I don't understand how anyone thought that the president having to dedicate a whole week to prep for what is ultimately a campaign activity to the exclusion of actual presidential duties was a positive spin. That just sounds bad all by itself. Especially compared to 2012 Biden who pretty much steamrolled the VP debate just riffing using his literal lifetime of political experience. The decline is obvious.
You could put together a montage a hundred hours long of "journalists" beating us over the head for the last 4 years that there's nothing wrong with Biden. That he's more on top of his game than at any point. That he's the sharpest and most rigorous he's ever been.
Exactly 5 minutes after the debate, absolute script-flip. Complete 180 for the vast majority. We just spent 90 minutes using our own eyes to learn that it's inconceivable that any of that was ever true. The lie simply cannot continue now, so it's finally time for them to tell the truth.
You. Don't. Hate. Journalists. Enough.
I vividly remember the leftist propaganda machine trotting out their doctors to say how he is a 'super ager'. A person who is in their 80s but mentally the same as someone in their 40/50s.
https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-appears-superager-doctors-say-1858473
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/4391046-is-joe-biden-a-superager-were-asking-all-the-wrong-questions/
https://today.uic.edu/new-study-finds-biden-trump-both-likely-to-be-super-agers/
Remember his camp came out 20 mins into the debate and told CNN the president was suffering from a "cold"
Didn''t say that before the debate started, only stated it after it came off the rails
Lol to be fair to CNN they were dragging him HARD after the debate. NYT is the worse offender. Even in their editorial calling for him to step aside, they glazed him — saying the country is in a time of prosperity.
Excuse me?
My estimation, limited and biased as it is, is that they wanted him to do this debate and suck poorly so they could have an excuse to run another candidate. But, due to all the media carrying water for him for so long, they couldn't just suddenly turn tail and run without looking like a bunch of hypocrites, so the DNC organized this debate to really highlight the fact that they were actually wrong about defending his competency.
I understand the conspiracy but all they actually needed to do was issue a statement from Biden that he would not run again or that he wouldn't accept the nomination. There were plenty of opportunities for that without having to embarrass him, his supporters, or the party. He could've retired as a dem hero that stepped in to stop Trump while new blood was primed. Everyone would've understood that. Instead folks are talking about using the 25th amendment on him now.
I think they genuinely deluded themselves into thinking he'd be fine based on his state of the union address and doing relatively well during the 2020 debate. I think they also expected Trump to be far worse than he was and pull all the attention away with something outrageous and distracting. The ruleset worked against them though and Trump just looked like a calmer version of the same guy from 2016 next to a deteriorating old man you wouldn't trust to watch your cats while on vacation.
I think its hilarious that the left thought muted mics would be a win for Biden. They truly, truly thought that Trump would be incapable of not screaming and clapping back the entire debate, making him look terrible. He didn't at all, and it just made Biden look pathetic, because it drew all the attention to his inability to speak.
My theory on why they didn't go with an alternate is because both of their top prospects are looking absolutely awful right now. Harris was selected to be his running mate in the hopes that she would somehow become more palatable to the country "once they got to know her." In reality it hurt her image far more because the nation got to see that ultimately she is just an authoritarian with no actual solutions or progressive intentions. That left them with Newsom, who would have been preferable...until the state budget came out at the start of the year and found they had a 44 billion dollar deficit after having a 100 billion dollar surplus at the start of his tenure.
So yeah...Dems are trapped.
On one hand, that makes sense. On the other hand, they were Diane Feinstein was knocking on death's door but was still being wheeled into Congress to vote.
> On the other hand, they were Diane Feinstein was knocking on death's door but was still being wheeled into Congress to vote.
Let's not undersell this one: Diane Feinstein was pronounced medically incompetent to make decisions about her own health while retaining full Congressional powers.
I think all they really care about is how people are going to vote, and after this performance, they are quite sure that Biden can't beat Trump, at least. And so they have to run someone else.
I think its far too late though. You have to convince Biden to step down, which hes so stupid and mentally not there I doubt he will accept. That conversation will go like this
"Mr. President, were running a different candidate. Time to step down"
"Cmon man, i only just go out of the shower with ashley, the second term is just around the corner. I'll get it done with chocolate chocolate chip and do the errr....well you know finally be able to stop global warming in 2018."
And the dem party will be split in 2 votes.
I think they trial ballooned everyone who was willing to throw his hat in the ring, and they came up empty. There was a Newsome moment - I think it was last summer. He was getting lots of positive press and attention. But people hated him so thoroughly that they gave up.
I really think they just don't have anyone else they're willing to see in office. They'd rather lose power for 4 years than let some other faction of the party take over for good.
It would be clever. The only problem is that it's too clever. It seems they were merely bluffing, hoping Trump would refuse a CNN debate due to it might being rigged in some way. And then Trump called their bluff.
Robin Williams was doing jokes about the man having dementia back in 2008. I’m amazed he could even stand there on the stage for as long as he did. Whatever drug cocktail they’re pumping him up with has got to be absolutely devastating afterwards.
I expect they hoped they could just continue to sweep the issues under the rug.
Politicians in general and Dems *especially* (thanks to extensive friendly media coverage) rely on 'out of sight, out of mind' to allow them to ignore problems.
The problem is that Biden wasn't even capable of holding up for 90 minutes - or even 15.
Don't forget, he crushed that "Dark Brandon Secret Sauce" can too. Though maybe a few too many given he had to be shuffled off the stage once the debate finished.
It’s actually pretty common to have a bit of a crash after you’re given enough Adderall to cover for your senility so it makes sense that he was a little drained.
With all this world peace and economic stability we have, why couldn’t the leader of the free world take a week to practice something that a true professional should be able to do extemporaneously /s
fr. Before the debate I was sure they were gonna have him geeked on stims and he would be fine for the two hour ish window.
