looks like the abominationās claim of executive privilege over the release of the entire Mueller report and itās attendant documents isnāt going to hold water even in the republikkkan cult. Iām sure Roberts is paying attention to right wing rumblings and wonāt be risking his reputation to side with an obviously corrupt āpresidentā.
Devin want the report so he can try and help the GOP brace for what will be eventually public.
And selective leaksā¦obviously
OT but came across this via Alternet
Thatās him, the guy behind the curtain Fascinating
Exclusive: Trump, the billion-dollar loser ā I was his ghostwriter and saw it happen
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-the-billiondollar-loser-his-ghostwriter-recalls-the-king-midas-years-090000640.html
I wouldnāt hold my breath on thisā¦ I think itās just as likely that this is just a ārope a dopeā strategy by these Rās to give them the look of being bipartisan. The executive is going to be sure to push this to the Supreme Court, and count on the two new tRump Toadies on the court to rule in their favor.
definitely not holding my breath, Iāve just decided to be slightly more optimistic today instead of my typically cynical stance.
I get the feeling that some in the fascistgop are starting to think the unredacted Mueller report will see the light of day and theyāre positioning themselves accordingly. I think there are four on the supremely corrupt court whoāll back any reichwing position, but I think roberts himself would side with the actual law if he determines it will help his legacy.
Good chance my cynicism about our politics will return tomorrow, though.
I had to like your post for the ārope-a-dopeā bit which I think is absolutely spot-on.
Youāre braver than I am for divining the future SCOTUS ruling. I keep hearing that three justices during Watergate were appointed by Nixon and ruled against him. There are also noises being made that indicate Roberts may be more interested in his legacy and preserving the constitutional rule of law than acting as a partisan shill for traitor_tRump.
I see similar predictions being made for the Senate vote on impeachment too. Granted, the Vegas book is probably leaning to the right winning on both counts but thereās a lot of variables and moving parts. Personally, I think itās more of a toss-up and a lot depends on whatās turned up in the House investigations and hearings.
This myth about Roberts needs to go away.
One single vote (which was not made to save Obamacare, but rather to avoid causing problems for other right-wing priorities which the precedent set would have endangered) that accidentally went the correct and just way does not give a lifetime of freebies.
Every other major vote, heās been with the reich-wing on.
There is zero indication that he will rule against the emperor.
The thing about the Senate that has surprised me is that I thought that the Rās would eventually tire of defending Trump and realize that they have a much more consistently Conservative lunatic in Pence. Since there are less than two years left in the term, Pence could become President and have the incumbency going into 2020 and 2024. If they had ditched Trump sooner, Pence would only have been able to run once.
Whatever.
Kamala 2020!
Well he voted against him on the Muslim travel ban:
Still Iām grateful for your reply as it spurred me to do a little more research.
Folks continue to make the mistake of assuming that every Repub judge and especially every Trump appointee is going to rule in his favor no matter what. I have to disagree. Itās not so much that theyāre all going to find their inner moral compass. Rather, itās that itās just a matter of time before they rightly view Trump as more liability than asset, and will unceremoniously dump him.
Having used him to pass that tax cut and move the courts solidly to the right, and facing the stain of continued support of him, theyāre dispense with his services and throw him under the bus. Count on it. Heās like the useful idiot asset in a spy or mob movie. No longer of any real use and representing a potentially dangerous loose end (especially in this instance), he gets his and thatās that.
Quite literally, heās not going to be the boss of them for much longer. Theyāre setting up for it now.
This one was the migrant issue, not the Muslim travel ban (that one Roberts let through with the laughable notion that as long as the administration insisted with a straight face that it wasnāt a Muslim travel ban, then they could do whatever they wanted, no matter how many times Trump had explicitly said that it was a Muslim travel ban).
And itās only one small decision on one minor and temporary issue-- thereās a lot of stuff with immigration and that moving through.
When I say lockstep, Iām talking about the āBigā decisions, not every single one. You know, the Hobby Lobby, Citizenās United, and the like. Score out those, and the ONLY one that Roberts has come on the correct side was Obamacare.
Masking that statistic with the noise of the minor decisions skews the true picture of what he is-- a reliable deliverer to the republican party.
No, actually, not really. Heās no liberal, but heās no Scalia, either. And his concern is the future of the independence of the courts and the conservative movement. Trump is an existential threat to both.
Itās a meme, isnāt it?: āIf thereās nothing to hide, everything should come out.ā and/or
āSurely our leaders have always done their level best for the American people, so theyāll really benefit big-time by releasing everything, which will prove it.ā
Name one. Iāll wait.
Remember the rules: itās the āBigā decisions-- Hobby Lobby/Citizenās United, etc. No decisions that werenāt big flag-waving and partisan events.
Well, for starters, taking the unprecedented step of rebuking a president, let alone one of his own party, over his attacks on judges and the courts. Has no legal weight, but still not the sort of thing youād expect a far-right fanatic such as the one you seem to imagine he is would do. And donāt give me that āOh heās just being super-strategeric hereā BS, which is literally no different from claiming that everything Obama did was an example of his brilliance. He defended the courts against a bully and would-be tyrant, and would do so again.
As for actual rulings:
- Texas execution case
- Louisiana abortion case
- Michigan v. Bay Mills
- Indian Community Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar
- Blocked Trumpās EO automatically rejecting asylum bids by people who cross the Mexican border illegally
- Voted to refuse to hear two cases arising from efforts by states to bar Planned Parenthood clinics from Medicaid
On some rulings, he may well be more āliberalā (or, rather, libertarian) than some thought. On others, itās more of a technical legal thing. Overall, though, his aim is to protect the courts from executive encroachment. He will rule against Trump in all such cases. Plus, Iām sure he personally loathes the man.
Trumpās power is that, for now, he has blocked nearly all information on his criminality.
That will not continue. The more he blocks the more ācase closedā, āletās move onā, etc looks like a coverup.
The actual malfeasance of Nixon got much more scrutiny because of the coverup.
Trumpās coverup(s) dwarf Nixonās by exponential comparisons
So am I the only who thinks Nunes and his fellow Republicans on the Intel Committee want the full unredacted report with supporting evidence is so they can comb through it to find the FBI and et al Deep State members?
Devin, leak? Only to the White House.