view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
They're not "taking advantage of a rookie". They're in cahoots. I will guarantee you she sees an opportunity to angle this into a possible appointment higher up the judicial food chain if Trump gets re-elected, and wants to make sure Trump gets the hint that if she gets an appointment, she'll continue to run even more cover for him. And I guarantee you that Trump has already let her know that he intends to do that just so he can have another stooge higher up the food chain in his pocket.
This is all deliberate. She's not even trying to hide it. She doesn't have to. She knows there's zero chance she'll be removed from the bench for it, and if Trump wins the election it won't matter anyway and she'll be set for life. Even if her reputation is ruined and she ends up resigning in disgrace, the right-wing-talk-show circuit is quite lucrative these days, and I guarantee you that NewsMax or OANN would scoop her up in seconds. She knows that too.
When you look at what she's done, she's beyond obvious.
She had an order overturned early on, and then, rather than changing the types of things she's doing, she changed the format that she's using to do those things. She started using these paperless orders that are more difficult to challenge.
She's favoring Trump as much as she thinks is possible to get away with. And if Trump is elected, some have been saying that he plans to appoint Cannon to the Supreme Court.
Not exactly a new strategy to reward your cronies with lifetime appointments.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/17/politics/bush-v-gore-barrett-kavanaugh-roberts-supreme-court/index.html