Everyone agrees IGs can be removed after 30 days notice.
The legal question is whether in some cases they can be removed without 30 days notice. Team Trump argues they can, the IGs argue the only way they can be removed is with 30 days notice.
The judge has to decide who’s right. Probably the IGs, but at this point it’s too late to reinstate them. So instead the IGs will have to argue for money damages.
She was being dismissive because they were extremely unprofessional. That doesn’t mean they will lose in the end. But they failed to show that this is an emergency.
When you ask for a TRO, you are asking for temporary measures due to an emergency. They aren’t your last word, you are expected to follow up later with your full argument.
This is equivalent to asking your teacher for an extension three weeks after the assignment was due. A complete fail.
The judge hasn’t yet decided whether the actions are illegal. If they are, then they will ultimately be put to a stop.
But for now, the question at hand is whether there is an emergency. That is a completely separate from whether the actions are illegal.
And if you wait three weeks to declare an emergency, then it’s not an emergency.
Inaccurate title.
Neither the headline nor the article say Schumer is avoiding a fight.
Nobody can see the future, not even you.
But the way things are going, I would bet that Democrats win the House and/or Senate in 2026 and have an excellent shot at the presidency in 2028.
In fact, last week a Democrat flipped a Trump +21 district in an Iowa special election. And that Democrat was a centrist.
The electorate wanted the change that Trump promised, and that’s what we’re getting.
In 2028, the electorate will probably reconsider.
I don’t think requiring evidence is an “excuse”. And so far there is little evidence that leftists can win statewide elections, which is a prerequisite for winning the presidency.
Conversely, if leftists start consistently winning elections then there is little that the party can do to stop them. That’s basically how MAGA took over the GOP.
They should only change if a different approach were proven to work better.
Practically speaking, that means leftists need to consistently win gubernatorial elections before a leftist can become a presidential nominee.
Not this time. But Obama and Clinton successfully ran as a centrists, and I expect Democrats will try again in the future.
Harris lost in 2024 because Latino and Gen Z males who voted for Biden in 2020 swung to Trump in 2024.
Those voters are centrist/independents, and identify as neither Democrat nor Republican. They voted Democrat in 2020 and Democrats need to win them back in 2028.
Ok, “leader of Our Revolution”. If Democrats are a failure then form your own party and show Democrats how it’s done.
If America tries to rename the Gulf of Mexico, then Mexico should rename itself “Real America”.
Bonus: it also works in Spanish.
The important thing isn’t stopping genocide. The important thing is that leftists feel good about themselves.
They removed the delegates of New Hampshire, because New Hampshire didn’t follow the rules. New Hampshire thought it was entitled to vote first even though it was clearly another state’s turn to vote first.
Eventually the DNC ended up reinstating the NH delegates.
No, they didn’t.
“Accepting pardon is an admission of guilt” is found as dicta (non-binding commentary) in Burdick v. United States (1915).
Recently, the courts explicitly rejected that interpretation.
Senior U.S. Circuit Judge David Ebel declined to adopt that “draconian” reading of Burdick, saying the statement was an aside, or dicta, in the court’s overall holding on the legal effect of someone’s unaccepted pardon.
Ebel said no court since had ever held that accepting a pardon was akin to confessing guilt and that the ruling instead simply meant that accepting one “only makes the pardonee look guilty by implying or imputing that he needs the pardon.”
Furthermore, “actual innocence” is among the criteria used to determine who should be pardoned.
Sure, the president could do exactly that if he wanted to. For example, Hunter Biden was pardoned for anything he did between 2014 and today.
Of course pardons are always retroactive, so Hunter does not get a free crime spree after his pardon.
And presidential pardons only apply to federal prosecution. Murder is a state crime, so it is not covered by a presidental pardon.
But if Hunter lied on his IRS forms in 2018 or committed mail fraud in 2022 or hacked a federal database last week, then yeah he officially got away with it.
A pardon is issued to prevent any future punishment. It does not have to give any reasons and it does not have to acknowledge a crime was committed.
In our legal system, you are only considered guilty of something after conviction. So if a pardon prevents charges, then legally you were never guilty of anything.
Of course you are personally free to assume whatever you want. Some people assume only guilty people are arrested, others don’t make that assumption. You can assume only guilty people are pardoned, but others don’t make that assumption.
Reminder to all that despite its name the FEC does not control elections. Elections are controlled by the states.
The FEC enforces campaign spending laws, but as we’ve all seen even lawbreakers can be elected president.