General Politics Discussion (IX) [ARCHIVED] • Page 484

The media are so excited so so so excited

 

What the ever lasting …

 

That Remington/Sandy Hook post broke me, I think. Just sitting here sobbing and shaking with rage. This country is evil. I try to convince myself that I'm having existential crises, but it's all real.

 

It hasn’t even been a year since the last presidential election but they’ll cover this more than daily climate catastrophes or the 3000 covid deaths yesterday or Roe being dismantled

 

Bold prediction (ok, more of a hope than a prediction): everyone in the Republican party except for maybe a few "moderates" automatically expect Trump to run and don't announce their candidacy to give him an easy path to the nomination. At the last minute he decides not to run (I think this is the most likely result since I feel like his announcement has been "imminent" several times now) and the Republicans have to scramble for a candidate leading to dysfunction and infighting, making it fairly easy for the Dem to win

 

Remember when John Delaney announced he was running in the first year of Trump’s term and still never got above 1% in the polls

 

i don’t even remember who the fuck this guy is lol

 

All these people posting inspirational RBG quotes on social media like this isn’t partially her fault. If she had retired during the Obama administration the Texas decision would’ve been 5-4 the other way.

 

He was the one that looked like Bill from King of the Hill came to life and put on a suit.

 

slide guy

 

Or maybe Roberts decision was just political posturing and would have probably went the other way had that been the case. Feels pointless to blame it on something that you wanted to have happened 8 years ago.

 

Oh good, we get three more years of the media showing clips of his rallies and then the talking heads can just sit around going, “Gosh, why is this country so angry and radicalized?!”

 

Why are all 87 or whatever of these Trump lawsuits taking forever to complete?

 

If I understand this dumb law correctly, he’d be getting sued for driving her, not the woman. The point is just to sue the providers out of existence but there are tons of consequences that these idiots don’t understand. Besides being a huge piece of shit.

 

The irony in this specific example is that if the law were to be interpreted to include people who seek out an abortion for themselves (which it’s totally broad enough that it could, from the language “knowingly engages [or intends to engage] in conduct that aids or abets the performance or inducement of an abortion”), it could also 100% include someone who helped that person get their abortion, including, for example, driving them to the clinic.

And an even more sick aspect of it is that if it was simply the gov’t enforcing the law, they could absolutely make a internal policy of like “Even though this language potentially covers people who get the abortions, we are using our discretion to not go after them.” But with private citizens who get paid per case? They have a huge financial incentive to argue that the law should be interpreted as broadly as possible

 

See what I said above. The law would likely include him, yes, but I don’t see anything in it that inherently excludes the woman who gets the abortion. It would be a matter of how broadly the courts decide to apply the “aiding and abetting” section

 

Maybe the lawyers in the thread can find a way to sue Abbott or the Ag or etc for aiding women in getting abortions by having abortion services in the state. Let’s get that 10K!