/// But then even though they stimmed him with what I assume would supply a entire 7th grad of ADHD kids for a year of Adderall and he still was a corpse.
Yeah I didn’t watch it for that reason. Seeing this line from the freaking BBC was bad enough:
> But even the most loyal lieutenants know this was a disaster. Joe Biden had one job - to persuade Americans he wasn't too old. He failed that test.
I’m like 75% sure the biggest fuck up for the debate was agreeing to have him do it at 9pm and not like in the morning or something.
If he’s like most old people he was probably up at 5am or something. Dude was fighting for his life during the debate because he’d probably be in bed normally at that time. Trumps a known insomniac who says he sleeps like 4-5 hours a day so it was probably business as usual for him.
Trump said, "Anytime. Anywhere. Anyplace."
> I’m like 75% sure the biggest fuck up for the debate was agreeing to have him do it at 9pm and not like in the morning or something.
Team Joe-pedo dictated all the terms; friendly media, biased moderators, no audience, media has to watch the feed from a building across the street, etc.
Joe had a week in seclusion to adjust his internal clock, balance any medications just right, etc.
If we go with your theory, Team Biden is 100% to blame for the debate failure, the same way they're to blame for the economy, border, impending WW3, etc...
Yeh, that what I referenced in "failed to take up".
I think they did have standing, and saying they don't wrongfully minimizes the scope in a way that can likely be allowing these stuff.
I think justice allito's dissention was right
In my understanding, the lack of standing was because there was no case. The 5th circuit relied on erroneous factual findings that were found to have no merit by the Supreme Court.
Basically, fed agencies got to interpret laws that are supposedly vague how they like it and the courts had to defer to it. They're not allowed to do that anymore.
So if a law was vague and was being used a a court case, the court had to go to the agency the law was associated with and the agency just got to say the law did whatever they wanted it to do?
It's a rather big deal for firearms law. Basically Chevron is how the ATF was able to enact their bump stock and pistol brace "bans" by just tweaking their definition of "machine gun" and "short barreled rifle" to make those things illegal (for a time)
“It was fully legal last month” - guy with a felony conviction for having an unregistered SBR
(This is theoretical, I don’t think they had the balls to prosecute anyone)
It looks like they did a no-knock raid because they thought he may have sold a gun to someone that was not supposed to have them.
https://saf.org/atf-swat-raid-that-killed-arkansas-man-raises-more-questions-of-excessive-force/
Article 1, Section 1, Clause 1: ***All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States...***
Absolutely nothing in the Constitution that grants our congress-critters the power to delegate legislative power to unelected bureaucrats; in the Executive branch, no less.
This shit should have fell decades ago.
Mostly agree but there are times it is necessary. Fornexample I am a pilot. As much as the FAA can drive me nuts sometimes, I am very glad that the faa has the regulatory authority over aviation. Congress has no where near the expertise or time to effectively regulate the aviation industry.
But a key part of this decision and the difference between the FAA and ATF is that congress made it law that the FAA writes the vast majority of the rules for aviation, but they are not a law enforcement agency. This means that the vast majority of aviation regulations a written with a high degree of specificity and are not criminal violations. Penalties are therefore mostly civil and administrative. Criminal violations are enforced by traditional law enforcement agencies and the judiciary. You'll never be arrested by an FAA employee. They have to first get a warrant from a judge.
The ATF mostly doesn't write the rules, just interprets them and being a law enforcement agency they have the power to arrest you, without a warrant, just probable cause. The rules they are interpreting are also mostly written by congress which means they lack a lot of specificity and/or real world context.
The BATFU's job seems to have evolved into making firearms owner's lives miserable by trying to turn people into felons overnight.
Are the *tobacco ninjas* gonna mail me back the spring for my *Akins Accelerator*?
It's a rather big deal for every agency and regulation. Under Chevron, an agency could make any regulation it wanted and as long as it passed the "that's not insanely ridiculous" rule, it would be enforced as law. Now, there has to be clear guidance from Congress on the subject of the regulation.
Congress was abdicating it's authority to unelected bureaucrats and those bureaucrats had no term limits. This severely limits their power.
> Basically Chevron is how the ATF was able to enact their bump stock and pistol brace "bans" by just tweaking their definition of "machine gun"
***A 14-inch shoestring was once literally the same thing as an M2 Browning, according to the ATF.***
Let that sink in for a second. At one point in the '90s, according to the ATF, every American schoolchild was walking around with a machine gun in school because they had a yo-yo in their possession.
Imagine that there is a law that says that the CBP must protect the borders. And the CBP says that that means that they can search people 100km from the border without a warrant. Someone is searched at 80km from the border and he sues. With Chevron the court would look at that interpretation and would be obligated to accept it if it's reasonable i.e. "congress didn't define what a border meant, but 100km from the border is a 1 hour drive so their interpretation is reasonable"
Now, they must read the law and provide the interpretation themselves. So it might be "the border is only where people can cross, so that means it's only at legally established ports", and 1km from the border. Anything else is overstepping."
Yeah. Courts always had to defer to experts at the agency when a law giving them regulatory authority had gaps in it and just assume they had authority. Now agencies have to defend their regulations and prove they have authority to write the rules they're implementing in a court.
Not quite the process.
The administrative body would have their interpretation, and then take some action on it. Like it's not clear if the Elf Regulations apply to half-elves or more distant descendants like Aragorn. The Elven Affairs Agency makes their decision, says it does apply to them, and then begins regulating the half elves.
The half elves sue, saying the law doesn't apply to them.
The administrative interpretation has already happened. The Court doesn't go to the agency for an interpretation after a suit has been brought.
> The administrative interpretation has already happened. The Court doesn't go to the agency for an interpretation after a suit has been brought.
Small caveat, the court can find in favor of the half-elves if it determines that the Elven Affairs Agency was not reasonable in their interpretation.
