US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Ostatnio edytowane przez moderatora:
They sure can. If people turn violent, especially if they go after NG soldiers, they can arrest people just fine and drag their asses to federal detention.
That is true that if they’re personally attacked they can probably apprehend them, that’s not really the same as national guard having regular arrest powers the police have.
 
the caption was fucking stupid as shit. The guy that rushed up on the cop got his shit pushed in, but the guy taking the video of THAT wasn't bothered at all.
I think they're (the nogs) are getting frustrated that this outrage bait isn't working so well anymore. "THIS IS WHAT THEY DO TO PEOPLE WHO RECORD!" Twenty years ago they could make the argument "omg police brutality!" Today? The most common reaction is "fucking finally."

For fifty plus years they've been crying "racism!" louder and louder even as the nation generally became less racist over time. The chickens are coming home to roost now, and they're going to start experiencing the racism they constantly whine about. Except it won't come from law enforcement (at least not entirely). It'll come from the apathy people are beginning to openly express when they cry "racism."

ETA:
That is true that if they’re personally attacked they can probably apprehend them, that’s not really the same as national guard having regular arrest powers the police have.
If the National Guard actually has to go hands-on, especially to protect civilian law enforcement, they will drag people away to restore order. It may well be just thirty feet to the nearest civilian paddy wagon, but they'll do it.
 
State law being applied to a national entity. If Roblox wanted, I would think they can argue that Louisiana's law is attempting to usurp federal authority vested to it in the commerce clause. Unless Roblox is headquartered in Louisiana, at least of what I know this is an avenue to attempt to trainwreck the whole attempt. 100% a procedural issue though, so it's not that Roblox good, more Louisiana's law has undotted i's and uncrossed t's and we have rights.
Roblox Corporation is a California entity, although I don't know where you'd get the idea that gives it immunity against lawsuits originating in other states. It takes like five seconds to verify that there have been tons of lawsuits filed and won by states against corporations chartered in other states.
 
Hogg was thrown out of DNC leadership for suggesting he wanted Dem incumbents to be primaried when the DNC's sole function is to support incumbents. Embezzling DNC funds to pay himself didn't help either.
The Hogg firing was weird as fuck to me. The obvious reason was him openly advocating for incumbents to be primaried, but the DNC's stated reason for firing him was that he was a white man. At least on the private side, if you want to fire someone for their race, you have to lie about it. Firing him for the shit he said would have been totally fine, but they obfuscated a totally rational reason by saying they did it because of race.

If I were Hogg, I'd sue the DNC for violating his civil rights. Internal DNC policy does not superscede federal law, and they're not allowed to fire you for belonging to a protected class (race, gender).
 
The Hogg firing was weird as fuck to me. The obvious reason was him openly advocating for incumbents to be primaried, but the DNC's stated reason for firing him was that he was a white man. At least on the private side, if you want to fire someone for their race, you have to lie about it. Firing him for the shit he said would have been totally fine, but they obfuscated a totally rational reason by saying they did it because of race.

If I were Hogg, I'd sue the DNC for violating his civil rights. Internal DNC policy does not superscede federal law, and they're not allowed to fire you for belonging to a protected class (race, gender).
There's a zero percent chance any judge is going to rule that employment regulations apply to elected party officers.
 
As long as they don’t come here, I’m cool with sticking it to the Somalians.
Dear god black people just have no idea how to handle police that will arrest them for getting into their faces.


FAFOOnTheStreetsInDC.mp4

Dude did not hesitate to use the mace. Also have a special appearance of the 5'2 BMI 35 women cop that isn't helping at all and can't do anything productive.
Blacks are always in the wrong, I’m sure he deserved it for one reason or another.
 
I would think something like Roblox would fall under federal court, not state court.

Good on them for trying, but I get a feeling this might fail for procedural reasons. Something something supremacy clause, something something commerce clause.
Why would state court not have concurrent jurisdiction? It doesn’t appear to be a case arising under federal court’s exclusive jurisdiction.

As for the supremacy clause issue, that doesn’t seem like a procedural issue. And unless there’s some federal law or case law I’m not aware of, protecting kids isn’t something that the Feds have exercised field preemption in. Even then, that’s definitely a substantive not procedural issue.
 
