• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    William on This part is interesting…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on This part is interesting…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    Niles on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on This part is interesting…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    tamens on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    Sweet Sue on This part is interesting…
    riverdaughter on This part is interesting…
    riverdaughter on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
    Niles on I’d hate to be this DOJ lawyer…
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    January 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Dec   Feb »
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Fundraising Update and the Art Of Thinking
      We have raised $9,353. That means we’ve reached the first two milestones, and I’ll write sixteen reviews of books with useful information. The final milestone is at $11,000, and is to be a booklet, “How To Think: Understanding the World.” The fundraiser will end at midnight this coming Friday, June 28th. DONATE OR SUBSCRIBE I […]
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

Emergency Powers. Thank you Patriot Act. {{facepalm}}

Hey, do you want to read something scary? Check this article in The Atlantic: What the President Could Do if He Declares a State of Emergency.

There were provisions in the Patriot Act that enhanced the ability of the president to take drastic measures in case of an emergency or faux emergency. You do not want to be “designated”. The scary thing is that concerned parties will immediately take it to the courts but who knows how long it will take to determine whether the president has abused his powers?

But wait! There’s more:

Due to the government shutdown, the courts will be the next entity to be unpaid. That will happen on Friday.

So, this shutdown looks like it was staged to create the maximum amount of dysfunction, to derail Congress and to impose some harsh autocratic rules.

The networks are doing all of us a disservice if they don’t focus on this tonight.

Here’s a short summary of the article:


23 Responses

  1. Yes, the shutdown was intended as a way to create harsh autocratic rules. Trump is not smart enough to figure any of this out; he has some “advisors” who game it out for him. When he said that the shutdown might last months or years, that was because it was fed to him, maybe by Russia.

    I think that the Democrats and indeed the American people need to test all of this out, to see if the constitutional republic will hold. File for an emergency ruling by the Supreme Court, which can be done. If the Court allows a President to subvert the budget authorizations by Congress, then we have no more balance of powers. But it also would allow a Democratic President to do the same thing. In fact, any president could just about do what he or she wanted, and then let the courts keep sorting it out. Not a recipe for a viable democracy, but if that is what the newly stacked Supreme Court wants, then that is what we will have. Right now, the networks are allowing Trump to make a national address to the nation about a bogus issue that he is only pursuing because he is obsessed with “winning” every point, and because a few right-wing people have goaded him into it. The media has abdicated any standing of being a guardrail for democracy; they are enablers of a would-be dictator who plays them for ratings. But I assume that they will cover the impeachment, as well.

    • That is certainly the way it works and why the partisan maneuvering by Republicans these last few years is absolutely stupid and short sighted. The pendulum always swings the other way and the GOP base is very old to start with. By opening up these avenues they may find that they’ve destroyed their party. We all know that conservatism is dead anyway and these guys are just radical pretenders trying to line their pockets. When Democrats regain the upper hand they really, really need to step up and do the right thing and destroy this faux conservative fascist movement by making examples of everyone who did willingly break the law, commit election fraud and treason.

  2. I should have mentioned that with AOL inadvertently writing ads for Republicans to run on, we may not see a Democratic President. I’m all for raising the upper level tax rates some, to make up for the Republicans always cutting them. But her vehement statements do no good, not nearly enough would vote for them, and of course they get used as a “parade of horrors” to scare people into not voting for Democrats in general. Isn’t it strange how a frosh Democrat from an immensely blue district, gets covered virtually every day? It is partly because she is so full of herself that she thinks that everyone wants to hear from her; and more pointedly, because the right-wing forces think that she is a gift to them.