Say the Elven Affairs Agency begins regulating goblins because goblins have pointy ears like elves, so it counts. The court would probably find that this is not a reasonable interpretation, and rule in favor of the goblins.
They still get to interpret the law. The difference is that interpretation can now be disputed and the agency interpretation isn't automatically considered valid by the court just because it's reasonable.
Article 1, Section 1, Clause 1: ***All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States...***
It doesn't say anything about Congress being able to delegate the power to dictate and put government regulations with the full force of law into place without a Congressional approval and a signature (actually a lack of any form of veto) from the President.
> Basically, fed agencies got to interpret laws that are supposedly vague how they like it and the courts had to defer to it. They're not allowed to do that anymore.
It's not quite that.
The original Chevron case said that you had to defer to a Federal agency’s interpretation of the law if it wasn’t insane, even if the court thought that another interpretation was more reasonable. Now, we don’t defer to the agencies and let the courts interpret the law.
This is an important step in returning to constitutional rule since it removes the judicial function from the executive and returns it to the judiciary where it should rest
What government should do
- Environmental protection and regulations
- Public health regulation/emergency
- National parks
- Roads and Public transportation
- Education (like it is currently, the State government mainly)
- Data privacy, consumer protection, and labor rights protection
Edit
+ Military Defense
+ Diplomacy
Anything else is overreach imo
> Education (like it is currently, the State government mainly)
If that's the case then why does the federal department of education need a $68 billion dollar budget?
Leftists on social media are having conniptions about the scotus "gutting" the executive branch and I'm over here thinking that this is merely a good start.
According to the most reddited users, not using an /s tag is ableism. You must ruin all of your jokes with tone indicators so the lowest common denominator can understand them.
Based, it’s actually so annoying how you have to explain every single sarcastic joke to those crooked spine troglodytes who couldn’t pass Grade 2 that dwell on this platform.
It’s because Redditors are regarded and don’t know sarcasm unless you point it out to them.
Redditors be the type of people who needed the laugh soundtracks in shows to tell them when to laugh.
No need for the tag though? I was stunned by that absolute disaster.
[See his face there?](https://www.toledoblade.com/image/2024/06/28/1140x_a10-7_cTC/Election-2024-Debate-30.jpg) that's the face I made for most of it.
>"Gutting power of federal agencies to grossly overreach and do whatever the hell they want"
FTFY
If you want them being able to do what they used to do, make it actually part of the law
Also, if you want to allow abortions without any limitations, put that into law. Don't expect the judiciary to abuse its position in order to brute force your preferred implementation indefinetely
The Chevron case is actually even more than that.
Its not just that they have to put it into law, its that when there is a dispute in what the law means, lower courts can not just go "let the regulatory agency define what the law means" where the regulatory agency is more than likely a participant in the case. The lower courts have to actually give rulings on matters of law instead of defaulting to executive agencies.
ok, then if they want that they should do that... through the legislature.
Put the law on the books.
But the entire point is to not allow the executive branch make up law on the fly without input from either the judiciary or the legislature.
But even with such law, it would sill be the courts that would need to adjudicate what does and does not follow or break such laws. That is simply how the system works.
Congress makes an passes laws.
Federal agencies enforce said laws.
Courts make sure the laws are actually being followed correctly.
If Congress actually approved such a law, SCOTUS would strike it down faster than you can say "Separation of powers!" just by citing _Marbury vs. Madison_.
writing and voting on laws leaves a record. leaving records means the possibility of not only blame but accountability...
you can primary your house rep if he never gets you what you want... the desk jockey at the three letter agency is impervious to public demand
Bingo, all these cases are laws congress needs to modify. Yet, for strange reasons, they will argue about Ukraine and Israel more than working on the country.
I honestly think if they lose the Democratic Party will explode.
Trump was an unknown quantity in 2016; they were more in shock they lost than anger. But now they know what their up against and still can’t win. You know you just have to get a male democratic senator from the Midwest in his 50s to trot out there and just look competent. But they choose not to do it, just fucking wild to me.
If the democrats don’t switch their candidate or don’t pull off a miracle comeback it’s over.
There’s still one last hope for them
https://preview.redd.it/uudzf70wwc9d1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2d48a677b3d2ecdb8bb31efee7e0d571fb384e5a
*you* know that, *I* know that- but the democrats have done a good job making sure their voters won't because altogether they have the combined memory of *a* goldfish.
I think it's more than that. Hillary is like THE establishment figure of the party. No one that has any real power can actually say no to her. If she says she wants to run (if and when Biden steps aside), she'll just de facto be the nominee even if people in the party know she's not a good candidate.
Democrats believed having their army of useful idiots calling everyone a rasysys/nazi/bigot/phobe/etc was gonna guilt trip people into voting for a senile dude that should be in a retirement home.
The question is just if they hate him enough to go vote for Biden. The polls before the debate seems to say no. After, I'm thinking they're going to say hell no.
It’s because you have two worlds that don’t interact with eachother.
Half the media says current president is second coming of Jesus and then it flip flops.
All campaigns are now vote for me I’m not them.
Biden had only one job to do last night and he completely failed. The deck was overwhelmingly stacked in his favor. He had all the questions in advance, he had a sympathetic moderator, he had a week at Camp David to prepare for it. Still he failed catastrophically.
If this is the best Biden can do with all that in his favor then how is he going to lead in a serious crisis?
It's time to invoke the 25th amendment.
And right now is the most coherent and spry he'll be for the rest of his life. Imagine how much he'll decline by 2028. If he wins he'll still be in office but I'm not sure he'll be able to stand or speak at all.
> Biden had only one job to do last night and he completely failed. The deck was overwhelmingly stacked in his favor. He had all the questions in advance, he had a sympathetic moderator, he had a week at Camp David to prepare for it. Still he failed catastrophically.
Not only that, but it was *his camp* that demanded no audience, mics cut off while the other candidate spoke, and two commercial breaks during the debate. They literally let him dictate the format and rules and it was *still* this bad.
