iknewitwhenisawit

Again, the Democrats have a majority of both houses and can give consent at any time. I’m not sure why you seem to think that this is a show stopper?

There’s nothing in the Constitution that gives the President immunity from prosecution, but the Supreme Court ruled that it is there.

As for gerrymandering… there are laws against gerrymandering, but the Supreme Court threw them out, except under conditions that are both vague and impossible to achieve. Unless the state legislature is literally twisting their mustaches and saying, “we are drawing a map to deny you representation” while tying a black person to train tracks the law has been invalidated.

And while you may personally agree with their decision the fact that the laws stood and were fine with decades of Supreme Court scrutiny shows that it is not a simple matter of states running their own elections.

As for the “no states having compact”, I expect the Supreme Court to come up with some justification even if Congress allows it.

A quick search shows that in May 2026 the Supreme Court ruled that gerrymandering is a-okay with them, so I’m not sure what you mean when you say that they’ve ignored every state election issue this year.

With a clear majority the Congress can very well give consent.

The concern is that the Supreme Court will overturn the compact when all checkboxes have been ticked because they are political hacks and will conjure some text regardless of actual law.

All it takes is for someone to sue (like the Justice Department under Trump) and for the Supreme Court to decide they have standing, and for the Supreme Court to make up some reason why the compact is not allowed.

If you think the actual text of the Constitution matters then you don’t understand how the current Supreme Court has been ruling. 😅

That’s like a third of the population though, right? 😉

Sadly it can’t hit the magic 60 Senator number to blast through the self-imposed filibuster level.

You need a ⅔ majority of the Senate to remove from office. Even if the Democrats come out with 59 Senators, you’d still need to convince 8 Republicans to value country over party, which seems unlikely.

No bullying necessary with this Supreme Court!

Maybe they can pass an Enabling Act before the new Congress starts? 😉

The point is to be able to say “there was massive voter fraud and the state did not take it seriously”. The goal is to make enough people reject voting - and hence democracy - that a fascist government can assume power.

It won’t work though. All Trump has to do is say, “I’m fine,” and he can act as President again after being removed.

deleted by creator

2027?

If the citizens of the USA wanted someone who values consent they wouldn’t have elected Trump…

Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #34: War is good for business.

Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #35: Peace is good for business.

“If he is basically fronting money to rent a plane from himself, and then if he does not forgive the loans but reimburses himself, he’ll essentially be using donor funds to pay himself,” said Jordan Libowitz, vice president in communications for the nonprofit watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Awesome.

I found the GitHub employee! 😉

Trump and Musk don’t have friendships like normal people. The term has no meaning to their interactions.

In a similar way to how you can’t really call Trump a liar. Trump doesn’t care or even know if what he says is true, and the term liar implies intent.

It’s not a law unless both houses of Congress pass it with a majority (or 60% for the self-imposed Senate anti-filabustering rule) and the President signs it (or both houses overturn his veto with a ⅔ majority).

I mean, if Trump declares it and his minions carry out his orders, it hardly makes much difference… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

We call that “summer vacation” in Europe. 😉