He's proclaiming again that he has already won and that there is fraudulent voting. Thankfully, MSNBC cut him off in mid-rant.
Hate . . . him . . . so . . . much!
now would be a REALLY good time to show up and kick some ass.
A "den of thieves," indeed.
Like so many other DU posters today, I am feeling overwhelmingly depressed and disgusted that close to half of my countrymen and women have fallen under the spell of Donald J. Trump, the GOP (Greedy Old Pricks), and unbridled capitalism.
I believe people vote for the presidential candidate that reminds them most of themselves. If I'm right, oh my God, what that says about half the population of the US!
with his ass-cheeks-to-elbows super-spreader campaign rallies, and he truly doesn't care how many people he leaves dead in his wake, even if they happen to be his cult followers who, bizarrely, still love him.
If a number of people get food poisoning after eating at the same restaurant, the local health department has the authority to shut that restaurant down. WHY can't they shut down Trump's rallies when people are not wearing masks and not socially distancing?
on his way to tonight's debate and that he tested negative. I heard this about a half hour ago on MSNBC.
Oh, really?! We should believe Mark Meadows? Are there any independent journalists and medical personnel who were on Air Force One today with Typhoid Trump who can attest to the fact that Trump was tested at all during his flight?
I know the Biden campaign is fully aware of the menace Trump could pose to Joe, but I still worry. They should demand to see the test results. Better yet, have Trump get a swab up the nose in front of everyone, right before the debate, and prove that he is testing negative.
And too bad if the person administering the test goes a little too far with the swab and accidentally scrambles what little brain matter exists beneath that thin, orange pelt on his head that he calls hair.
I guess she would agree that all Amendments to the Constitution are unconstitutional and should be thrown out, including the 2nd Amendment (the right to keep and bear arms) and the 19th Amendment (the right of women to vote).
That seems to be what she's saying here:
Amy Coney Barrett on originalism: "That means that I interpret the Constitution as a law... I understand it to have the meaning that it had at the time people ratified it. That meaning doesn't change over time and it's not up to me to update it or infuse my policy views into it."
But when she says in this quote that she "interprets" the Constitution, wouldn't that suggest logically that its meaning is up to interpretation and that different people could interpret it in different ways?
If its meaning were all cut and dried, there would be no need for the Supreme Court at all. Everyone would understand exactly what it means. Wouldn't that be nice? No Supreme Court, no appellate courts, maybe even no lawyers!
Okay. I just gave myself a headache. Or added to the one I've had since 2016.
Regeneron, the miracle "cure" that Typhoid Trump is now raving about, was developed from fetal tissue.
From the Regeneron website:
Currently, there are limited research efforts
employing human-induced pluripotent stem cell lines derived from adult human cells and
human embryonic stem cells that are approved for research use by the National Institutes of
Health and created solely through in vitro fertilization.
Just felt the need to post some encouraging news:
Researchers have developed a synthetic molecule, inspired by naturally occurring "nanobodies" found in llamas and other camelids, that could possibly be effective in preventing Covid-19 infection.
It would be administered as a nasal spray, which they are calling "Aeronabs." It's not a vaccine, but rather, another way to help prevent the virus from entering the body through the nose, which seems to be its favored entry point. According to the article:
Far more effective than wearable forms of personal protective equipment, we think of AeroNabs as a molecular form of PPE that could serve as an important stopgap until vaccines provide a more permanent solution to COVID-19, said AeroNabs co-inventor Peter Walter, PhD, professor of biochemistry and biophysics at UCSF and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator.
Of course, it could still enter through the mucous membranes in a person's mouth or eyes, but this might provide some protection.
The article says they hope to begin human trials soon. Here is the article:
Get Trump, Pence, Biden, and Harris all up there on stage. Either member of a team or both members would be allowed to respond to the other side's statements.
This just occurred to me, so I haven't thought it through all the way. But it could either be another free-for-all, cluster-you-know-what melee, or it could be extremely revealing and informative.