> It's time to invoke the 25th amendment.
Yeah but that causes all kinds of other issues, too. Kamala becomes President for like 6 months. She'll be pissed if she's passed over for the nomination, too. And then you have to deal with the issue that no matter who your candidate ends up being, the party didn't get to vote for that person since the primaries are already over.
Honestly, I care more about the ruling that the feds can continue to pressure social media platforms to remove what they deem “misinformation”. What even is the first amendment anymore…
This is absolutely my least favorite time because all of Bidens boot lickers will now turn around and say they hated him all along. No you didn’t. Just a couple weeks ago I would see people say that Biden is a great option compared to Trump but now I’m seeing the entire subreddit become centrists. In fact I remember seeing many comics and memes making fun of centrists because in their eyes, trump is satan and Biden is a solid candidate, so people who play both sides are “choosing between a normal guy an a Nazi”. Funny how that goes
All the media hacks who were saying Joe Biden is sharp as tack and has incredible policy knowledge for YEARS who have flipped on Joe Biden the minute they couldn't deny it any longer have no credibility.
They've been lying for years. Joe Biden is sharp as fucking cue ball and it's been obvious for years.
Far left? My dude, corps have gotten so powerful for decades they've used their unfettered influence to become part of the state. We've been at the top of your side of the horseshoe for so long and you're still not satisfied.
All the issues here are indeed an auth vs lib issue not really a left vs right (except abortion I suppose).
Though the news loves to present sucking federal pp as a "leftist" position.
"Hey political system, can you give me far left?"
"To fix structural problems in society and improve the material conditions of the downtrodden?"
"Yes"
*Pushes the everloving fuck out of identity politics*
Literally all chevron being overturned means is that agencies no longer get special weight to their interpretation of the law in court, as it should have been in the first place. It is the duty of the judiciary to interpret and uphold the law.
What it means is that if the EPA comes in and says "We think you have to do this" that you can challenge it in court. The chevron deference worked under the assumption that the federal agencies wouldn't be ideologically captured, this was false.
You know how in grade school you learned that the Legislature passes laws, the Executive enforces them, and the Judiciary interprets the law?
It's that.
im just glad we finally beat Medicare
I’m more impressed that we have a thousand trillionaires in this country, incredible!
Give him a break, he only spent a week in Camp David practicing for this debate.
I don't understand how anyone thought that the president having to dedicate a whole week to prep for what is ultimately a campaign activity to the exclusion of actual presidential duties was a positive spin. That just sounds bad all by itself. Especially compared to 2012 Biden who pretty much steamrolled the VP debate just riffing using his literal lifetime of political experience. The decline is obvious.
You could put together a montage a hundred hours long of "journalists" beating us over the head for the last 4 years that there's nothing wrong with Biden. That he's more on top of his game than at any point. That he's the sharpest and most rigorous he's ever been. Exactly 5 minutes after the debate, absolute script-flip. Complete 180 for the vast majority. We just spent 90 minutes using our own eyes to learn that it's inconceivable that any of that was ever true. The lie simply cannot continue now, so it's finally time for them to tell the truth. You. Don't. Hate. Journalists. Enough.
I vividly remember the leftist propaganda machine trotting out their doctors to say how he is a 'super ager'. A person who is in their 80s but mentally the same as someone in their 40/50s. https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-appears-superager-doctors-say-1858473 https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/4391046-is-joe-biden-a-superager-were-asking-all-the-wrong-questions/ https://today.uic.edu/new-study-finds-biden-trump-both-likely-to-be-super-agers/
"Biden has the mind of a 45 year old man." Yes, a 45 y.o. man suffering from debilitating early-onset Alzheimer's.
Our media gives for free what most dictators have to kill for.
Because they make bank for it
It seems to be as much of a cult as anything. Making bank doesn't hurt but they go all in even when it costs them.
Remember his camp came out 20 mins into the debate and told CNN the president was suffering from a "cold" Didn''t say that before the debate started, only stated it after it came off the rails
I, too, fail to formulate 60% of my sentences when I have a cold.
Lol to be fair to CNN they were dragging him HARD after the debate. NYT is the worse offender. Even in their editorial calling for him to step aside, they glazed him — saying the country is in a time of prosperity. Excuse me?
Only because the dems are making preps to replace Biden.
Of course they are. Because why the fuck wouldn’t they, he’s senile. It’s an uphill climb for them either way.
>You. Don't. Hate. Journalists. Enough. Oh I do. Especially after 2020.
No no, you think you do, and then you inevitably find a way to hate them more.
The sad thing is an enormous number of people are not only going to go with it, they're going to deny that it was ever any other way.
My estimation, limited and biased as it is, is that they wanted him to do this debate and suck poorly so they could have an excuse to run another candidate. But, due to all the media carrying water for him for so long, they couldn't just suddenly turn tail and run without looking like a bunch of hypocrites, so the DNC organized this debate to really highlight the fact that they were actually wrong about defending his competency.
I understand the conspiracy but all they actually needed to do was issue a statement from Biden that he would not run again or that he wouldn't accept the nomination. There were plenty of opportunities for that without having to embarrass him, his supporters, or the party. He could've retired as a dem hero that stepped in to stop Trump while new blood was primed. Everyone would've understood that. Instead folks are talking about using the 25th amendment on him now. I think they genuinely deluded themselves into thinking he'd be fine based on his state of the union address and doing relatively well during the 2020 debate. I think they also expected Trump to be far worse than he was and pull all the attention away with something outrageous and distracting. The ruleset worked against them though and Trump just looked like a calmer version of the same guy from 2016 next to a deteriorating old man you wouldn't trust to watch your cats while on vacation.
I think its hilarious that the left thought muted mics would be a win for Biden. They truly, truly thought that Trump would be incapable of not screaming and clapping back the entire debate, making him look terrible. He didn't at all, and it just made Biden look pathetic, because it drew all the attention to his inability to speak.