    • I am definitely in favor of adding additional tiers to the tax code and a top of 70% is fine. The problem with raising taxes on upper brackets is that even if you lower the taxes on the current brackets by 1% each, and add additional brackets with rates above 35% the majority of the US populace seems unable to understand how a graduated income tax works. There needs to be some major drive to educate people that if say AOC gets her wish and there is a 70% top bracket with lets arbitrarily say 1 $1,000,000 threshold… if your taxable income is $1,000,001 the tax you pay is not $700,000; you will only pay the 70% rate on $1. The upper class has been duping the lower classes with this for years, and it should stop

      • Jmac, of course you are right, but few understand this. They think that 70% means 70% for everyone. But even beyond that, people unfortunately are very much against taxes being raised. The best way to do it, is to get elected, and then do a budget which raises taxes a bit on the wealthiest. I have no problem at all with upper rates of 70%, but it would never win an election. She seems like Sanders, just throwing things out without electoral backing. If I thought that we could run on massive hikes in the tax rates for very wealthy people, I would be all for it. But it’s a sure loser. And you know that Wall Street would deliberately tank the markets just to show how unhappy they were. And corporations would throw tantrums, and move out of the country, or lay off all sorts of workers just to get the Democrats blamed for it. Business has such a foothold in our country, that they get to run all the financial policy. Bill Clinton tried to raise the rates about 3%, and he only very narrowly got his budget passed, the one that Republicans and their business allies said would destroy the economy. Of course, it didn’t, but some years later, GW Bush got in, and gave it all back; just as the last Congress did with Obama’s small raise in the marginal rate. We have to win first; and radical tax proposals will just hamper that.

        • But it’s a sure loser

          This is only because the 1%, who are the ones who would face paying more, control the congress. Now that they have control they will continue to try and increase their already firm control. Control will not be taken back drip by drip… it has to be ripped back, and those who are pulling the strings the corporations and Wall St. have to be removed. Short of a revolution, I am not sure how it happens; but simply not trying because it will fail is not the answer (see Obama). It’s times like this that I wish we had a parliamentary system.

      • Here is the explanation that needs to be taught in middle school (where I am presuming an understanding of percentages has taken place)

  3. We know trump does not read and is a mega ignoramus. He does not know what is in the Patriots Act. So who is directing him to do these things?

    MAGA Maggie and her brand instead of writing about trump’s sneezes or other gossip, can she dig around to who is whispering in trump’s ears about all this?

  4. It is not that he is doing these egregious things but if you focus on the effect they have on America and how it is weakening everything that was held sacred, the rule of law, norms, traditions, lack of corruption, you start to see the clear picture. He is NOT doing things to make America better. He should be removed from office. People need to start ascribing motive here. It is not one person who for all intents and purposes is an idiot but who else is behind all this.

  5. Beyond the courts, though, we have a Democratic majority in the House. This means that if Trump declares a national emergency the House can hold hearings on the facts he uses to declare the emergency. The man uses false numbers all the time, so that coming out in a House hearing would be good for the American people to see.

  6. The lawyers are American doing the dirty deed for the Russian company. Maybe the Russian company is trying to see if trump has turned enough judges and corrupted the judiciary (the presiding judge in this case is a trump appointee and she did scold the lawyers for the Russian company). This is all a game in further weakening of America.

    • Seriously? “Apparently some of these brave self proclaimed patriots were whipped into their frenzy by a cable television ENTERTAINER UNKNOWN to undersigned Counsel named Rachel Maddow” !!!! Do they live under a rock? Her “variety” program? These people should be disbarred and deported to the Motherland where they will be less busy but no doubt happier….

  7. Let’s have a massive boycott to Ignoramus’ plenteous of circus…

    TURN OFF your TV…do not watch his non-emergency faux Origanum dictamnus…

    Make it viral…

  8. So cool!

  9. How do they not realize that we, Hillary supporters exist and are the majority? No way I would vote for Biden with or without this.

    • BUNGLED? Joe never makes it past the primaries and never will. Does this idiot not know what is going on daily with respect to the STOLEN 2016 election?

  10. Let us hear more of this from more Rs. No way to run a government.

  11. Whoa! Impressive. None of my tweepers tweeted anything about the buffoon’s speech.

  12. Notice MAGA Maggie’s tweet is on Nov 9, 2016 and see how conveniently she says the incriminating part was left out of the article. why?

  13. What’s with President Sniffles? Seriously, what fatal disease or addiction is he suffering from?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: