties in pregnancy, however, even serious ones, do not pose the heightened risks to the mother the exception encompasses.

 

American women need to start leaving states (like Texas) that implement Sharia Law, lest it cost them their health and possibly even their life....

Edited December 12, 2023 by RupertKBD

[King Heffy]

15 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

Yet another reason we should hope that as many Republicans as possible, lose in 2024:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/j-d-vance-ukraine-is-going-to-have-to-cede-some-territory-to-the-russians/ar-AA1lo7PJ?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=b2aa3a198edf428a85c5d273b594e6c8&ei=18

 

 

"I'm Vladimir Putin and I approved this message"....

What's in America's best interest is putting that Nazi in front of a firing squad for treason.

[RupertKBD]

2 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

What's in America's best interest is putting that Nazi in front of a firing squad for treason.

 

Ukraine's as well.....

[The Arrogant Worms]

 

Jack Smith Drops New Trump Bomb: Expert ‘Extracted Data’ From White House Phones During Riot — Including Trump’s Cell

https://www.mediaite.com/news/jack-smith-drops-new-trump-bomb-expert-extracted-data-from-white-house-phones-during-riot-including-trumps-cell/

[The Arrogant Worms]

Inflation cools as Fed weighs next steps on monetary policy

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/12/inflation-fed-monetary-policy-00131279

 

Mellow inflation data for November might help President Joe Biden’s case that the economy is on safer footing than public polling suggests.

[RupertKBD]

18 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

Inflation cools as Fed weighs next steps on monetary policy

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/12/inflation-fed-monetary-policy-00131279

 

Mellow inflation data for November might help President Joe Biden’s case that the economy is on safer footing than public polling suggests.

 

It's actually been that way for quite a while, but because people still spend an extra 20 bucks to fill their gas tank, or an extra 2 bucks for a dozen eggs, it doesn't feel that way.

 

And in politics, feelings always trump facts....

[King Heffy]

21 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

It's actually been that way for quite a while, but because people still spend an extra 20 bucks to fill their gas tank, or an extra 2 bucks for a dozen eggs, it doesn't feel that way.

 

And in politics, feelings always trump facts....

And we have people suggesting that electing the far right will solve it when the cause of the problem is corporate greed.  These people are absolute idiots.

[nuckin_futz]

2 hours ago, RupertKBD said:

Yet another reason we should hope that as many Republicans as possible, lose in 2024:

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/j-d-vance-ukraine-is-going-to-have-to-cede-some-territory-to-the-russians/ar-AA1lo7PJ?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=b2aa3a198edf428a85c5d273b594e6c8&ei=18

 

 

"I'm Vladimir Putin and I approved this message"....

 

So he wants to turn Americans into a modern version of 'cheese eating surrender monkeys'?

Edited December 12, 2023 by nuckin_futz

[King Heffy]

2 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

 

So he wants to turn Americans into a modern version 'cheese eating surrender monkeys'?

And he's apparently fine with having to pour a ton of money into the defence budget to account for the Russian threat.  Ukraine winning the war and the extermination of Putin's regime is an absolute bargain from a financial point of view if you think medium to long term.