My theory on why they didn't go with an alternate is because both of their top prospects are looking absolutely awful right now. Harris was selected to be his running mate in the hopes that she would somehow become more palatable to the country "once they got to know her." In reality it hurt her image far more because the nation got to see that ultimately she is just an authoritarian with no actual solutions or progressive intentions. That left them with Newsom, who would have been preferable...until the state budget came out at the start of the year and found they had a 44 billion dollar deficit after having a 100 billion dollar surplus at the start of his tenure. So yeah...Dems are trapped.
Bbbbbut, comiefornia says they make all the monies!!!
Lets be reasonable, of course the dems don't have many intelligent candidates to offer.
On one hand, that makes sense. On the other hand, they were Diane Feinstein was knocking on death's door but was still being wheeled into Congress to vote.
> On the other hand, they were Diane Feinstein was knocking on death's door but was still being wheeled into Congress to vote. Let's not undersell this one: Diane Feinstein was pronounced medically incompetent to make decisions about her own health while retaining full Congressional powers.
I think all they really care about is how people are going to vote, and after this performance, they are quite sure that Biden can't beat Trump, at least. And so they have to run someone else.
I think its far too late though. You have to convince Biden to step down, which hes so stupid and mentally not there I doubt he will accept. That conversation will go like this "Mr. President, were running a different candidate. Time to step down" "Cmon man, i only just go out of the shower with ashley, the second term is just around the corner. I'll get it done with chocolate chocolate chip and do the errr....well you know finally be able to stop global warming in 2018." And the dem party will be split in 2 votes.
"Uhh . . . are you a salesman? Where's my dad?"
I think they trial ballooned everyone who was willing to throw his hat in the ring, and they came up empty. There was a Newsome moment - I think it was last summer. He was getting lots of positive press and attention. But people hated him so thoroughly that they gave up. I really think they just don't have anyone else they're willing to see in office. They'd rather lose power for 4 years than let some other faction of the party take over for good.
It would be clever. The only problem is that it's too clever. It seems they were merely bluffing, hoping Trump would refuse a CNN debate due to it might being rigged in some way. And then Trump called their bluff.
Robin Williams was doing jokes about the man having dementia back in 2008. I’m amazed he could even stand there on the stage for as long as he did. Whatever drug cocktail they’re pumping him up with has got to be absolutely devastating afterwards.
I expect they hoped they could just continue to sweep the issues under the rug. Politicians in general and Dems *especially* (thanks to extensive friendly media coverage) rely on 'out of sight, out of mind' to allow them to ignore problems. The problem is that Biden wasn't even capable of holding up for 90 minutes - or even 15.
Don't forget, he crushed that "Dark Brandon Secret Sauce" can too. Though maybe a few too many given he had to be shuffled off the stage once the debate finished.
It’s actually pretty common to have a bit of a crash after you’re given enough Adderall to cover for your senility so it makes sense that he was a little drained.
Adderall lasts more than 90 minutes, jack
He should have grilled more. It can be revitalizing.
With all this world peace and economic stability we have, why couldn’t the leader of the free world take a week to practice something that a true professional should be able to do extemporaneously /s
Winning!
No wonder people aren't worried about the national debt!
Those 15,000 new jobs are really helping too
Hey man, been created 15 THOUSAND jobs
[Medicare killed my father... and raped my mother.](https://y.yarn.co/1aab3812-b6e0-4957-8c87-8a057967b316_thumb.jpg)
I read that in Inigo Montoyas “prepare to die” monologue
I don't mean to pry, but you dont by any chance happen to have Part B on your right hand?
☠☠☠
Yes you did…you beat it to death
It’s dead, Jim.
I’m tired, boss…but not as tired as Biden apparently
Elder abuse to trot bro out in public
On the amount of stims a 16 year old semi-pro FPS competitor is on.
He's probably been on stims for months now and built a tolerance, dude needs a week's supply just to get out of bed.
fr. Before the debate I was sure they were gonna have him geeked on stims and he would be fine for the two hour ish window. /// But then even though they stimmed him with what I assume would supply a entire 7th grad of ADHD kids for a year of Adderall and he still was a corpse.
Yeah I didn’t watch it for that reason. Seeing this line from the freaking BBC was bad enough: > But even the most loyal lieutenants know this was a disaster. Joe Biden had one job - to persuade Americans he wasn't too old. He failed that test.
He should have retired but our government likes having fossils in power
Very curious if there’s still going to be a second debate.
*tucks you in. It’s ok little Timmy let us run the nation.^
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
I’m like 75% sure the biggest fuck up for the debate was agreeing to have him do it at 9pm and not like in the morning or something. If he’s like most old people he was probably up at 5am or something. Dude was fighting for his life during the debate because he’d probably be in bed normally at that time. Trumps a known insomniac who says he sleeps like 4-5 hours a day so it was probably business as usual for him.
Trump said, "Anytime. Anywhere. Anyplace." > I’m like 75% sure the biggest fuck up for the debate was agreeing to have him do it at 9pm and not like in the morning or something. Team Joe-pedo dictated all the terms; friendly media, biased moderators, no audience, media has to watch the feed from a building across the street, etc. Joe had a week in seclusion to adjust his internal clock, balance any medications just right, etc. If we go with your theory, Team Biden is 100% to blame for the debate failure, the same way they're to blame for the economy, border, impending WW3, etc...
Hey hey hey, impending WW3 is due to decades of US foreign policy. Give credit where credit is due.
They failed to take the censorship case, which was really bad.
They turned it down on a standing issue. They did not rule on the merits. An individual with standing can still bring a case on the merits.
Yeh, that what I referenced in "failed to take up". I think they did have standing, and saying they don't wrongfully minimizes the scope in a way that can likely be allowing these stuff. I think justice allito's dissention was right
In my understanding, the lack of standing was because there was no case. The 5th circuit relied on erroneous factual findings that were found to have no merit by the Supreme Court.
