[IAmBroom]

Oh, we're clear.

We're just powerless to do anything, as the (probably) legally elected administration runs this ship like its own personal party barge into ... everything in sight.

Our Checks refuse to speak up in Congress, and our Balances keep voting to make the (current) POTUS immune to the law.

[octoberfranklin]

Frankly, both parties feel like the "elected administration runs this ship like its own personal party barge" when they're out of power.

If you don't like that, the only solution is to push for limited government next time you're in power.

Whatever power you put into the hands of the government is guaranteed to fall into your enemy's hands some day. This is a deliberate design feature of the US political system. It's the only way to get people to wake up for the need to limit government power.

A good start would be ending selective prosecution by restoring the original role of grand juries: to decide whether or not to hire a contract prosecutor for a single case. Public Prosecutors can be just like Public Defenders -- contractors of the court, with no discretionary powers.

[panda-giddiness]

> Whatever power you put into the hands of the government is guaranteed to fall into your enemy's hands some day.

Only if there's a functioning system of checks and balances. Unfortunately, there is not. This Court is willing to use motivated reasoning to achieve its preferred outcomes; to slow-walking favorable rulings for Democrats while expediting favorable rulings for Republicans (often without explanation via the "shadow docket"); and to throw out decades of precedent in the process by ignoring stare decisis, a bedrock legal principle which ensures stability of the judicial process.

Just to give an example, consider the ban on universal (national) injunctions. One might be surprised to learn that it was the Biden administration that initially petitioned the Court for the ban. However, the Court found such a ban unnecessary then (i.e., when lower Courts were blocking the Biden administration's agenda), but conveniently found it necessary during the second Trump administration (when lower courts started blocking the Trump administration's agenda). And just as another kick in the balls, they used the birthright citizen case as a vehicle to bring the matter to Court, strengthening the President without even deigning to address the Trump administration's obviously illegal executive order.

The result of this mess is that, if the Trump administration is eventually voted out, it is highly unlikely that an incoming Democratic administration would be able to capitalize on the expansion of executive powers that this Court has given to this President. We see a similar situation in Poland. After ~a decade in power the Law & Justice party was voted out, but the new coalition government has not inherited the same ability to government, with its agenda constantly curtailed by Law & Justice appointees embedded throughout the government (including the highest court).

[Fazebooking]

Thats def not the same though.

Trump doesn't take the normal route as any other president did.

Of course with his second term, at least people can't complain how he interacts with your ex allies like us germany. Thats fair to do, shitty and short viewed but hey.

But certain things like his fraud coins etc. this is bluntly illegal and he did not do this shit in his first term.