Or! I would love to see Kamala debate Trump and Biden debate Pence. That would be exquisite!
Miracles do happen, but it looks like Crazy-Eyes Coney Barrett will get ram-rodded through the Supreme Court Justice nomination and confirmation process and end up on the Supreme Court despite our Democratic Congressmen and Congresswomen's best efforts to block this monumental act of hypocrisy and sweep-the-leg, do-anything-to-win power grab on the part of Republicans.
But Supreme Court Justices can be removed by Congress through impeachment. A good article on this is found on the Brennan Center for Justice website:
The article describes the grounds for impeachment:
The United States Constitution provides little guidance as to what offenses constitute grounds for the impeachment of federal judges: as with other government officials, judges may be removed following impeachment and conviction for Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors, otherwise, under Article III, Section 1, judges shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.
The article does add that impeachment of judges is very rare:
Impeachment of judges is rare, and removal is rarer still. With respect to federal judges, since 1803, the House of Representatives has impeached only 15 judges an average of one every 14 years and only 8 of those impeachments were followed by convictions in the Senate. Justice Samuel Chase is the only Supreme Court Justice the House has impeached, and in 1805 the Senate acquitted Chase.
But if Coney Barrett is the wild-eyed religious fanatic that she appears to be, AND we win the Senate and keep the House, then we just need to catch her in an act of Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors, (perhaps helping her lawyer husband get a case dismissed for one of his corporate criminal clients) and impeach her bony ass (with a nod to that climactic scene in the movie Working Girl when Melanie Griffin sends her evil boss Sigourney Weaver packing).
So what if a Supreme Court Justice has only been impeached once in our nation's history, and one has never before been removed? We have been taught by none other than our "favorite" president (sarcasm) that one must never shy away from violating norms and standards in pursuit of one's goals (sarcasm).
Let's find an excuse (a legitimate excuse; after all, we ARE still Democrats) and impeach her. AND Kavanaugh. AND expand to 11 justices. AND make DC and Puerto Rico states. AND eliminate the filibuster. AND, most importantly, get rid of the Electoral College. The Republican Party must pay a political price for what they have done to our country.
I just had an idea: Trump's base has FoxNews. We have MSNBC and Free Speech TV. Both of "our" channels target an audience of college-educated (or smart enough to go to college, but took another path to a career), liberal viewers.
It's time to outfox FoxNews with a new liberal channel that mimics the whole FoxNews infotainment platform. Call it, oh, I don't know, let's say, . . . "HooterNews: News That Will Keep You UP All Night"! That would grab their attention. Then, once we have piqued their curiosity and they click on our HooterNews Channel, we will bombard them with the truth about Trump and the Republicans, but presented in a way that does not immediately tip them off that it's a liberal channel. There would be:
* Bleached-blonde news hosts in super-short dresses who cross and uncross their legs a lot.
* Interviews with World Wrestling Federation stars who are liberals, if we can find any. If we can't find any, just pay them enough to read a list of truths in an aggressive, macho manner about Trump's aberrant and abhorrent behavior.
* Conspiracy theories that are actually true (such as how the Trump family and friends stole millions from donors' 2016 inaugural funds), but presented in a gossipy way by some flamboyant TV personality, I'm thinking Wendy Williams, but for Trump's base, she would have to be white, 'natch.
* For commercials, show all the same commercials that they would see on FoxNews, even, or especially, the MyPillow guy.
Would this be sinking to the Republicans' level? Would this be propaganda? Would this be manipulative? Yes. Yes. And yes. But it would be like hiding your sick dog's medicine in a spoonful of ice cream. Deceitfulness motivated by love and concern. Because without this kind of sleight of hand, I honestly don't see how we can overcome the brainwashing to which a certain segment of the population has succumbed.
Profile InformationMember since: Thu Jan 23, 2020, 02:36 PM
Number of posts: 1,909
- 2023 (18)
- 2022 (32)
- 2021 (47)
- 2020 (38)