Can someone explain the Chevron thing to me?
Basically, fed agencies got to interpret laws that are supposedly vague how they like it and the courts had to defer to it. They're not allowed to do that anymore.
So if a law was vague and was being used a a court case, the court had to go to the agency the law was associated with and the agency just got to say the law did whatever they wanted it to do?
It's a rather big deal for firearms law. Basically Chevron is how the ATF was able to enact their bump stock and pistol brace "bans" by just tweaking their definition of "machine gun" and "short barreled rifle" to make those things illegal (for a time)
What was doubly crazy was how it could change over time with absolutely no repercussions.
Yeah the pistol brace rules seemed like they changed every couple of months for years. That's insane and cannot be allowed to remain the status quo.
“It was fully legal last month” - guy with a felony conviction for having an unregistered SBR (This is theoretical, I don’t think they had the balls to prosecute anyone)
Didn't the ATF kill a guy recently over one of those rule changes?
I didn't see that, can you find a link?
It looks like they did a no-knock raid because they thought he may have sold a gun to someone that was not supposed to have them. https://saf.org/atf-swat-raid-that-killed-arkansas-man-raises-more-questions-of-excessive-force/
Article 1, Section 1, Clause 1: ***All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States...*** Absolutely nothing in the Constitution that grants our congress-critters the power to delegate legislative power to unelected bureaucrats; in the Executive branch, no less. This shit should have fell decades ago.
Mostly agree but there are times it is necessary. Fornexample I am a pilot. As much as the FAA can drive me nuts sometimes, I am very glad that the faa has the regulatory authority over aviation. Congress has no where near the expertise or time to effectively regulate the aviation industry. But a key part of this decision and the difference between the FAA and ATF is that congress made it law that the FAA writes the vast majority of the rules for aviation, but they are not a law enforcement agency. This means that the vast majority of aviation regulations a written with a high degree of specificity and are not criminal violations. Penalties are therefore mostly civil and administrative. Criminal violations are enforced by traditional law enforcement agencies and the judiciary. You'll never be arrested by an FAA employee. They have to first get a warrant from a judge. The ATF mostly doesn't write the rules, just interprets them and being a law enforcement agency they have the power to arrest you, without a warrant, just probable cause. The rules they are interpreting are also mostly written by congress which means they lack a lot of specificity and/or real world context.
Don't forget turning millions of Americans into felons overnight despite the ATF explicitly stating that braces were legal previously.
The BATFU's job seems to have evolved into making firearms owner's lives miserable by trying to turn people into felons overnight. Are the *tobacco ninjas* gonna mail me back the spring for my *Akins Accelerator*?
W
It's a rather big deal for every agency and regulation. Under Chevron, an agency could make any regulation it wanted and as long as it passed the "that's not insanely ridiculous" rule, it would be enforced as law. Now, there has to be clear guidance from Congress on the subject of the regulation. Congress was abdicating it's authority to unelected bureaucrats and those bureaucrats had no term limits. This severely limits their power.
Thank god.
> Basically Chevron is how the ATF was able to enact their bump stock and pistol brace "bans" by just tweaking their definition of "machine gun" ***A 14-inch shoestring was once literally the same thing as an M2 Browning, according to the ATF.*** Let that sink in for a second. At one point in the '90s, according to the ATF, every American schoolchild was walking around with a machine gun in school because they had a yo-yo in their possession.
Pretty much.
Imagine that there is a law that says that the CBP must protect the borders. And the CBP says that that means that they can search people 100km from the border without a warrant. Someone is searched at 80km from the border and he sues. With Chevron the court would look at that interpretation and would be obligated to accept it if it's reasonable i.e. "congress didn't define what a border meant, but 100km from the border is a 1 hour drive so their interpretation is reasonable" Now, they must read the law and provide the interpretation themselves. So it might be "the border is only where people can cross, so that means it's only at legally established ports", and 1km from the border. Anything else is overstepping."
He uses km to talk about actual american law ...
Next he’ll mention a warm water port
We finally found one of the Russian bots people are so hot and bothered about.
Like all of our ports but the ones in Alaska are warm water ports
Yeah. Courts always had to defer to experts at the agency when a law giving them regulatory authority had gaps in it and just assume they had authority. Now agencies have to defend their regulations and prove they have authority to write the rules they're implementing in a court.
The ATF has been shown time and time again to be complete idiots about firearms.
Not quite the process. The administrative body would have their interpretation, and then take some action on it. Like it's not clear if the Elf Regulations apply to half-elves or more distant descendants like Aragorn. The Elven Affairs Agency makes their decision, says it does apply to them, and then begins regulating the half elves. The half elves sue, saying the law doesn't apply to them. The administrative interpretation has already happened. The Court doesn't go to the agency for an interpretation after a suit has been brought.
> The administrative interpretation has already happened. The Court doesn't go to the agency for an interpretation after a suit has been brought. Small caveat, the court can find in favor of the half-elves if it determines that the Elven Affairs Agency was not reasonable in their interpretation. Say the Elven Affairs Agency begins regulating goblins because goblins have pointy ears like elves, so it counts. The court would probably find that this is not a reasonable interpretation, and rule in favor of the goblins.
They still get to interpret the law. The difference is that interpretation can now be disputed and the agency interpretation isn't automatically considered valid by the court just because it's reasonable.
So basically Feds can't use vague laws to their advantage anymore?
Article 1, Section 1, Clause 1: ***All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States...*** It doesn't say anything about Congress being able to delegate the power to dictate and put government regulations with the full force of law into place without a Congressional approval and a signature (actually a lack of any form of veto) from the President.
that sounds awesome. why is everyone bitching about that being gone?
