Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
![]()
Yeah, the Appeals Court already gave it the go-ahead for trying him as an adult, rather than in Family Court.
Don't I know it - the Rochester court system had Judge Leticia Astacio
, who'd been elected in 2014, and was caught drunk driving in 2016. She then spent the next two years in and out of her own court dates while on indefinite leave (and still drawing her salary) because she kept violating her terms of parole in myriad ways - having her children blow into her car's interlock device to circumvent the safety feature because she kept drinking, attempting to buy a gun while on probation, going out-of-State without informing her probation officer... just generally doing everything she could to shoot herself in the foot. She only got removed from the bench in 2018, as the previous link shows.
And in brighter jurisprudence news, the pregnant Alabama woman who'd been shot in the stomach will not be indicted after all. I can't find a reliable link at the moment.
Edited by ironballs16 on Jul 3rd 2019 at 4:20:23 AM
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"![]()
I think I've got a source that meets "reliability" requirements:
https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1146502253160947713?s=19
"Marshae Jones shouldn’t have been charged to begin with."
"The DA’s decision here represents precisely what we want to see in these critical moments: a prosecutor who is not afraid to use discretion and the power to refuse to prosecute when justice demands the charges be dropped."
In case you can't access twitter
Edited by Ultimatum on Jul 3rd 2019 at 8:30:14 AM
have a listen and have a link to my discord serverEven if they did, they don't under Mc Connell.
This is the key problem. By ruling that the citizenship question was administratively imperfect, and not that it was unconstitutional and un-American,Eh to me this sounds more like the DOJ needs to be seen doing *something* after Trump had his latest Twit-squit. They cannot come out and say 'Respectfully, we disagree with POTUS' (well, they could but the axes would be flying low that day).
To me, their words sounds more like "Don't hold your breath" type of non answers a bureaucrat gives you when they *know* they can't do something but you won't accept it.
"Invade Iran."
"We'll look into it."
"Drone Strike CNN."
"We will explore options."
until they actually make an action, I shall see and wait. I mean, given time, they would probably find a way they might attempt, but time is of the issue, as the forms needs to be produced starting now.
Edited by 3of4 on Jul 3rd 2019 at 11:43:19 AM
"You can reply to this Message!"Technically Congress is in charge of the Census. Not that it matters practically due to Mc Connell.
Article I, Section 2: “Representatives . . . shall be apportioned among the several States . . . according to their respective Numbers . . . . The actual Enumeration [Census] shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they [Congress] shall by Law direct.”
Edited by wisewillow on Jul 3rd 2019 at 2:46:45 AM
Oh Goody! After watching Philip DeFranco, apparently the same appeals court overturned a different Judge (Marcia Silver) who'd denied the same type of waiver for a 16-year-old boy accused of raping a 12-year-old girl
. Though a possible wrinkle in this case, according to the link below, is that the boy is: "a special-needs student who had been suspended from school 12 times, had previously been found guilty of juvenile offenses six times and who had already violated probation."
The appellate judges also upbraided Silva, overturning her decision and noting that the teenager could be culpable because the 12-year-old was not old enough to provide consent in the first place.
She is, incidentally, appointed to the bench by Chris Christie in 2014
.
Edited by ironballs16 on Jul 3rd 2019 at 6:16:00 AM
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"Wasn't it the Department of Commerce that was responsible for the Census? It's them that's at least printing it (as we speak, I believe).
Regardless, this is a 'will try', with the key word being try. And it will still be too late to legally add the question to census even if the Supreme Court agreed to listen to this new excuse, and a new Supreme Court case will also have those damning emails that expose the real reason why the Question was (attempted to be) added to the Census.
This will go down in flames harder then the loss they've already taken. Of course, Trump's administration could still try to violate the Supreme Court by printing the Census with the Question on it, but the DoC has already said they're printing the census without the Question, so they can't claim a flaw or ignorance, and that would be grounds for Impeachment, and would hurt Trumps' image with Independents.
Edited by DingoWalley1 on Jul 3rd 2019 at 7:28:04 AM
![]()
Uh, I’m not so confident. John Roberts’ opinion basically said “lie to us better and I’ll let you.”
I dunno about Trump trying again in 2021, but Warren says she’ll do a new Census after she’s elected if Trump does a 2020 Census with the citizenship question. Yes, she has a plan for that.
Edited by wisewillow on Jul 3rd 2019 at 4:46:22 AM
x2 Other then the Census only being made every 10 years (on the 'X0 years), as per the Constitution. Trump can't reforce the census afterwards, and if he does he creates grounds for impeachment. He also can't do it if the Democrats get the Senate (which is entirely possible).
Except there are still standards in place; the Supreme Court is done until October, which is as far as they can (theoretically) push off printing the Census (and we already have proof they've started printing it without the question). The Supreme Court also ordered this case back to a District Court that now has to rehear the case, and very rarely does the Court decide to let cases skip lower courts to jump straight up to the Supreme Court (they didn't allow a jump with the Muslim Ban, which they ultimately upheld). And, again, the new Case would involve the Damning Emails, unlike the previous case. And even then, even if they were to allow this new excuse to pass, the decision wouldn't be announced for at least a month after the case (this case, for instance, was heard in early April, and we only just got the rejection of it a few days ago), at which point it will be well past the point of no return to add the Question.
Edited by DingoWalley1 on Jul 3rd 2019 at 7:57:28 AM

Reminds of that time in Texas a football team gang raped a cheerleader, and then the coach and others trief to cover it up becausr it could ruin their lives.