All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Gray Lensman]

I honestly don’t think they can rule on this. His having appointed 3 of them to their positions should cause them to recuse themselves. That and Ginny Thomas.

BTW, what’s your source on this?

Should and must are two different things - I don't think there is any mechanism to force a SCotUS justice to recuse themselves outside of their own ethics, or lack thereof.

[Mister Mets]

I honestly don’t think they can rule on this. His having appointed 3 of them to their positions should cause them to recuse themselves. That and Ginny Thomas.

BTW, what’s your source on this?

The story is posted all over.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ts/8081147001/
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/04/polit...eal/index.html

As for the recusal question, why should Trump appointed justices recuse themselves? Should we expect Jackson to recuse herself in any case involving the current White House? Should Kagan and Sotomayor recuse themselves in any case involving Biden because his former boss appointed them?

There doesn't appear to be much precedent for pushing for anyone to recuse themselves because of who appointed them.

The Ginni Thomas situation is a bit different, although I'm curious as to the neutral standard that people want applied.

[AnakinFlair]

I honestly don’t think they can rule on this. His having appointed 3 of them to their positions should cause them to recuse themselves. That and Ginny Thomas.

BTW, what’s your source on this?

It's been all over MSNBC the past few hours.

For recusals, they've already shown through Clarence Thomas' actions that they won't recuse when they should. And Rachel Maddow made a rather chilling observation last night- when the public starts seeing the Court as illegitimate, the Court would usually try to moderate itself and show that they can still make fair, impartial rulings. Instead, you've got Alito and Roberts out there criticizing US for criticizing them, as if to say that the public are the unreasonable ones. So who knows what they will ultimately do.

[worstblogever]

He used up a lot more oxygen to avoid answering the question than he would have to simply say, "Yes, the KKK is a terrorist group."

Seriously, right? Why's that so hard to do? Should practically be a reflex for anyone... but then, when the GOP becomes a white nationalist party, you will find yourself unable to criticize white nationalists.

I was like...please don't be Tony Gonzalez. Not the greatest TE in NFL history. That would have sucked.

Man, I'm nowhere near the level of Chiefs-honk that you are, and even I was like, "Please, be a different person..."

[Malvolio]

The story is posted all over.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ts/8081147001/
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/04/polit...eal/index.html

As for the recusal question, why should Trump appointed justices recuse themselves? Should we expect Jackson to recuse herself in any case involving the current White House? Should Kagan and Sotomayor recuse themselves in any case involving Biden because his former boss appointed them?

There doesn't appear to be much precedent for pushing for anyone to recuse themselves because of who appointed them.

The Ginni Thomas situation is a bit different, although I'm curious as to the neutral standard that people want applied.

I would certainly expect Justices appointed by Obama or Biden to recuse themselves if there's ever a case that directly involves Biden. The reason there's little precedent is because there have not been that many cases to go to the Supreme Court that directly involve the President or a former President. Of course, Trump has been involved in so many precedent setting crimes.

[Tami]

I honestly don’t think they can rule on this. His having appointed 3 of them to their positions should cause them to recuse themselves. That and Ginny Thomas.

BTW, what’s your source on this?

I actually heard about this on the news radio while driving home.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Well we needed some comedy news. Facing the aspect he would look like a moron in court and lose a $1 billion dollar breakup fee with Twitter ; Elon Musk comically has to now buy a company he doesn't want. Because his ego wouldn't let him admit he over paid for it to get right win applause. Its more funny that Musk's fans are in shock as he is paying the original over paid price he offered.

This is more funny because its pretty 99% likely Musk would have had to pay that breakup fee and he just couldn't handle folks laughing at him.

[Tami]

Well we needed some comedy news. Facing the aspect he would look like a moron in court and lose a $1 billion dollar breakup fee with Twitter ; Elon Musk comically has to now buy a company he doesn't want. Because his ego wouldn't let him admit he over paid for it to get right win applause. Its more funny that Musk's fans are in shock as he is paying the original over paid price he offered.

This is more funny because its pretty 99% likely Musk would have had to pay that breakup fee and he just couldn't handle folks laughing at him.

I just worry he'll take revenge on Twitter by destroying it.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I just worry he'll take revenge on Twitter by destroying it.

Well this is the catch 22 here. If Musk does destroy Twitter , the banks and partners he aligned to pay this price will not be happy. I fully expect he's gonna be searching to unload this the next couple years.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I just worry he'll take revenge on Twitter by destroying it.

Or enabling voices like Trump.

"Threats of violence are just free speech!"

[The Cool Thatguy]

I just worry he'll take revenge on Twitter by destroying it.

Not to always be 'that guy' (heh), but would that be such a bad thing?

[Tami]

Not to always be 'that guy' (heh), but would that be such a bad thing?

Some of us actually like Twitter, ,it's much better than Facebook.

[Tendrin]

Oklahoma attacks transgender care again:

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt signed a bill Tuesday targeting medical treatments for transgender youth and called on the GOP-controlled Legislature to impose a statewide ban when it returns in February.

The bill signed by the first-term Republican, who is up for reelection next month, authorizes more than $108 million in federal funds from the American Rescue Plan Act for health services at the University of Oklahoma Medical Center.

It prohibits any of the money from being used for gender reassignment medical treatment on children under 18 years old. Oklahoma Children’s Hospital at OU Health currently offers medical services related to gender identity for those up to age 24, including puberty blockers, gender-affirming hormone therapy, and help finding surgeons who perform gender-affirming surgeries, according to its website.

Stitt also called for the Legislature to ban some of those gender reassignment treatments statewide when it returns in February, saying in a statement that he wanted a prohibition on “all irreversible gender transition surgeries and hormone therapies” on minors.

https://apnews.com/article/health-le...source=Twitter

Oklahoma governor okays the torture of trans kids on the basis of bigotry.

[CaptainEurope]

I honestly don’t think they can rule on this. His having appointed 3 of them to their positions should cause them to recuse themselves. That and Ginny Thomas.

BTW, what’s your source on this?

Clarence Thomas just gave the DOJ until Thursday to respond to Trump's motion. Does not feel like he would recuse himself.


Waiting breathlessly for the media to comment on the "optics" of Trump suing to slow down an investigation into possibly criminal behavior on his part.

[Catlady in training]

Speaking of Musk and Twitter, what are the odds that the dumbass will shut up after getting roasted like he did with his arrogant "advice" to end the war?