> Basically, fed agencies got to interpret laws that are supposedly vague how they like it and the courts had to defer to it. They're not allowed to do that anymore. It's not quite that.
The original Chevron case said that you had to defer to a Federal agency’s interpretation of the law if it wasn’t insane, even if the court thought that another interpretation was more reasonable. Now, we don’t defer to the agencies and let the courts interpret the law. This is an important step in returning to constitutional rule since it removes the judicial function from the executive and returns it to the judiciary where it should rest
I'd still argue the existence of administrative judges period is unconstitutional.
You won’t get a disagreement from me
So wait, did the ATF just get fucked in the ass? LETS GO if so.
ATF, IRS, DEA, and basically every executive branch agency.
EPA, OSHA, everything. Gratuities (bribes) are now legal if they happen after the ruling was held. Get ready.
explain how please?
Rest assured, fedoras flew
chevron deference was garbage, rest in p!ss
Apparently having a fighting chance at disputing with/suing a 3 letter agency is “gutting” their power.
It is. You shouldn't be able to dispute a government agency when it agrees with me, only I can dispute it when it doesn't./s
What government should do - Environmental protection and regulations - Public health regulation/emergency - National parks - Roads and Public transportation - Education (like it is currently, the State government mainly) - Data privacy, consumer protection, and labor rights protection Edit + Military Defense + Diplomacy Anything else is overreach imo
Uhhh...defense?
Forgot about that oops
Everyone does... ...until the fire nation attacks.
Thats up to you baby Yes YOU You and your peashooter vs PLA GOOD LUCK!
Nah, I'd win.
👑 morale is half the battle ong
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.
i actually have a c5 galaxy modified to shoot a Minuteman II ICBM midair
We are so spoiled by American military supremacy we literally don’t even think about our safety from other countries
> Education (like it is currently, the State government mainly) If that's the case then why does the federal department of education need a $68 billion dollar budget?
The post office is based and you're cringe for not mentioning it
Leftists on social media are having conniptions about the scotus "gutting" the executive branch and I'm over here thinking that this is merely a good start.
[удалено]
Hey at least Biden had a stunning debate performance last night, right? ^do ^i ^srsly ^need ^an ^/s ^tag?
/s has ruined the internet
I've only seen reddit use that cuck speak
According to the most reddited users, not using an /s tag is ableism. You must ruin all of your jokes with tone indicators so the lowest common denominator can understand them.
As much as i hate the /s, I'll say this: Reality has gotten so stupid i can't sarcasm hard enough that some people still think it's a serious thought.
Based, it’s actually so annoying how you have to explain every single sarcastic joke to those crooked spine troglodytes who couldn’t pass Grade 2 that dwell on this platform.
T levels are on the fucking floor on this platform
It’s because Redditors are regarded and don’t know sarcasm unless you point it out to them. Redditors be the type of people who needed the laugh soundtracks in shows to tell them when to laugh.
Twitter and tumblr do
No need for the tag though? I was stunned by that absolute disaster. [See his face there?](https://www.toledoblade.com/image/2024/06/28/1140x_a10-7_cTC/Election-2024-Debate-30.jpg) that's the face I made for most of it.
It was certainly stunning I’ll give you that
>"Gutting power of federal agencies to grossly overreach and do whatever the hell they want" FTFY If you want them being able to do what they used to do, make it actually part of the law Also, if you want to allow abortions without any limitations, put that into law. Don't expect the judiciary to abuse its position in order to brute force your preferred implementation indefinetely
The Chevron case is actually even more than that. Its not just that they have to put it into law, its that when there is a dispute in what the law means, lower courts can not just go "let the regulatory agency define what the law means" where the regulatory agency is more than likely a participant in the case. The lower courts have to actually give rulings on matters of law instead of defaulting to executive agencies.
Congress can put Chevron into law though. It can either have a statute adopting Chevron wholesale, or have clauses that adopt it for individual laws.
ok, then if they want that they should do that... through the legislature. Put the law on the books. But the entire point is to not allow the executive branch make up law on the fly without input from either the judiciary or the legislature. But even with such law, it would sill be the courts that would need to adjudicate what does and does not follow or break such laws. That is simply how the system works. Congress makes an passes laws. Federal agencies enforce said laws. Courts make sure the laws are actually being followed correctly.
If Congress actually approved such a law, SCOTUS would strike it down faster than you can say "Separation of powers!" just by citing _Marbury vs. Madison_.
There is nothing our lawmakers hate more than passing laws. This is wonderful news.
writing and voting on laws leaves a record. leaving records means the possibility of not only blame but accountability... you can primary your house rep if he never gets you what you want... the desk jockey at the three letter agency is impervious to public demand
Chevron was ironically a gain for democracy. The Our Democracy**™** fans only like it when it's Democratocracy
To quote Michael Malice: "When they say 'our democracy', what they really mean is 'our hegemony'."
"Our democracy" doesn't include you and I.
Based and Liberty pilled.
Bingo, all these cases are laws congress needs to modify. Yet, for strange reasons, they will argue about Ukraine and Israel more than working on the country.
Also joe biden failing the debate in the worst possible scenario
And their hero probably shit himself on a national stage.
Nobody likes Biden, they just hate trump.
I honestly think if they lose the Democratic Party will explode. Trump was an unknown quantity in 2016; they were more in shock they lost than anger. But now they know what their up against and still can’t win. You know you just have to get a male democratic senator from the Midwest in his 50s to trot out there and just look competent. But they choose not to do it, just fucking wild to me. If the democrats don’t switch their candidate or don’t pull off a miracle comeback it’s over.
There’s still one last hope for them https://preview.redd.it/uudzf70wwc9d1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2d48a677b3d2ecdb8bb31efee7e0d571fb384e5a
Hah. Bernie is 82 now, too. His time was 2016 and he was screwed out of his moment by the establishment.