I think they're (the nogs) are getting frustrated that this outrage bait isn't working so well anymore. "THIS IS WHAT THEY DO TO PEOPLE WHO RECORD!" Twenty years ago they could make the argument "omg police brutality!" Today? The most common reaction is "fucking finally."

For fifty plus years they've been crying "racism!" louder and louder even as the nation generally became less racist over time. The chickens are coming home to roost now, and they're going to start experiencing the racism they constantly whine about. Except it won't come from law enforcement (at least not entirely). It'll come from the apathy people are beginning to openly express when they cry "racism."

ETA:

If the National Guard actually has to go hands-on, especially to protect civilian law enforcement, they will drag people away to restore order. It may well be just thirty feet to the nearest civilian paddy wagon, but they'll do it.
Everything was relying on control of the narrative as "Blacks are innocent angels being hurt by racism". Bodycams+loss of control of the narrative showed the opposite here.
 
The Hogg firing was weird as fuck to me. The obvious reason was him openly advocating for incumbents to be primaried, but the DNC's stated reason for firing him was that he was a white man. At least on the private side, if you want to fire someone for their race, you have to lie about it. Firing him for the shit he said would have been totally fine, but they obfuscated a totally rational reason by saying they did it because of race.

If I were Hogg, I'd sue the DNC for violating his civil rights. Internal DNC policy does not superscede federal law, and they're not allowed to fire you for belonging to a protected class (race, gender).
I don't think he was technically fired even though that's exactly what happened. The DNC ruled that his election for that vice-chair position was invalid over some procedural technicality so they had to redo it. I don't know if they ever did or who got it in his place just that he was out immediately.
 
Quoted from the US Constitution... "[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; . . ."

Issue Roblox can raise... The Louisiana law is an attempt to usurp this power given they're an internet based company and Louisiana's laws are trying to be applied to everyone who uses Roblox. The argument is that Louisiana is not Congress and if Roblox is not in Louisiana, then Roblox has every right to say that Louisiana cannot make law on behalf of other states. The fact they're seeking damages in general and not something state targeted like a forced region lock adds credence to this. It sounds dumb at first glance, I totally get it, but as I said in that comment this is all procedure, so Roblox would want to be as pedantic as possible as that's kind of the name of the game.
Dude what? You seriously arguing that states lack all power to regulate entities outside their state because of the commerce clause? Have you simply not heard of the dormant commerce clause, or that it DOESNT completely limit states ability to regulate out of state entities? Which can be compared with Indian tribes and Foreign entities where states actually do lack power to regulate?
Or hell, cases like International Shoe? Even a first semester 1L would know this take is plain wrong.
 
Or hell, cases like International Shoe?
Well then. I haven't actually heard of that case, no, or at the very least I only got a passing mention of it. I had instead heard of the commerce clause as a very broad one that has been abused quite frequently before. That, mixed with the implications the article gave which made me think the suit was kinda slapdash at inception and Louisiana was overshooting the damages they wanted to get, made me assume that this was coming into the courts a bit of a pre-existing mess where people paid to be anal-retentive pedants nitpick everything to death.

On the face of things, I had assumed that this gap meant that there was room to argue Louisiana was secondary in jurisdiction at best (Not helping me, I've known Roblox has had pedo problems for a long time and Louisiana's bragging about being the first immediately makes me question, "Well why ARE you the first exactly?" I get to thinking no one tried because there's no use in trying.) and Roblox would probably pound on that procedure and pedantry if they wanted to fight it. Law also tends to be decades behind internet issues as well, meaning I just plain am not assuming that they're sending their best, which usually means point for the defendant. Guess I am wrong though, did not know this was directly addressed in a SCOTUS case. In my defense, I got saddled with having to analyze a SCOTUS case on loli in great detail, and I will never be able to scrub Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition or the knowledge Romeo and Juliet are in an actual judicial citation list from my brain. I got more of a focus on rights legislation than economic.

Suppose the real question then is whether any other states want to get in on the action.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole