Summary
Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance suggests the Supreme Court may reject Donald Trump’s recent legal filing supporting TikTok amid an upcoming U.S. ban.
Trump’s brief emphasizes his own use of TikTok, claiming it as a vital platform for political expression.
Legal expert Vance criticized the filing as self-serving and noted Trump’s representation by John Sauer, his former Solicitor General nominee.
The case concerns whether U.S. companies can continue hosting TikTok after the ban, but Vance doubts the Court will entertain what she describes as a “kleptocratic” move.
That’s only if there are elections in 2028
Hopefully, there will be elections in 2026.
One third of the Senate and all the Congress will be running.
Start working on getting good candidates into the primaries now.
I wish I had faith in the DNC to run candidates that can win in contested districts in 2026
They’ll do what they always do, find some MAGA Lite mini-Fettermans. Because the only other people who might run are brain-dead triangulating centrists or progressives, and the corporate moneybags hate the progressives more than they hate fascists.
And that don’t come out as Republicans immediately after winning.
Should hold the same penalties as a poor person’s fraud.
Flipping parties should be an immediate vote of no confidence.
If 2024 taught us anything it’s that we have to work if we want good candidates.
Man, you thought 1/6 was crazy, wait till you see what the MAGAs would do after four years of feeling like trump sold them out and then cancelled the election…
Like, it won’t get to that part, but it wouldn’t get past it either.
Stop acting like we live in unprecedented times and read up on American history. There’s honestly even not that much of it.
Shit will be bad the next four years, it’s gonna suck. But we’ve had an actual civil war before, it’s highly unlikely to be the worst it’s ever been or that we’ll stop having elections.
The rhetoric and social makeup of the events leading to the American Civil war lies in direct parallel to our current political times. I might suggest that you too read up on our history.
Considering that half the country didn’t hold elections in 1864 I wouldn’t qualify it as a true election and merely a continuation of an embattled presidential term.
America has a very violent history of political assassination and internal political struggle. It’s not unlikely that elections may be suspended or that Trump may run for a third term. Or hold potemkin elections a la Russia or Venezuela.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_events_leading_to_the_American_Civil_War
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1864_United_States_presidential_election
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contested_elections_in_American_history
I disagree. The Southern states were in the minority in the federal government and they revolted because they wanted the feds to force the Northern majority to treat Black people as escaped slaves and send them to the South.
This time the Republicans have control of all branches…
What are they going to do? Kick blue states out of America and start a war if they refuse?
And the elections were cancelled in states that had seceded, the states run their own elections, so they choose not to have one while actively at war with the federal government…
Like, I don’t see at all how this is relevant past an incredibly superficial level like you say it is
You’re not speaking to the macro level events that lead to the civil war, just the specifics. Also you were the one who brought up the American Civil War.
You’re ignoring my larger points of the possibility of potemkin elections or Trump getting a third term.
You don’t seem to be arguing in good faith as you’re not addressing the thrust of my argument. Which is, Trump is likely to interfere with upcoming elections.
My point of bringing up the civil war was saying shits obviously been a lot worse.
If I didn’t address your points, then I apologize and have no idea what point you’re trying to make.
That happens sometimes.
You can choose to try and elaborate and see if you can clarify…
Or wildly accuse people
Because they couldn’t understand what you’re trying to communicate.
I don’t see what’s hard to understand about that. Stop getting hung up on who’s fault a misunderstanding is, and either try to clarify or just accept it’s not working on move on.
Why do you want to start throwing out insults because there’s a misunderstanding?
At this point that’s all I’m trying to understand, because it keeps happening. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence it started happening after the new owners of CNN said Faux News was their inspiration and they wanted to make their viewers more like Faux’s.
Ever since people seem more eager to turn misunderstandings from a discussion to a slap fight.
I have no interest in that.
At no point have I insulted you and it’s strange that you are now so defensive and also accuse me of making this into a “slap fight”.
Not to be dismissive but you have a comment history of being aggressively contrarian and I have no further interest in your viewpoint as it’s not productive.