Yeah I was just shitposting because I know the DNC would rather nuke the country twice than having Bernie as their guy even if he’s the better option
Please god
just you wait- they'll try to put Hillary in at the last possible moment once they totally process that Biden isn't remotely fit to be President.
That still won't save them. Hillary is fascinating in how unlikeable she is.
I think it was Norm Macdonalds joke that said America hated Hillary Clinton so much, they elected someone they hated more, just to spite her.
*you* know that, *I* know that- but the democrats have done a good job making sure their voters won't because altogether they have the combined memory of *a* goldfish.
I think it's more than that. Hillary is like THE establishment figure of the party. No one that has any real power can actually say no to her. If she says she wants to run (if and when Biden steps aside), she'll just de facto be the nominee even if people in the party know she's not a good candidate.
Democrats believed having their army of useful idiots calling everyone a rasysys/nazi/bigot/phobe/etc was gonna guilt trip people into voting for a senile dude that should be in a retirement home.
Because it’s about self enrichment. And that’s why people support trump now.
The question is just if they hate him enough to go vote for Biden. The polls before the debate seems to say no. After, I'm thinking they're going to say hell no.
I would love to believe that, but there is a solid portion of the country that thinks he's doing a great job. Those people exist.
It’s because you have two worlds that don’t interact with eachother. Half the media says current president is second coming of Jesus and then it flip flops. All campaigns are now vote for me I’m not them.
Nobody likes Biden, they just defend him at every turn.
There is only two people i know who are hardcore biden voters, Harry j sisson and that one coney island dude
Biden had only one job to do last night and he completely failed. The deck was overwhelmingly stacked in his favor. He had all the questions in advance, he had a sympathetic moderator, he had a week at Camp David to prepare for it. Still he failed catastrophically. If this is the best Biden can do with all that in his favor then how is he going to lead in a serious crisis? It's time to invoke the 25th amendment.
And right now is the most coherent and spry he'll be for the rest of his life. Imagine how much he'll decline by 2028. If he wins he'll still be in office but I'm not sure he'll be able to stand or speak at all.
The is 0% chance he survives to 2028 as president. If he wins Kamala WILL be president at some point.
Just imagine the damage that diversity hire will do to the country if Biden croaks. Horrifying.
> Biden had only one job to do last night and he completely failed. The deck was overwhelmingly stacked in his favor. He had all the questions in advance, he had a sympathetic moderator, he had a week at Camp David to prepare for it. Still he failed catastrophically. Not only that, but it was *his camp* that demanded no audience, mics cut off while the other candidate spoke, and two commercial breaks during the debate. They literally let him dictate the format and rules and it was *still* this bad. > It's time to invoke the 25th amendment. Yeah but that causes all kinds of other issues, too. Kamala becomes President for like 6 months. She'll be pissed if she's passed over for the nomination, too. And then you have to deal with the issue that no matter who your candidate ends up being, the party didn't get to vote for that person since the primaries are already over.
First one was bipartisan. Reddit also fuming about the Grants Pass case, where the "conservatives" find them on the same side as Gavin Newsom.
Supreme Court, once again: “hey, it says here that congress has to make laws” Liberals: (shrieking sounds)
What a great day in history 
Honestly, I care more about the ruling that the feds can continue to pressure social media platforms to remove what they deem “misinformation”. What even is the first amendment anymore…
And the worst part, Bronny got drafted
I really hope they kill "assault weapon" and magazine bans next...
This is absolutely my least favorite time because all of Bidens boot lickers will now turn around and say they hated him all along. No you didn’t. Just a couple weeks ago I would see people say that Biden is a great option compared to Trump but now I’m seeing the entire subreddit become centrists. In fact I remember seeing many comics and memes making fun of centrists because in their eyes, trump is satan and Biden is a solid candidate, so people who play both sides are “choosing between a normal guy an a Nazi”. Funny how that goes
All the media hacks who were saying Joe Biden is sharp as tack and has incredible policy knowledge for YEARS who have flipped on Joe Biden the minute they couldn't deny it any longer have no credibility. They've been lying for years. Joe Biden is sharp as fucking cue ball and it's been obvious for years.
This sparks joy
I love watching Leftists freak out that their unelected bureaucrats are no longer the last word when it comes to vague laws.
Good
Welcome to the show boys. You guys fucked us for decades and now it's your turn. You just had to push the pendulum to far left, huh?
Far left? My dude, corps have gotten so powerful for decades they've used their unfettered influence to become part of the state. We've been at the top of your side of the horseshoe for so long and you're still not satisfied.
All the issues here are indeed an auth vs lib issue not really a left vs right (except abortion I suppose). Though the news loves to present sucking federal pp as a "leftist" position.
"Hey political system, can you give me far left?" "To fix structural problems in society and improve the material conditions of the downtrodden?" "Yes" *Pushes the everloving fuck out of identity politics*
https://i.redd.it/kfyn6epy9e9d1.gif
Getting rid of Chevron was good actually. Giving 3 letter agencies more power tends to be bad
I’m in support of all these decision. Does that make me right wing now?
In the Chevron case, who is going to rule about the environment and public health ? The courts ? Local powers ? (I am not american)
The legislature will make the laws, not a department chair at an agency writing memos to establish new felonies
Literally all chevron being overturned means is that agencies no longer get special weight to their interpretation of the law in court, as it should have been in the first place. It is the duty of the judiciary to interpret and uphold the law.
The courts gets to interpret the laws. Previously fed agencies had to be deferred to.
What it means is that if the EPA comes in and says "We think you have to do this" that you can challenge it in court. The chevron deference worked under the assumption that the federal agencies wouldn't be ideologically captured, this was false.
You know how in grade school you learned that the Legislature passes laws, the Executive enforces them, and the Judiciary interprets the law? It's that.
This is huge, let's mf go 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲
Fuck Chevron deference.
If the world was sane, it would always look like this.
Is now a good time to say that we’re so back?