Expanding the SC aka The end of democracy

[*ochocincos*]

(06-20-2022, 03:22 PM)hollodero Wrote: First, I have a somewhat technical question about that. Could a republican majority in the senate, pretty much a certainty after the midterms and quite possibly beyond, simply pull the nuclear option, expand the court to 13 judges and put 6 strict Trump loyalists in there. I'd think they could easily do that, but I'm not certain and the internet doesn't really answer that for me.

There's a reason I ask that, imho this could be the last puzzle piece to abandon elections - or say, the necessity to care about them - altogether and establish a one-party system. The rest is pretty much apparent imho, an authoritarian president with a loyal party in the majority in both chambers could do the trick quite easily. Like just using alternate electors from now on, who in the end would stop that if the next VP is on board? Or a president that quite literally can do anything he wants, in any case no impeachment will stop him and apparently no other legal remedy is available. The constitution is levered out quite easily that way, as of yet I have not seen any possibility to stop a president doing anything if his party holds the majorities (actually, a senate majority suffices) and is with him 100%. And this is very likely the case after 2024. Trump (or someone just like him, but probably him) will run and might win, and so will his Congress minions.

As for the SC, I chose 6 Trump loyalists for a reason, it seems Justice Thomas might already be on board. I mean, that would be embarrassing for Tadjikistan really. A wife of a SC justice engages in open subversion attempts - imho already a huge scandal in its own rights - and said judge does not have to recuse himself from related legal matters and hardly anyone seems to care about that, it's that normalized already. My trust in that branch is eroding quickly as well, for that reason and because it apparently turned into an institution just as political (and hence blindly loyal if need be) as the other two branches. Only thing possibly still missing is a majority of blind loyalists (I guess Gorsuch and Kavanaugh disappointed Trump greatly), hence the initial question.

I know folks will call me crazy for putting up a topic like this (and sure, go ahead), but I think this is all way more realistic than people would admit, or despite all conceded hyperboly at least worthy of debate. Eg. the republican party in Texas is about to pass a resolution that calls the election of Joe Biden illegitimate. And hearings discuss whether Trump knew he actually had lost? The Texas GOP doesn't want to see it that way, and I'd say almost the whole republican party does not, and a large part of their electorate. Mitch McConnell of all people apparently holds the fort, but I suppose even he is gone if Trump wins again. Other dissenters leave voluntarily or get primaried out.

Lastly, why do I care? Because that affects me in Europe as well. Hardly any of our tiny domestic topics is as important as an alliance (culturally, morally, value-wise, militarily) with the US that imho can not possibly be relied upon in good faith any longer.

It's definitely looking to be possible to manipulate the US government to a point that one could essentially remove democracy.
What Trumplicans have to be aware of now is that it's not just them that get to question elections.
You better believe that if Trump (or someone affiliated with him) were to win anything moving forward, the validity would likely get questioned.
At this point, I wouldn't believe anyone affiliated with Trump would get elected without cheating outside of areas that were already heavily affiliated that way before 2021.